How do you feel about sponsoring people doing the London marathon and the like?

Just interested in the range of views.

It was only when my wife was working for a charity that I became aware/ thought about how much it costs charities for the places at the marathon and similar events or the costs to the charity for the parachute jump fundraisers and the like. How many people are aware how much it costs a charity to buy a guaranteed place (still called a golden bond place I think) in the marathon for one of their fundraisers? I don’t know the exact figures today but at the time it was around £400 when a standard ballot place would cost an individual around £40.

Talking to folk in the know who do this sort of thing for a living, a charity will normally make zero or very minimal ‘profit’ from a charity participant doing a run/triathlon/parachute jump etc if they only raise the minimum amount once the cost of the place, admin and advertising for participants is taken into account. Putting it another way, if you have just sponsored someone to do todays marathon and they raise the minimum required non of your money will go to a good cause; if they raise twice what is expected of them half of your donation will be used for good works. The sad bit of the conversation is the charities find themselves between a rock and hard place – the British public seem to have been conditioned into donating like this and are much less inclined to just give for the sake of giving. And then once they have given through sponsoring a friend they are much less likely to donate in a more efficient way as well as they think they have done their bit.

I’m pretty militant these days and refuse to donate if a friend or colleague is doing something unless they have paid for the event themselves. I temper that by being very generous when they have and giving money monthly by direct debit to specific charities I want to.

So, do you give? And if you do, do you do it because its the right thing to do, because you haven’t really thought about it or because you feel pressured into it?

That’s why it’s important to hit your target designated by charity. In 2012 I ran for bowel cancer and raised over £2500. Gold bond place cost them over £1000. So at least I helped. I think different charities are charged different rates. Large charities like oxfam probably pay less and hence their targets for runners are less.
Personally if I run again will be through ballot or club. As hard to ask friends and family to dig so deep again. So just meet ur set target and all is good.

What happens if you don’t raise the required amount?

For charities of less well known causes there must be some value in just raising awareness via it? Maybe not directly on the day as I guess that with that many people not many will notice but during fund raising etc… the people donating will at least hear about it and maybe look into it.

The charity would be better off if everyone gave directly to them rather than sponsoring someone else via justgiving or whatever , as they would then have all the dpa agreements needed to contact those people again to ask for support, and may gain more in the long run. As posted above a lot of people use the charity as an easy way in to their event and don’t actually give a damn who they do it for,.

Though… If anyone’s interested in the ride London 100 I may know of a charity with a few places left to fill 😉

What happens if you don’t raise the required amount?

I think some are getting tougher/more realistic and pursue the participate to cover the costs, but I don’t know how binding their case is. I’d imagine pursuing them to court might be a PR disaster. For most charities though if the participant does not make the minimum the charity makes a loss that it hopes to recoup with those who collect more than the minimum. It’s an incredibly inefficient way of converting contribution into good works but it is a very efficient way of getting more folk out there getting donations for you.

So just meet ur set target and all is good.

If by your set target you mean the charities set target for you, that’s my point – all is not good – the charity has just about broken even. The participant should not have a warm fuzzy feeling they have done some good work, they’ve just not cost the charity any money.

Surely the companies charging £400 to charities instead of £40 to ballots are the villains here, the overheads must be the same for both, they are making profit out of people’s generosity

It can be complex at times

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31623072

I think the London marathon and similar events are a bit of an exemption, as the actual entry cost etc. is fairly insignificant – rocket dog is right if organisations are doing that, though I think that the marathon organisers hand entries to some other charities direct for them to resell.

I won’t sponsor people’s holiday (Great Wall of China, Kilimanjaro etc.) or parachute jumps though

I think the London marathon and similar events are a bit of an exemption, as the actual entry cost etc. is fairly insignificant

I’m afraid you think wrong – the golden bond place scheme is a London marathon thing from the actual marathon organisers direct – not via a reseller. It cost charities circa £400 for a place at the FLM at the turn of the millenium so I guess it will be more now (jonno above implies it is now £1K).

I agree with RD, I don’t understand why the places cost more than ballot places, it seems cynical, but that’s the deal. I guess it is a guaranteed place whilst the ballot is massively oversubscribed. You are paying a premium to push to the front of the queue.

It’s a horrible racket and I won’t sponsor anyone to do something like that unless I think they really won’t enjoy it.

I give to friends, friends of friends and STWers who do charity events. Any marathon is a major achievement and deserves recognition.

I do have some concerns over the amounts charged to charities for these guaranteed places, it just feels wrong.

enter the Ballot, run a decent time in a feeder event, or enter as a charity runner.

For folk looking to do London as an experience, there are only a few ways of entry, it’s massively popular and oversubscribed.

I wouldn’t do it (charity fund raise that way, or run London ) but it’s pretty much a feeding frenzy. I understand a lot of the Big Marathons are.

Personally I stick to the more low key ones, they’re still 26 miles 😀

I don’t mind sponsoring people, it’s usually work colleagues BUT I had a colleague who expected everybody in the office to sponsor him and he kept on and on about what he was raising money for (just me and him in the office on a night shift so I was a captive audience) so I said no. Bloody Hell you’d of thought I was responsible for the ills his charity was trying to correct.

If by your set target you mean the charities set target for you, that’s my point – all is not good – the charity has just about broken even

well, that’s the charity being incompetent in setting such a low minimum.

give to friends, friends of friends and STWers who do charity events. Any marathon is a major achievement and deserves recognition.

Munqe-Chick is grateful for your Ironman support. Doing an IM was a personal challenge for her, but having a charity and the support/expectation of those who sponsored her was an extra motivation to train when it was cold and wet, and to complete the event when she was in a dark place.

I do have some concerns over the amounts charged to charities for these guaranteed places, it just feels wrong.

I agree, but I refer to my first reply. Justgiving and such sites make a profit out of charitable giving for providing a pretty basic service.

What happens if you don’t raise the required amount?

They should be barred from entering events run by the same company.

I don’t mind if somebody’s actually making a big effort – running a marathon when you’re not a runner, great; running your 10th marathon, no way.

That said, I did once get sponsored to go cycling but the SDW in a day was waay beyond what I’d done before.

Folk who expect me to essentially pay for them to go skydiving can **** right off unless they can prove that they have a massive fear of heights.

It’s a racket! Panorama did a programme a few years ago about the absolutely enormous salaries the organisers pay themselves.

well, that’s the charity being incompetent in setting such a low minimum.

Whilst I agree, talking to folk in the know, it’s a race to the bottom. Charities are in effect in competition with each other to get folk to run for them. The runners, in the main, are after the easiest option and choose the charity that will be easiest to raise the required money for(rather than choosing the charity because of the charity’s worth). The minimum value needed to be raised plays a big part in their decision.

And it’s not charity singular that set their targets like that, the same model is used by all the charities.

Munqe-Chick is grateful for your Ironman support.

Did Munqe-Chick do IM Wales on a free (to her) bonded place, or buy her own place and then choose to do it for charity?

I don’t like this form of sponsorship for a range of reasons, costs as descibed above being one. I don’t like the peer pressure of being expected to donate from colleagues etc. I don’t like that it devalues the achievements of those running for themselves. I also don’t like supporting the whole charity industry. There are some charities i will support and do so directly via gift aid but there are many out there who i don’t think should be supported.

It was only when my wife was working for a charity that I became aware/ thought about how much it costs charities for the places at the marathon and similar events or the costs to the charity for the parachute jump fundraisers and the like.

Anecdotally,

I’m doing the Manchester 10K in a couple of weeks. I wanted to raise money for the National Autistic Society (because Reasons), they wanted a fairly high minimum sponsorship and I’d still to pay for my own place.

In the end I opted to buy my entry outside of their procedures and then raise money for them anyway, dodging the ‘minimum fund’ requirement. Until the event has sold out and the only way to get entry is via a charity, I can’t see any earthly reason why this approach shouldn’t be standard practice. The whole thing is a bit… odd.

Also, sponsor me! I’ll throw a JG page up in the near future.

and I’d still to pay for my own place.

This is the bottom line for me, I’ve always payed my own entry or covered the minimum requirement myself. Anything anyone gives me in sponsorship goes to the charity. Normally I’ll only sponsor those people who do the same, normally that is I’m not an arse about it.

The runners, in the main, are after the easiest option and choose the charity that will be easiest to raise the required money for

And this is another thing that grates on me. I do sponsor people when they’re raising money for a cause which means something to them, but when it’s just as a means to get an entry. Screw that.

Cougar – How much is running 10km going to hurt you? I want to know you’re really gonna suffer if you want any of my dough.

(actually I’ll sponsor you anyway – abuse your power and make a sticky thread for your run)

I wasn’t aware of that convert – in that case that’s shocking, clearly taking the piss, I thought it cost them the same as a ballot place.

I know that ‘Marie curie’ get bugger all from the all from the etape organisers too.

I suppose this is unfortunately how the ‘charity industry’ works now!

I had a friend working in Africa with NGO’s and some of the tales he came back with were truly disgusting.

Cougar – How much is running 10km going to hurt you? I want to know you’re really gonna suffer if you want any of my dough.

(actually I’ll sponsor you anyway – abuse your power and make a sticky thread for your run)

Oh, agony, almost certainly. I take to exercise like a duck to petrol.

(And, thanks!)

I’ll always give to people that are doing a self supported challenge.
I personally feel the same as most here that I won’t give a free holiday, to easy to get a free experience by tagging a charity to it.

I do loads of personal challenges but will never have them sponsored as I feels that taking the focus away from my intention, to challenge myself. Forcing myself out of comfort zone is part of that challenge so I don’t need to name a charity to help me. I’d only be picking a charity at random anyway as they’re a nothing close to my heart.

That said if I did want to support a specific cause I would bend over backwards to do so.
Has it happens I’ll be one of a group of MTBers riding 240miles to bivvy on the summit of Snowdon next Saturday.
It’ll cost all riders involved a fair chunk of money and time to do aside from the blood, sweat and tears but something’s are worth the effort. In this case it’s a local family who will loose two young children to Battens disease in the near future and I’ll do my utmost to give these kids some good experiences whilst they’re still able.

If you’re in the mood…
http://www.justgiving.com/oasnowdon

I suppose this is unfortunately how the ‘charity industry’ works now!

some of it yes but not all of it. You need to do what Cougar is doing really and make sure yourself that the max is going to the charity. Same with donating to charity work eg. Nepal at the mo. You need to read the stuff carefully to make sure they are working there rather than just taking a cut and passing it on to international rather than local partners.

Not sure about the big charities, but the smaller ones make you pay the £50 entry fee, so it’s not like you’re getting a free place by raising money. Having to raise a few quid in exchange for bypassing the ballot is completely different to the folk who get a free holiday whilst walking up a mountain somewhere.

Whilst I agree, talking to folk in the know, it’s a race to the bottom. Charities are in effect in competition with each other to get folk to run for them

Fair point. As in you make a good point, not that it is fair!

Did Munqe-Chick do IM Wales on a free (to her) bonded place, or buy her own place and then choose to do it for charity?

A stand-alone entry was ~£400. A charity entry was £100 to the competitor and a (non-enforced) minimum £1000 to be raised for the charity. Munqe Chick raised £2000; we know of entrants who raised bugger all which sticks in the craw-at the very least they should have to pay the full £400 entry fee, and for an event as popular and highly regarded as Ironman I’d expect you to be barred (especially given how strict IM are when it comes to the wider image of the event – you can get DQ’ed for littering on the course).

For me it depends on the person, th event and the charity. If a regular marathon runner asks me to sponsor them for London marathon then no, but the 20stone pie eating office dweller doing a half maybe. Clearly as it is a big challenge for them.

In the same vain it depends on the charity someone at work keeps asking for money for Pensions for paws! Money to pay for medical treatment for retired police dogs….as they deserve pensions too! Surely the owner pays…so no!

Personal choice and if they ram it down my throat they get nowt!

I either give direct to charities or will sponsor someone doing something actually useful – such as picking up litter or doing something of direct practical benefit to other people or the community.

Time wasting utterly self indulgent activities such as “sponsor me to bike round Iceland for 3 months” or “sponsor me to drive 6 different vehicles in 45 minutes” or for running from one place to another get short shift as they achieve little in real terms for anyone other than the participant and if supported by an events company of some sort, are just cash cow events being milked by greedy events organisers lining their pockets.

Don’t even get me started on the salaries of the board members of charities and some of their perks. In my personal view some of the inflated salaries verge on being theft from the good causes charities are supposed to support. The lower level workers are often very decent, honest, committed types though and great respect to them.

thepurist – Member

The charity would be better off if everyone gave directly to them

Yep, but that’s the point isn’t it, events get people to donate who otherwise might not.

Folk at work keep trying to convince me to do events for charity, that I’m already doing not for charity. Seems to defeat the point to me but then if I did it, I’d be able to raise a couple of hundred quid. Messy

I take to exercise like a duck to petrol.

so that how you make a duck go woof

Don’t even get me started on the salaries of the board members of charities and some of their perks. In my personal view some of the inflated salaries verge on being theft from the good causes charities are supposed to support.

Board members of charities don’t get paid salaries – the board members / trustees etc are the volunteers that give rise to the name ‘voluntary sector’. Directors and executives get paid and if they’re very good why shouldn’t they get paid well. Its a false economy not to have the best people and not to implement the best strategies if the result is a charity raises less income and does less work as a result. Its perverse that people are repulsed by the idea someone being paid well to do good, caring, publicly beneficial work. Plenty of people who do shit things to people for a living- nobody cares how rich they get doing it.

Regardless of what the operating costs are if the result of the Marathon is more money finds its ways to charities than would if there was no marathon then job done. If £9 of your £10 sponsorship is eaten up by event costs then thats still £1 to charity rather than non.

The alternative is no marathon an no donations. Or a marathon that still costs money to stage and that has nothing to do with fund raising, and that nobody is really interested in…. and no donations.

The lower level workers are often very decent, honest, committed types though and great respect to them.

My experience is they’re mostly dead wood. The problem of a culture of low pay for voluntary sector work is it attracts a glut of people who don’t really need to work, but who feel like they’re doing something worthwhile simply because they turn up. Thats not to say there are also people who are startling, sparkling, selfless, imaginative and brilliant – but those brilliant people find themselves mired in a sector that clogged with bimblers and freewheelers.

I’ve done a few chariy events – not things you could do nomally, things like abeiling off the Finnieston Crane. But morally I objected to getting other people to pay for my fun, so I just paid the cost myself. Also donate to charities of my choice.

It’s a daft situation – the point of charity is that it’s a gift, it’s not a commercial transaction, and especially not a transaction you emotionally blackmail others into paying for.

Likewise I don’t support holidays or indungences in the name of charity unless the entrant had paid their own logistics and the money is a direct donation.

I have a hard time supporting NGO’s as well after some of the tales I’ve heard from an actual front line worker. Very few do much other than get in the way and cause problems on the ground for those that are able to get things done.

Oddly enough similar thoughts were already floating about before I read this. Our local rag is reporting that there will be a sponsored walk from the war memorial to the irrelevant battle memorial, the staggeringly incomprehendible distance of 1.1miles. I’m not sure what to make of it really…

yikes this is eye opening. Had no idea a charity paid so much for a place.

I agree with the masses, I aint going to sponsor you to do something you’d quite like to do anyway…so parachute jumps, absailing, charity sportive places and fully paid trips to africa to climb kilamanjaro are all most definitely out.

So who would sponsor somebody to do the 3 peaks challenge? 👿

It’s an interesting question.

I get around it by deciding each year how much I want to give to charity – usually around £500 or so (but I feel a bit guilty that it’s that little given how much I earn)

I have a direct debit that takes half that, £50 usually goes on a TV relief donation and the rest to friends/colleagues doing stuff. I see those as supporting friends rather than giving to charity in the most economic way.

justgiving take about 5% too 🙁

I wont sponsor anyone fund raising this way. The whole event has turned into a business with business dressed up as charities using to make millions. Its supposed to be an event celebrating running, not a corporate fundraiser where it is very hard to get an entry without going via a charity.

I have no problem with people choosing to run for charity and raise money. I do object to the way charities have taken over the event and excluded anyone who just wants to run the race for the challenge and fun of it.