This is not directed at anyone in particular - just thought I'd state that at the outset.
No one is stopping anyone from approaching potential sponsors and making the initial contact. Many clubs have already done so and have the shiny new boats to prove it but their bids for funding will always be focussed on local needs. We can all come up with suggestions for where to look for sponsorship but the real question is who is going to actually go out there and secure it for the sport in general?
Once potential sponsorship is looking promissing then I think the Slalom Committee would appreciate being included in the loop so they know what is being discussed on behalf of the sport but I'm certain they wouldn't prevent someone from bringing in potential sponsors if they really exist. In fact, sometimes the personal touch is the best opening approach rather than being committee lead.
So what is preventing You from taking the first step to help your sport?
The first person to bring in a £10,000 sponsor to the sport will without a doubt be regarded as the saviour of Canoe Slalom but ten £1,000 sponsors would be just as good if there are people out there prepared to put the time and effort in.
Enhancing the Sport - Good or Bad
I am in favour of more double events so that you get 2 days racing for the price and time of 1 weekend. The main cost for events is the travel and accommodation. Grandtully events are double because we know that people are more likely to travel to a double race. From a Scottish paddler perspective, more double events would be a huge help.
This may then result in too many Division 1 races on the calendar for a particular year with too many promotions to premier. However, this only applies to the minority of paddlers and we could put other measures in place to contain promotions.
This may then result in too many Division 1 races on the calendar for a particular year with too many promotions to premier. However, this only applies to the minority of paddlers and we could put other measures in place to contain promotions.
Mark I always find it bemusing when posts begin with an apology -I can totally see why you feel the need. Because we are all human and perceive comments in different ways it is easy to misconstrue.Mark Shaw wrote:This is not directed at anyone in particular - just thought I'd state that at the outset.
No one is stopping anyone from approaching potential sponsors and making the initial contact. Many clubs have already done so and have the shiny new boats to prove it but their bids for funding will always be focussed on local needs. We can all come up with suggestions for where to look for sponsorship but the real question is who is going to actually go out there and secure it for the sport in general?
Once potential sponsorship is looking promissing then I think the Slalom Committee would appreciate being included in the loop so they know what is being discussed on behalf of the sport but I'm certain they wouldn't prevent someone from bringing in potential sponsors if they really exist. In fact, sometimes the personal touch is the best opening approach rather than being committee lead.
So what is preventing You from taking the first step to help your sport?
The first person to bring in a £10,000 sponsor to the sport will without a doubt be regarded as the saviour of Canoe Slalom but ten £1,000 sponsors would be just as good if there are people out there prepared to put the time and effort in.
You make some very salient points indeed. Expanding on your comments, I think it is an excellent idea, as is probably obvious from previous comments on here. Shiny boats are always good for clubs and I take my hat off to them for taking the time out to go through the process.
I think you have hit the nail firmly on the head. Who is going to go out there and do it and as you say for the sport in general. Now to me, there are regulars on here who speak with a lot of common sense (I think it goes without saying that I am not one of them.) I would suggest that this is not for one person as it could be quite onerous and would benefit from the input of a collective mind - to thrash out some ideas and approaches and targets. Of course any success should be fed back. I think sponsors probably do exist it's just where you approach - hence the need to put heads together to maximise success and share expereince. It seems to me that there could be a natural resource out there; I'll go out on a limb and say that somewhere within the slalom community someone might work for a large company who may be worth an approach - sometimes a bit of networking is a good way in.
So what is preventing You from taking the first step to help your sport? I think the answer to that is nothing; it maybe though that people and including some of those who regularly post here are reluctant to step on any toes - I know I wouldn't want to.
Are we saying then that it is ok to make approaches?
Another nail on the head - small amounts are good too.
Problem with the forum are that some good ideas get raised - not just in this thread but in many - and then they die with the thread.
It'd be good to coordinate something rather than have random approaches going on.
Paul - yep travel - i recently worked out entries as just short of £400 and travel costs over £2500 overall cost was getting on for 5k.
I definitely empathise with the Scottish contingent
I'll end this with an apology for anything I have written which may have offended
There has already been a suggestion made previously in the forum for how promotion could be managed whilst allowing the number of events to increase (apart from Prem) and that is to allow paddlers to race in the next higher division (paddle up).
Promotion to the next higher division would then be based on achievement of a specified standard within that higher division rather than being based on the points gained from the division they are currently in. This would allow as many Div 1 doubles as organisers were prepared to run (on appropriate grade water of course).
The only limiting factor that I can see is the availability of the timing team and the need to find twice as many judges for a Div 1 compared to the lower divisions.
If promotion to Prem was no longer based on how well you do at Div 1 races, would paddlers be prepared to sacrifice the 'quality' of timing and judging at Div 1 races or would we prefer not to go down that route and maintain the limited number of Div 1 races we have today?
On a positive note for Div 1 paddlers, it would limit the potential rise in race fees due to the cost of funding officials expenses which are bound to come in the Premier division fairly soon.
Promotion to the next higher division would then be based on achievement of a specified standard within that higher division rather than being based on the points gained from the division they are currently in. This would allow as many Div 1 doubles as organisers were prepared to run (on appropriate grade water of course).
The only limiting factor that I can see is the availability of the timing team and the need to find twice as many judges for a Div 1 compared to the lower divisions.
If promotion to Prem was no longer based on how well you do at Div 1 races, would paddlers be prepared to sacrifice the 'quality' of timing and judging at Div 1 races or would we prefer not to go down that route and maintain the limited number of Div 1 races we have today?
On a positive note for Div 1 paddlers, it would limit the potential rise in race fees due to the cost of funding officials expenses which are bound to come in the Premier division fairly soon.
The above is the personal opinion of Mark Shaw and does not reflect the views of either the BCU or England Slalom Committees.
With regard to the timing etc (judging etc.) of Div 1 races I would be reluctant to see the established standard drop. There are considerable efforts to increase the number of those able to support both timing and judging across the country andy we have made particular effort in Scotland not in the pursuit of independence but rather to try and control the travel costs and staff number requirements to deliver these functions. That said we should not be limiting appropriate racing because of the timing team availability however there is also a need to manage the calendar so that work is properly spread across the calendar.
but at what cost to the sport?
Maybe it's time to limit officials expenses to specific roles without which the race wouldn't run, e.g. chief judge, timing keeper, etc. The remainder would have to be drawn from unpaid volunteers/parents/club members/etc.
The accounts need closer inspection at this years ACM as I really do think this sport is on borrowed time if nothing is done to address its expenditure vs income.
Maybe it's time to limit officials expenses to specific roles without which the race wouldn't run, e.g. chief judge, timing keeper, etc. The remainder would have to be drawn from unpaid volunteers/parents/club members/etc.
The accounts need closer inspection at this years ACM as I really do think this sport is on borrowed time if nothing is done to address its expenditure vs income.
The above is the personal opinion of Mark Shaw and does not reflect the views of either the BCU or England Slalom Committees.