How can ANYONE compete with the Cuyama
Ride? They had a French chef serving crepes, they provided meals for
all the riders, and the rides are very relaxed. We had to drop our 5-day
ride because it was point-to-point without the availability of drivers for
rigs. We couldn't compete, so we dropped it. We were very
disappointed, but you can't blame the other rides for providing amenities that
the riders love. My thoughts on the subject.
Barbara
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 5:37
AM
Subject: Fw: [RC] Free Enterprise
Oh Randy
PALLEEEASE! This may be fine if it was not the glaringly obvious goal
of Motion #4 to eliminate certain new rides that personally bother
you. I am very suspicious of someone who is trying so hard to
change something that has no problems, and doesn't bother anyone but
you, into something that could, as has been so
clearly pointed out, present so many new and as yet unforeseen
problems. The riders should have the option of doing 3 day rides
that are close to home, if they so choose. Not be forced to travel 1000 miles
because of the personal agenda of a few. And if SW
riders would rather drive 1000 miles to attend a ride rather that do one
next door, they should have that option. If I were considering
opening a Pizza Parlor I would certainly come to you for advice. But,
the fact is that some rides just do not survive, for various reasons. I
just don't think you can continue to blame Cuyama XP for this years Renegade
low #'s. In a private post to me a few days ago you pointed out that
Ft.Stanton had a good turn out because it was not in any conflict with any
other rides. Could it be that Ft Stanton was more of a success because
>1) allot of riders had gotten over some of the personality disputes that
are well documented and well known in the SW?? >2) that Ft
Stanton is in really pretty country.?? >3) that it is a new
ride. ?? >4) that it is in summer, when people have more time for such
rides. ?? >5)better weather, >6) not in the wind and blowing sand
for 5 days.?? >7) Last March the country was still pretty deep in
economic shock from 9/11.?? > 8) By the time Ft Stanton came
around people were out and about again. >9) There are allot of people in
California. I know that allot of riders were turned away from Cuyama because
of limited base camp room. Did they come on out to Renegade? No. They
went home. Could any of these things possibly have anything to do with Cuyama
XP or Ft.Stanton's success and Renegades not so great turn out. I
personally am against any change in the way rides are sanctioned. But I would
suggest that at the very LEAST, all the questions and possibilities should be
clearly outlined BEFORE any such change take place. And that all existing
rides be grandfathered in regardless of their age. And that this be
set aside for a considerable length of time, till all the reasons,
ramifications, and possibilities can be thoroughly explored and clearly
answered. I say all this in the hope that ALL the BOD members will take
this very serious, and not jump to pass something that I feel is considerably
more serious than it may seem on the surface. Annie G.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:13 PM
Subject: [RC] Free Enterprise
Annie,
The difference you are missing is: Pizza
Hut does not franchise (sanction) another Pizza Hut close to the first
one. What Dominos does is not controlled by Pizza Hut. You are
comparing Apples to Oranges.
Lets use endurance riding as an example:
Lets assume a hypothetical "endurance organization" exists known as United
States Endurance Ride Organization, and they sanction their own endurance
rides. I would expect "USERO" to sanction their endurance rides
without any consideration as to the time or location of AERC endurance
rides. USERO would only be interested in coordination of their own
rides, not what AERC does...that would be "free enterprise" between
competing endurance organizations. When AERC sanctions rides too
close to each other or in the same window of time, that is not free
enterprise, that is bad business practice and eventually hurts everyone -
the riders will suffer as the number of rides shrink. If you believe
each Ride Manager and each Ride is in competition with each other then you
have set up a system to eliminate many rides. If that is the case,
then why have Sanctioning Directors at all? It would be much
simpler for Ride Managers to send in the Sanction Application
straight to the AERC Office and let the Office rubber stamp the Sanction
Applications...and then let the strongest rides survive.
Unfortunately, if we operate that way, there would be a very quick
reduction in number of rides because those located in the larger population
centers would dominate - Ride Vets, who are a very small number - would be
completely booked up and some rides would not be able to get the services
of experienced Ride Vets because they would be working the big rides, etc
etc. Vets like Barney, Gail, Jaime, Jim, etc would not be available
to many of the rides they current work because they would be working the
select big rides. There is a reason AERC has Sanctioning Directors
who coordinate ride dates - it is for the benefit of not only Ride
Managers, but the riders, too.
Randy
From: "Annie George" <ageorge@xxxxxxx> Subject:
[RC] Pizza Hut. If Pizza hut is close to Dominos, and
everybody likes Dominos better, = then by by pizza hut. Its called
free enterprize. Annie G. Anne George Saddlery www.vtc.net/~ageorge
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp
is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information,
Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe
http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|