Fast Running Blog

I want to vent about the registration costs for the Des 10K.
Does it seem reasonable to anyone on this site that they should charge $38 normal $40 expo day for a 10K?
I have not organized a race before but this seems ridiculous to me. Particularly considering this is not a charity run that I can tell...

it's hard to find a race that isn't outrageously expensive. i am still recovering from the $55 entry fee i paid to run the layton 5k last year. yes, 5k. i am not sure if races are charging so much because the costs of holding a race have increased, or if it is just because they can charge that much because people are willing to pay. i have run quite a few 5k's in the past year and $25-$30 entry fees are typical (except for those rare gems such as the $1 tremonton turkey trot). i would agree that $40 for a 10k is expensive, possibly even unreasonably expensive, but it doesn't stand out to me as costing any more than other races around here.

I was afraid I was just being cheap. I would like to race more often and if you figure dinner out is often in that range it is reasonable, similar time spent at the even as a dinner etc... I guess I have until Saturday to finalize my decision but at this point not being in 100% racing shape I just don't know. But I would like to hear additional thoughts on this.

Can you imagine if Apple put on road races? Or someone else who actually knows how to make money?

Races are just now starting to get to their market value, which is based on demand. Races have been undervalued for many years, costs purposely kept low by race directors figuring that runners would not want to pay more. Race directors are now finding otherwise, and races are still selling out despite entry fees going up.

There was an article in Runners World recently that broke down the "average" marathon and the cost breakdown of how your entry fees are distributed. Its interesting, but I can't seem to find a link to it online right now. Check that out if you get a chance.

They specifically talked about the NYC Marathon, and how despite it being $150 (or more, I can't remember)... the NYRRC could easily bump the price up another $50 and still sell out the race w/ no problem. There is a high demand out there. Look at all these mud-run events that charge like $75... there are hundreds of them now!

$40 is tough to swallow for a 10K, but considering there are 5Ks that cost almost as much and are not nearly as competitive, its probably a fair value for Des News.

This is a pretty good article that addresses the topic, interview with the director of the Green Bay Marathon (who incidentally I have worked with quite a bit over the years):

http://www.runcolo.com/content/interview-sean-ryan-race-director-green-bay-marathon-547/

I think he tells it how it is.

Interesting article, Paul.

I can understand that some races are intended to be "experiences" rather than just foot races. It seems OK to have high entry fees to support that kind of race, as long as people are willing to pay. I just hope there will be continue to be some races that are designed more for "hard core" runners who are looking for well-run races without the unnecessary extras (which include prize money, in my opinion) and with low entry fees. Even though some would disagree, I think such races can still be financially sound and grow to be large (if that is desired).

I think if people show that they want it, then it will happen. Right now, people are wanting to shell out bucks for big party races. And the market is responding to that demand. I'm not saying it's good or bad, it just is.

I think there will always be grassroots in running, though. The half marathon I did last Saturday was $35, and it was a nice race. This Saturday there is a $10 race in North Logan. There's literally dozens of races every weekend. Choose the ones that reflect your values and you want to have your money.

That's why I wanted to hear your feedback. Thank you.
Part of my problem is having been used to the $10 and $20 entry fees.
But it is also a matter of support. If I agree that racing (these races in particular) are a good thing for the community, I should support the capitalist way and match the supply and demand mind set. I agree that the race is good. It is a fast course with some of the best competition. It has to be the deepest race in the state. So by those standards we are actually getting a deal.

It's cheaper than the big 10k in Colorado, the Bolder Boulder, where the cheapest option is $46.
http://www.bolderboulder.com/Register/Race_Package_Options.htm?

But yes, it all comes down to demand.  As long as people will pay it, they will charge it.  So it's just deciding if that much money is worth it to run in the most competitive race in Utah. 

What I could never comprehend is the people who race every weekend.  Not even looking at how that would mess up my training, I would never pay that many race entry fees.

If it makes you feel better, Adam, I have vented about this recently, too http://greenshortsrunning.blogspot.com/2011/01/thoughts-on-race-entry-fees_27.html (http://greenshortsrunning.blogspot.com/2011/01/thoughts-on-race-entry-fees_27.html).  And so did Predog http://runningfreeandeasy.blogspot.com/2011/07/costs-of-racing-whats-fair-race-fee.html (http://runningfreeandeasy.blogspot.com/2011/07/costs-of-racing-whats-fair-race-fee.html).

i agree that it is a matter of support. i will pay for the races that i want to support, even if at times the price seems a bit steep. i personally like to support the tiny 5ks, and they are usually reasonably priced. however, there are times when i am looking for something specific in a race, such as a great course, competition or some other quirk like chasing a man dressed up as a thin mint girl scout cookie. i am willing to pay for those events if i feel the benefits outweigh the costs (my lame attempt at keeping with the economics theme). it just all depends on what you want to get out of the race (exercise, PR, trophies, a party, free bread, t-shirt, etc.)  

des news is one of the races that i love to support each year (particularly the less-than-popular marathon). they keep the races simple and put the money back into the event with their prize money, which draws in more competition. (i think of bit of it also goes to providing the marathoners with a fancy charter bus ride to the top of big mountain :)). incidentally, the marathon is actually one of the most affordable ones in the state at $65 ($75 at the expo).

Jon, It does help. I agree with the limit and that is why $4/k seems steep to me. Especially since there isn't anything special about the race, no bands etc. Unless you count the stretch where the overweight parade viewers get to heckle you at mile 5. But I think I've talk myself into it for the competition.

Allie, I do agree with you as well that it is worth it to just go out and have fun. The marathon costs really don't start to add up until you calculate in flights and hotels if you have to travel. But I'll still shell out >$100+ to run in Chicago for my hometown sentiment. Though I wouldn't want to chase the man as a cookie I have considered running with the giants and my grandfather sent me a link to a marathon in France that stops at all the wineries in the area. But at least the latter (and those mud races) are events not runs. I also bet the 10K price is a bit cheaper to cover the higher costs of the marathon so from that perspective I don't mind doing my part either.

This is a side note, and you guys/gals probably already pointed this out, but it's interesting that this year DesNews is only paying prize money to locals and those who attended school here. Seems good that if they are paying prize money that it would go back to local runners, rather than have people from out of state/country swoop in to grab the money and leave. But of course, the winning times will probably be slower.

Steve P - I did not know that. I think that's great, although comp will suffer a bit. That said, Utah has enough great runners to still make it a great race.

Paul, Speaking of Utah and great runners. Are you coming down on Monday?

Nope, I'll be in Indiana. You'll all have to party hardy without me.

Well without you there I might win!  ;)

Just to add the view point from the mediterranean shoreline. In Italy the racing scene is different, to race you need a sport medicine doctor and to be affiliated with a running team (all for legal reasons), so in a race there are only committed runners. About cost of life a pair of Mizuno wave inspire is about 90-120 euros, Nike running shorts around 35 euros, the real currency exchange is very close to 1:1 even though italian salaries are on average lower than US ones.
After this short introduction let's move to the topic: the average 5-10k race (with 200 runners) costs about 5-10 euros, even "big races" (1000 runners) half marathon and marathon are usually under 30 euros. With those 5-10 euros you still get a goodies bag with some pasta or wine or some other local food items (last year the goodies bag was 2kg of potatoes). The only two exceptions, I am aware of it, are Rome and Florence marathons where the cheapest option is about 40 euros and italian people already started to complain about it, but in these two cases half of the runners are foreigners ready to spend 1000 plus dollars/euros for a vacation, the cost of marathon registration is just pocket money for them and the organizers are going to take full advantage of that.
Why races are so cheap around here? First nobody would go to run a race that costs 20 euros, and also the other important consideration for a runner are the awards and prizes, except for the first 10 people, there should be good prizes for the top 10 in each age group. Usually all the awards and prizes are food items from prosciutto, salami, pecorino cheese, parmesan, pasta, wine (usually in this decreasing order). In my running career around here I won a few pounds of pasta, several liters of wine, some olive oil, some honey and other random items such as cookies, sunglasses, running socks. People want somehow have their registration money back in prizes, and if you consider that out of 200 people 150 of them will go back home with something you understand why the ratio registration/# and quality of the prizes is crucial for the success of a race. Nobody would care less about a fast course (many courses are held on the old part of many small towns and they are not fast at all) or a perfectly measured course (many races are infamously short) but no one is going to brag about a fast time. The main concern is always beating your direct competitors, with the same 200-300 runners in every race direct competition rather than time.
How is it possible for a race director to organize a race with a low registration fee and giving away lots o prizes?
Most of the races are organized during reliogious festivities or some other local festivities, the goal is not to make a few euros from the runners but to bring 400 people (runners and their friends and family) to the festivities in this way they will spend more money in restaurants and at local shops (all the races are held on saturday late afternoon or on sunday late in the morning strategically placed close to dinner,lunch) . The mayor of the town is more than happy (usually) to host a race, police (carabinieri) are working anyway and instead patrolling some random roads they are patrolling the busiest intersections, many other volunteer groups (local runners not runnig, red cross volunteers, parish volunteers, protezione civile volunteers) are checking other intersections and manning the few aid stations. Insurance and prizes are usually provided by local agents and shops, the same thing for water, gatorade and food at the end of the race, inflatable arches by a couple of running stores providing also some indirect sponsorship. In this way everybody is happy, usually. 

That's interesting to hear about the European races, Camillo.  Thanks for the post.

That is really interesting about the Italian races.  I wonder if the low entry fees have anything to do with the fact that you don't have a lot of weekend runners or weight loss runners (not that I think either of those things is inherently bad...weight loss is certainly an admirable goal, and weekend running is certainly better than no running--and I certainly have no problem welcoming everyone to the sport) due to the necessity of affiliating with a running club.  It seems that a lot of American runners who fit in those categories don't just want to race against competition, the clock, or themselves, but they want to be entertained too.  The most frequent question I get asked by non-runners when they find out I spend 1.5-4 hours per day running, 6 days per week is, "How do you keep from getting bored?"  I am utterly at a loss as to how to answer this question.  I haven't yet come up with an answer that satisfies anyone (including myself).  It's something you have to do to understand, I suppose.  At any rate, I think this desire to be entertained (live bands on the course, huge expos, big-name sponsors, lots of race hype, large crowds of participants and spectators, loaded goodie bags etc.) is what is driving up the prices.  Those things all cost a lot of money, so naturally the race fee goes up.   
This makes me wonder, is this need to be constantly entertained, even while exercising or competing, a function of our culture as it relates to our dependency upon being constantly connected to some form of entertainment?  I think I am probably somewhat of an anomaly among my peers. To give you a brief idea of my childhood entertainment selection, the only TV I watched was at grandma's house (she had cable!) and the occasional family VHS movie night on our 1976 turn-dial Zenith.  The rest of my free time was spent largely outside or on the couch reading for hours.
In contrast, today the average person over the age of 5 is connected almost without interruption to the latest news, entertainment, music, and other sources of information and diversion via some ever-present electronic device.  To a degree, I have also become part of this trend.  I am the unofficial family IT guy, and am in the process of learning to build my own computer.  I'm also well above average in my ability to navigate and make use of the internet and/or social media, and I enjoy movies and some TV shows as much as anyone.  The difference is mostly in the amount of extraneous entertainment I was exposed to as a kid.  I seem to notice that most people who grew up in a similar circumstance as I did also seem to be able to let go of those things easily and embrace a more "primitive" form of entertainment.  As a result of this effect, I am almost never bored while running.  On familiar runs, I'm usually lost in my own head solving world problems (or just my own) or seeing just how hard I can push myself when appropriate.  When I'm on a new run, it's as if I'm a kid again going on some adventure and finding some cool new place to explore, camp, or just see.  In a race, I'm constantly occupied with pushing my limits, assessing my condition, sizing up the competition, etc.  I don't understand boredom while running, which is why I can't explain to people how I avoid it.  I simply don't experience it. 
The question is, does my experiences as a child and adolescent as it relates to entertainment set me apart from my peers in my ability to be "entertained" while running without overt extraneous stimuli?  Are other runners like me also influenced in the same manner by similar experiences in their earlier years?  Does an ability to find ways to engage one's mind while running (you could throw in swimming, biking, etc) make it easier for one to become a "serious" runner?  And finally, is the growing popularity of expensive "party races" related to a trend in the amount of external entertainment people are exposed to as they grow up?  I don't intend to sound elitist or anything.  These are just honest questions which I would really like to know the answers to.  They are probably also applicable in many other facets of life (such as school, employment, etc.)

Apologies for the long post.  One more thought:  My only real complaint, or rather worry about the increased popularity of party races with high race fees is that I don't want to see the sport of distance running become like "money" sports such as football and basketball that are almost totally driven and controlled by money, sponsorships, etc.  Obviously, it's not a sport that will ever have a huge entertainment value for the average guy watching ESPN (and maybe that's a good thing), but I think there is a small concern that the market could theoretically become saturated with expensive party races, reducing the competitive quality of races, or worse, largely icing out those who really run for the love of running or those who are trying to find a toehold in running.  As Paul said, the increasing trend is inherently neither good nor bad, it is just what people want to pay for, and I really am not against charging market prices for the kind of race that people want. I just hope there are enough of us around who run for deeper reasons that the low-key, "grassroots" side of running remains a healthy and thriving niche in the market.  I'm pretty confident this is the case, if for no other reason than that running is just too hard to stick with if you don't love it for its own sake.  :)

Eugenio, So is it better or worse in your system? I am always torn because I want as many people running as possible because I want as many people exercising as possible. I also understand that supply and demand dictates price. But I think that with each additional person the costs could be distributed not increased?
A separate thought is that in addition to timing price gradients (meaning early vs race day) there could be age graded options. One thing I liked in high school is most of the races I did were between $10-20 so I could race them nearly every weekend. However, at $30-40 a pop I do not see how a high schooler could afford it. So to make the sport better we should do something along the lines of 12-25 year old (still in "school" age) one price ($20) 26 and up another price ($30). Not that at 33 I am making that much more money than a 25 year old but it is a suggestion to strengthen the sport where it needs it most. Yet another idea is to keep the competition high by implementing more return perks. Meaning top 1, 2 or 3 per age-group get a comp in next years race... This would obviously only work in races of a certain size otherwise the whole field would get comped in...

Joe, I agree with your long post and feel that this inability for the average American to deal with alone time really contributes to another recent discussion on the blog. http://fastrunningblog.com/forum/index.php/topic,1618.msg13683.html#msg13683

All, So I did the race and yes it was worth the $40. Not for the the frills. There weren't any. I will say the crowd was more supportive than a remembered and the heckling was by far at a minimum. It was worth if for the fast course, camaraderie and supporting a sport I love.

Adam, the "italian" system is just different (races are really cheap, but salaries are much lower than US). Keep in mind that for 200-300 people racing there are about 500-1000 people running regularly (but not racing), those people rarely enter a race (usually big races, once in a lifetime event). People here exercise regularly and obesity is not a problem in adults yet, unfortunately obesity is starting to become evident in children.
For me racing some of the local races costs zero, because my team refunds all the registration fees (as long as I finish the race), because we have a big sponsor (a ceramic factory) that just is "happy" with the free advertisement (this year we are currently the top team, in spite of my presence, but in the last 10 years we always finished in the top three spots). Many races also have Team prizes based on the number of finishers (so a Team can win up to 200-400 euros for its activities ), some races far away from Rome give a 50% discount to runners coming from a long distance (>60 miles away), many races give gas-money to carpooling athletes (i.e. 20 euros to four athletes coming from the same town).
It is just different and the whole world around running is very different, we usually say (among fellow runners) that rich people don't run, usually ride their expensive mountain bikes (in a previous "life" I was a "respectful" mountain biker)

About 10-15 years ago we had a lot of races with $5 entry fee without a shirt, and $10 or so if you wanted one. Those are now gone. Why? I think I understood it some when I tried to organize a couple of my own races in 2009 in an attempt to challenge the trend. I made them free and simple. You get a number, a measured course, and you run. Hardly anybody came. Why? Because I was missing some "essentials" that make it impossible to organize even a silly little 5 K for less than $20 a person: a fancy shirt, food, entertainment, goodies packet, age division awards, and of course the infamous raffle. Obviously the sentiment that Adam is expressing here was not felt sufficiently back then. With the entry fees rising and people still coming it does not appear that common sense is returning any time soon, although you would think that the abundance of lost jobs, bankruptcies,  foreclosures, short sales, and other financial difficulties would be pleading for its swift return. Let me dare suggest that if we refused to pay the entry fees we cannot afford, the market would push them back down to a reasonable range, although that will mean that some of the frills built around racing might have to go. If you live in Utah, and have interest in racing without breaking the bank, I am willing to organize a few of those races again - send me a message.

Supply and demand are interesting things. Let's suppose that you want to buy a vacuum cleaner. I use this example, because I remember my own experience buying a vacuum cleaner was just like this. Anyway you look online and you see several in the $100-$200 range. Then you see one for $20. Do you think "jackpot" or do you think "wow, what a terrible vacuum cleaner!".

Seems to me that it's the same with races. Any "proper" race is going to cost at least $20 bucks. Maybe you could get away with less, but only if the race is well established.

Sasha,  There are trail races that are as you describe.  The BST Marathon is a great example.  It is free (just bring some food or drink to share).  It attracts a good number of runners.  Local "elite" runners show up and even a well know pro.  It has a few aid stations with volunteers but lacks shirts, prizes, a raffle, etc.  It is followed by an informal potluck.

Speaking of volunteers, it seems all races rely heavily on volunteers, including those put on by profit driven businesses.  If a race is a business driven by profit, supply and demand, and the laws of economics.  Why should someone volunteer to put money in the race director's/ board's pockets?  I wish the article linked above would have addressed this.

What's the BST marathon? Or is this one of those that we're supposed to keep quiet...

BST = Bonneville Shoreline Trail  ;)

I understand the fees, but would really like to see more "no shirt" options and a discounted price. ;)  There are only so many shirts that I will wear and unless they are a female cut, I can't wear them at all and give them away (a mens small is too big!).  This may be more of an interest to racers who have been around awhile. 

i'm interested to hear if anyone has an opinion about des news adding a half marathon to their list of events this year.
prices have gone up across the board -- it now costs $75 for the marathon and $45 for the 10k (late registration is $85 and $50, respectively). this is not unreasonable -- it's right in line with what other races are charging, and as mentioned above, races can charge whatever they want if the demand is there and people are willing to pay...
i guess i'm just a little disappointed to see this happening. i've always liked the grassroots vibe and simplicity of the des news marathon. how many more downhill half marathons can be supported in this state? and how will this affect the famously competitive 10k? all events award prize money: $1000/$500/$250 

One big issue is that counties and municipalities keep upping their prices for permitting, police support, etc. With gov't money tight, cities try to get everything they can. That gets passed on to the runners.

If its not a half-marathon / marathon, is it even worth running? Any other distances are just disappearing. This will likely dilute the competition, which is a bummer. Although the 10K is the only race on the USATF circuit, so it still has that going for it.