I have another alternative that would probably work for large regions; let some
of
the people work double shifts and not pay for registration. Then let some of the
people who don't want to shag cones pay double registration. This would be
dependent
on availability of people willing to work 2 shifts. For example:
Let's say I don't want to work. I find somebody that would like to work two run
groups in exchange for free runs. I then pay for my registration and his. This
way
it doesn't cost the region anything. You probably would have to keep track of
this
somehow for administrative reasons but it shouldn't be a big deal. You could
have a
sign up list for people willing to work double shifts and then people who don't
want
to work could get hooked up. I know that at every event there's always car nuts
(like me) that end up staying all day anyway. Just a thought.
Jenaro
dg50@daimlerchrysler.com wrote:
> Pat Kelly <lollipop@ricochet.net>, who has been around for a while, seen much,
> and who takes the time to post reasoned and well-thought out responses instead
> of knee-jerk reactions *cough* wrote:
>
> > Paid courseworkers seems a nice touch, but you'd have to have some sort of a
> > relief system. Standing out on course in the heat/rain/snow/etc. all day
>would
> > cause a loss of attention by the workers, dontcha think?
>
> Yes, but the nifty thing is you don't have to pay those who are offshift. 25
> people working for 8 hours, or 200 people working for 1 hour works out the
>same
> in terms of cost.
>
> Of course, the shorter you want the work shifts, the more people you need to
> make it work. At some point, you have more paid workers than you do
>competitors
> - which isn't going to work - so there's obviously a happy medium.
>
> The other side is that too little of an earning potential reduces the desire
>to
> participate in the worker program. A potential paid worker has to make enough
> money on the day to make the trip worthwhile. Getting to hang out and watch
>cool
> racecars up close and personal is worth something too, but I think we'd be
> hard-pressed to get anyone to work less than about 3 hours at $5/hr.
>
> On a six-hour, 5 station, 5 worker-per-station event, that's 50 people. Cut it
> back to 3 people per station, that's 30 people. Make it a 4 station course,
> that's 24 people.
>
> ...you know, 24 people isn't much. Perhaps you don't need high school kids to
> fill that, maybe you can get volenteers at the event to do that - and give
>them
> a free entry (for a minimum 2 hour shift say) instead...
>
> OK, 4 corner stations, 3 people per station, 2 hour work shifts - and you may
> have to work more than one shift if the event runs longer than 6 hours - in
> exchange for a free entry. That's 36 people. Depending on how much your entry
> fee is, that's a cost of somewhere between $360-$720 (you're not paying them
> cash - so no IRS - but they don't generate revenue either)
>
> That seems doable - especially if "you don't have to work" increases car
>counts.
> Attract 36 more cars, and you've covered the extra cost.
>
> Alternatively, you could "pay" workers in $5/hour event discounts. Work long
> enough, and eventually the event is free.
>
> > On the other hand, I'd bet some folks would be happy
> > to pay more just so they wouldn't have to work. Again, the higher costs
>might
> keep
> > others out of the sport.
>
> So if we do it this way - recruit our "pro" workers from the on-site
> competitors, then you'd have the choice. Either work, and pay less, or
>not-work,
> and pay more.
>
> Hmmm, you could actually raise the price of the event by $5 right from the
> get-go, assuming everyone wants to work a 1-hour shift, and then nothing
>changes
> for people who don't mind (or want to) work.
>
> > Another part to consider are the insurance liabilities when paying someone
>to
> > do that is somewhat dangerous. I don't know what those would be.
>
> Wouldn't Club membership cover this?
>
> That, of course, would require a "teenaged worker corps" to be SCCA members -
> which might not be a bad thing in of itself.
>
> >I have no answers...
>
> That's what discussion is for. Take one crazy idea, bounce it off enough
>people,
> and see what falls out the bottom. Sometimes it's good, and sometimes not.
>
> But doesn't this beat all hell out of the same old "Street tires/turbos/Type
> Rs/subframe connectors" crap?
>
> DG
|