• Sean

    “Elite race memberships are down 9% on last year and down 26% on three years ago which continues a trend since at least 2011 (down almost 40%).”

    In the scheme of things, the cost of a license isn’t much. There is no way a license costing a few hundred dollars is the cause of a 40% membership drop over 4 years. They really have been asleep at the wheel.

    • inopinatus

      Perhaps this is a tailing off of the Cadel effect.

    • Tom Galbraith

      Sean, I respectfully disagree. $361 is a lot for a young Elite rider with minimal parental support, on top of maintaining a bike, kit purchases, event entry fees, etc. Just one crash on your bike can cost you over $1K once a new helmet, kit, and bike repairs are made.

      • Sean

        Considering the amount people spend on bikes, accessories, clothing, supplements, travel and so on – $361 is chicken feed and doesn’t explain any part of a 40% decline in membership. It’s less than a dollar day, my coffee habit costs 5 times that.

        • Dan

          You can pay for mine then this year?
          It’s alot of money for alot of people.

          • AMK

            Mine too while your at it?

        • Tim Rowe

          For a rider in the prime of their earning career, yes. The idea that a rider aged 19-29 has no other option than a full Elite license when they’re generally university students or people just starting out in their career is utter crap when you’re effectively giving everyone else a discount just for turning 30, so long as they don’t want to race Elite.

          • Matt

            When I was a uni student $360 was close to a weeks income. Maybe we need a sliding scale. All the MAMIL’s can pay $2000 a year for a race license. That might help the bottom line.

        • Matt DeMaere

          You’re not listening and it reminds me so many recurrent conversations in amateur sport.

          No, your personal spending habits are not a basis on which to decide whether it is affordable for the majority. All the cash spent on cycling and its ancillaries by young professionals certainly drives this site, but it is not the basis of the _sport_, just the industry.

        • Flemish toilet bowl

          That comment!?
          You probably think you can’t race a second hand bike made of steel.

          • Sean

            I never said that. Most guys I see riding around here are on bikes worth more than my car.

    • Tim Ashton

      $376 is quite alot for me, and I suggest it is for most people.
      Then add on individual race entry fees and the cost of participating in races throughout the year is pretty costly.

      • ceedee

        Does club offer the cheaper regional licences?

        • Tom Galbraith

          Not all state bodies have bestowed Regional status on truly regional clubs. Our region of Toowoomba QLD is currently asking the question of CQ with no resolution as yet.

        • Tim Ashton

          I live in Brisbane so no. I used to live in cairns, where there is only one cycling club and limited racing, licences are $15 cheaper……bargain at $361

    • Tim Rowe

      The significant increases in license fees has driven a lot of people away in recent years. I have just stopped doing road races/crits altogether as $360 just to do a few club crits isn’t even remotely justified. For that kind of money (remember – add the entry fee, might be $10-20) if I want to be involved in the sport I’ll just ride to the event and volunteer instead. What was working out to be $55 per club crit – forget it.

      • Sean

        Completely agree with you here, we need other options like a club only license.

      • Agree Tim. I haven’t raced lately or held a license for a number of reasons. One of those reasons is that by the time I pay my annual fee and then an additional $10 or thereabouts to race, and I only race handful of times per year, it’s costing me $50 just to get on my bike and have a race. It’s not even about whether a person has the money. It’s about a sense of value.

        • Bex

          Tim and yourself have said it perfectly. Very hard to justify getting a racing licence if i want to head down and do a few crits in the summer.

  • Andy B

    The cost of a license considering the number of local races in my area does seem quite expensive

    Its very difficult to draw new members in my area when the local clubs struggle to get the permits and permission to run events or even hold weekly club races.. plus the cost of events and requirements for traffic control and other over governance
    I don’t think these have anything to do with Cycling Australia but I wonder if these problems are the same throughout Australia?
    Does high costs of organising events put off people from running them which in turn reduces member numbers?

    • inopinatus

      The administrative burden is a barrier for race organisers. The #1 scarce resource is volunteer time, not dollars. Volunteer availability, more than anything else, is the limiting factor for club racing.

      If you love cycling in Australia and wish to see it flourish, put your hand up. Help your club. Most volunteering spots are not onerous. The price of a viable racing season may be your Saturday morning as a corner marshal or line judge, twice a year.

      • Andy B

        I agree Volunteers make the whole club racing system work
        Its just a shame that some requirements in our area seem to be going beyond a normal volunteer role with the requirement of licensed traffic controllers (3-4) and the costs associated with that growing

        • jules

          I agree with inopinatus, but Andy B you are correct that the problem is broader than just volunteers – although they are always needed too. I am aware of some of the difficulties faced by race organisers – club, state – and it goes beyond volunteers. as I wrote above, a lot is down to bureaucrats who have responsibility for issuing race permits just not doing their job, or doing it in such a risk-averse manner as to impose ridiculous, over-the-top conditions on a race permit. part of the cause of this is likely prejudice – that cyclists ‘shouldn’t really be doing this stuff on public roads’ and a feeling that they doing us a favour by issuing a permit.

    • jules

      here in Vic, there are so many options on where to race. I find myself having to make hard choices. the red tape for race organisers is growing here, but from what I can tell – not as quickly in other states like NSW where police seem to competing to throw up the most number of hurdles for organisers. there is a definite general trend towards driving races with more sophisticated, expensive governance, and probably less of them as a result. this risks placing an artificial limit on growth of the sport where race numbers are capped and limits reached. that’s not the case in Victoria, but I wonder about elsewhere.

      • Andy B

        I am in NSW and from a distance it certainly looks like the vast majority of good events are in Victoria (grass is always greener)
        I won’t proceed to mention my jealousy…

        • jules

          one of the issues I’ve heard of in NSW – and this is anecdotal – is the low hurdle at which police set the bar at a race requiring a police escort. the monopoly provider of police escorts is…. the police. who earn a nice tidy wage from it. red tape is certainly a growing industry in some areas of Australian life. it’s like a legalised and softer version of govt corruption.

      • Rocky

        That’s true of Melbourne, doesn’t mean the regional areas are so lucky, unless you want to do 8 – 10 hours of driving at the weekend.

        • jules

          ok but is that due to difficulty in getting permits from governments, or just low numbers?

  • CGradeCyclist

    The cost of a racing licence is the absolute reason why I haven’t renewed for the last two years.
    As a father of two teenage girls, I’m already paying lots for their sport. And due to the commitments related to that (attending games, doing parent volunteer duty, etc), I can’t race anywhere near as much as I used to.
    So given I earn an income on the national average – $300+ is a really significant cost, especally when I’m not sure how many times I’ll get to race for that. If it was sub-$200, it would be a much more borderline decision – if I could get to a race once/twice a month, it would work out OK. But at $300+ its waaay too much for someone in my situation.
    Also, re: the equipment comments. When I’m riding, everything I have at that time (bike/wheels/clothing/helmet) totals less than $1k, so the licence in my pocket is more than a third of that (and only lasts a year!).
    Would desperately love to get back into racing though. I sincerely hope CA can do a comprehensive overhaul of their membership structure with a real focus on driving down membership costs… :-)

    • Ourmedia Guy

      AGREED !!!! know 5-7 riders who are in this boat, must be thousands nationally.

    • Paolo

      Same here. For the few club races i would have time to do in a year it’s just not worth it I would like to race sometimes, but $360 plus entry fees turn out to be $50-$70 for a race where i might just be able to sit in the bunch for an hour.

    • Yeah nah mate

      If you are 30+, which I assume you are given you have 3 teenage girls, you can race c-grade on a masters license for $263 per year.

      Not $200 that you desire but also not $300+ that generated your false sense of rage.

      The real outrage hear is, however, not about Dads (and mums) who work median wage jobs paying $260 or $360 per year.

      It’s about uni students being forced into $360 p/year and onto elite licenses regardless of where they actually sit in the pecking order.

  • Cul

    The cost of Elite & even Masters membership is
    often cited as the main reason many smaller clubs just aren’t getting numbers
    at events, this is obviously having effect on CA’s member base as well; however
    certain state bodies seem very reluctant to allow many regional clubs access to

    “regional licenses” despite the obvious lack of opportunity for members to race
    at other clubs, or even in CA open events. Really for the cost of membership,
    the benefits are very limited..

    • Sean

      A club only or regional license would be a great idea.

      • Callum Dwyer

        Some clubs have access to regional licences, but even them still cost about $250 for elite/u23 licence.

    • ceedee

      Lack of racing opportunity is main reason I didn’t get licence this year. The region where I live is down to one D grade event for the year.

  • jules

    I don’t understand what CA actually does. CT did you do an article on that topic once? I can’t remember.

    • Cameron Harris

      I’d like to see that, and stack it up against what bicycle NSW and bicycle network do. They all seem to be competing for my dollar in NSW.

      If for a club licence as well. As a cycling returnee, I’m realistic that I’ve missed my competitive window, but club level involvement is of interest.


  • Marcus J

    I’d love to know more about where the money goes. Particularly, what exactly ordinary members get back for their fees. From their report, CA has 26,000 members, who paid about $2.1m last year in fees. There is also revenue of nearly $700k relating to insurance – whether this is for member insurance is not specified, but it seems a fair assumption. Looking at where the money goes, there are only 2 line items that seem like they could be of direct benefit to ordinary members – sport competition and sport development, totalling $600k. (This ignores events, which turn a standalone profit, and insurance, where it’s not clear how much of the $1.2m expense relates to members or to CA corporate insurance.) The big one is employee costs, yet what they do for ordinary members is unclear. AFAIK, they never turn up at our local races, which is the primary reason for most of the racing memberships.

  • GT

    “In 2014 CA forgave $1.2 million of bad debts,”
    So who owed CA $1.2 million that got written off?

    • jules

      sponsors? NRS teams?

    • Tim Rowe

      It’s extremely common for NSOs to struggle to recover debts from athletes part of overseas trips – that is, athletes who travel as part of teams to World Championships, those kinds of events. For a variety of reasons and not apportioning blame to any parties this is not an uncommon problem in MTBA – I can’t imagine it not being a problem for CA either. It wouldn’t surprise me if there was a chunk of that kind of debt accumulated over years.

      • jules

        they are giving unsecured loans to athletes? have they had a close look at that practice? seems a bit dodgy

      • winkybiker

        I don’t understand why membership fees would be used to cover expenses for elite athletes in the first place, either by way of “loans” or gifts. No-one covers my expenses when I go to an event or to a race.

        • Yeah nah mate

          No one covers your expenses because you suck. If you sucked less, someone would probably cover them.

          It’s not uncommon for grass roots to fund elite. Look at how much it costs a junior to play soccer, and then that money goes to talent dev and funding pro level stuff.

        • Dave

          Sponsors would be covering the cost of sending representative teams, not membership fees.

    • Warren J

      Hi Matt / cyclingtips, it would be great to have a bit more background to these bad debts.

      From my reading, in 2010 Cycling Australia set to capitalise on international success with a ‘Joint Venture’ with marketing groups to own and operate some of its own events and bike shows – to expand income by becoming a race promoter, rather than governing body. The events all bled money, and the joint venture was written off as a failure, and a lot of the debts discussed in this article relate to this. A google of ‘Joint Venture Cycling Australia’ gives articles from SBS etc.

      (I’m also interested in reporting on UCI finances in the wake of Landis legal proceedings etc – a reason the UCI doesn’t have much appetite for doping challenges these days I feel eg not sacking Astana).

      Cheers for reporting on governance issues in general.

  • Deryck Walker

    In the scheme of $19,358,254 annual revenue the deficit only represents just over 5% of revenue. Compare to Australias national debt ot GDP 33.88% (2014), CA is looking pretty good!

    • jules

      you can debate these figures for ever, particularly with only a shakey grasp on accounting like me, but a big difference is that a lot of Australian national debt is used to fund saleable assets (e.g. infrastructure), whereas CA’s debt appears to be in the form of net losses (i.e. no asset growth to balance it out).

    • A

      Tell the bank that.

      • Deryck Walker

        Some banks are known to throw money at far less stable entities, but then again some of those less reputable banks are no longer with us as a result.

        This situation seems far from dire. It’ll take time to settle the deficit, but with the right guidance this should be sorted (im guessing 5 – 7 years unless someone/something throws money in the pot in the interim). It just needs cool heads, the right leadership, and no mass hysteria (which the interwebbie is known to occassionally whip up).

  • Pete

    CA should introduce a “10 race” license or similar option for people who would like to do occasional or particular races but cannot commit to race regularly enough to justify a full license. CA would of course be concerned about people down-grading. Well, this option could be made available only to those who didn’t hold a full license the previous year. IE New members or upgrades from ‘Ride’/silver level. They could even test the water with this being a women-only option.

  • Sean

    The best solution for all us old buggers is to join a vets cycling club.

    • Ross

      Only $100 per annum for my local Vets club.Why the large price difference between CA and Vets?

      • Callum Dwyer

        It would be great if vets went all ages and provide some competition to CA.

        • Dave

          Indeed, separating the amateur structure could be worth considering.

          If you’re not wanting to enter UCI-classified races or contest for national championships, there’s no reason you need to deal with CA.

  • Durian Rider

    Id rather line up to the daily fast bunch rides in Radelaide that are harder than any race Ive done as nobody is holding back for the sprint and Strava times are another focus so its full gas all the way.

    Im fitter now from training with a power meter on Strava than when I used to race A grade 10 years ago. Its a joke how much race fees and licenses are now for CA riders. My first license in 97 was like 120AUD or something. My bike at the time was a $2000 Avanti Corsa with 8spd 600. Now for 2k you can get 11spd Ultegra on high end carbon Giant that would be better than any bike Lance won his TDF’s on.

    But you don’t get more in 2015 from CA. :(

    Yeah I can afford it but Im over it and would rather go hit up the fast bunches where its full gas and nobody saving or working in a team tactic situation.

    • Yeah nah

      No chance of ‘random’ drug testing in the local bunches either hey Harley ;)

      • Durian Rider

        I started racing in 97 and have NEVER been drug tested!

        I even raced in Belgium, France and UK and was never tested. I remember seeing syringes laying on the toilet floor it was so rampant though.

        That said if you did get caught for drugs you would be pretty silly. Even a local doc got busted for anabolic steroids for racing in C grade crits.

        99.9% of the fast riders Ive known in the last 18 years of racing have taken something or still do take something to boost performance.

        I myself have experimented with a lot of legal and illegal PED’s. Just watch my youtube vids. Well they were not technically illegal because I got them ALL thru a registered doc and it would be easy as fuck to get a TUE and then race on these ‘illegal drugs’ and call myself ‘natty’.

        The system is a fucking joke and nothing is changing other than the faces of the corrupt marketing agnencies and sporting federations that only have the bottom line dollar as their main focus.

        Society is shocked that peoples whose jobs who rely on their performance would take substances and use any loopholes to continue to use these substances.

        The most powerful drug still is EPO and it is incredibly easy for me to get legit sources from legit hospital pharmacies. To get caught you have to be more stupid than unlucky as the half life of EPO is 4 hours. Ive never taken it but have friends who have and their performance boosts were incredible. Yes one can raise hemoglobin via anabolics but you will also suffer in the heat and have excess fluid retention that will negate the extra hemoglobin once the climb starts. EPO doesnt have the negative weight gain and is why its so popular amongst boxers, runners, cyclists and dancers.

        Let me guess ‘yeah nah’, you still believe drug testing is legit and you wear your Rapha kit cos you think the sponsored riders wearing it are full natty brah but you forget that your Rapha jersey design was just a label ripped off an old team whose most famous rider took more heroin than the average smacky in paramatta in the 90’s.

        Keep believing in falsehoods brah and keep knocking those who bring the truth to the table.

        • Yeah nah mate
          • Gavin Adkins

            Well played.

          • Durian Rider

            haha that article was pretty funny and pretty spot on!

            Still though, you didnt reply to the points I made and you are still hiding behind a fake account.

            This is who I am. http://www.youtube.com/user/durianriders

            Who are you? Another faceless troll? xD

            • Yeah nah mate

              Forgive me. I tuned out after you started making unverifiable claims. about racing in Europe.

              • Durian Rider

                Do you even ride brah?

                Im a real person whom anyone can talk with face to face. People are welcome to come train with me any day of the week. Im approachable.

                You are just trolling cycling forums under anon accounts cos backing your own opinion and personal experience against your real identity scares you more than riding up and down the local bike path incase you get dropped by the soccer mums who just got into cycling.

                Grow some balls one day and put yourself out there.

                • Yeah nah mate

                  For all your hypothesising you’ve totally mistook my motivation. It’s just satisfying getting a rise out of you, because that’s what you do on the regular to Internet dorks.

                  • Durian Rider

                    U even ride brah?

                    Is this u?

                  • Durian Rider

                    But I don’t hide behind fake accounts like you do and I actually ride a bike and can prove it. :)

  • Michael K

    Why do we have State Cycling Administration? I would bolster up CA (as the overseer of the sport in Aus) and do away with the State administrations. Centralize the running of schools cycling and all the other really good programs into one center. By all means have a more local office.

    Next step in my plan would be to then merge CA and the various Bicycle Network groups into one entity. Have one division responsible for race
    administration and one division responsible for getting people on bikes and road safety campaigns.

    This would reduce the administration costs associated with people and bikes and also better encourage private race promoters and local clubs to organize events.

    • Callum Dwyer

      I agree with Michael in regards to state bodies. They are unnecessary double up on administration.

      I’m not sure if it still the case, but a few years ago about 45% licence fee goes to your state body. So they costing members if they push up licence fee.

      • James L

        The state bodies is only a byproduct / cost in the scheme of things, ultimately we need a good national business thats customer focused, largely indifferent of delivery mechanisms as long of customer goals are achieved. I think the issue needs to be understood in terms of the overall business economic model thats established for Cycling in Australia.
        Ideally we need a capitalist based model rather that what is in effect a federation model that, as is pointed out, inefficient. The challenge is federation is difficult to change potentially. Ultimately people can move this issue, if all cyclists speak and if the federation model may be the constraint, we can change this.

    • inopinatus

      Why would it reduce the administration costs? BN and CA are chalk and cheese, with very different purpose, business model, & constituencies. It’s like proposing to merge the NGV with Bunnings because they both deal with painters.

      The actual synergies would be peanuts and greatly outweighed by the merge costs. The subsequent organisation would be utterly confused about its mission. This isn’t a path I’d recommend.

      • Michael K

        I don;t agree with you at all. BNV and CA may be different entities and have slightly different adgendas, but if you look at the core purpose they are swimming in the same direction.

    • Arfy

      Wasn’t there a requirement for CA to amalgamate the cycling bodies under one banner a couple of years ago? It seems that never happened, and that CA kept their agenda limited to supporting cycling at the National level. This is a pity, because now with the high license fees it seems CA is cutting off their nose to spite their face. They are pushing young (and not-so-young) cycling enthusiasts away from racing, effectively cutting their grass-roots level support. This is a distinctly different strategy than other sporting codes such as cricket, rugby league, and AFL. In fact, Tennis Australia in recent years spent millions of dollars upgrading grass-roots tennis facilities around Australia as they saw that their neglect over the previous decade had resulted in less public interest in tennis, and therefore less revenue. They recognised they are in the Entertainment business, and this business requires a large loyal fan-base and general public interest to be successful.
      My question to CA is, if you are struggling with revenue, then how the heck is cutting off your grass-roots support going to grow CA’s revenue in the future? It appears CA is on the slippery slope to oblivion.

      • Dave

        It was the MTB and BMX bodies that CA was supposed to integrate.

        The MTB and BMX bodies furiously resisted this move, because they are doing fine without getting involved with CA.

        • Arfy

          I thought I’d read somewhere about the recreational cycling organisations being on the ASC’s radar, so I had a bit of a dig around. The main point the ASC mentioned was a potential CA/BMX/MTBA amalgamation, but there’s also a reference to the recreational organisations (in the “Background” section):

          Now I’m not sure that CA is really in a financial position to do anything about it right now, but it would make for a better structure to reach grass-roots if it did.

  • James L

    There are many issues with this report that i do not think clarify fully the apparent structural issues with CA. On the licensing, im not an economist but id suggest that charging everyone full price for what many will only race 4-5 times a year is a poorly designed customer engagement approach and threatens revenue, as its effectively a one size fits all model. We see this when organisations cannot identify segments within its markets and thus, cannot design products for each segment, a common management technique these days. I personally make more than enough to pay this annual fee but I shirk at it for a number of reasons, one of which is that I look to reward organisations that build progressive, interesting events.

    Secondly, how does an organisation with such low profit have such a high level of bad debts operationally? for me this would point to poor event design, poor forecasting and so on, questioning management practices. Two points arise from this: 1. For those who continue to pay this heavy levy id be disappointed as it sends a message that a big portion of the money I pay goes to the inefficiency of the administration in managing the sport. 2. In terms of funding from the taxpayer, there should be more focus on effective business performance, NPS (positive feedback from the cycling community to measure CA’s progress in action and satisfaction). Funding thus should only be apportioned to good performance and for less poor performance, funding could be routed to more effective market mechanisms. We are aware of the costs of insurance, but this is an opportunity to address the levers of the cost of the insurance as a community and negotiate on scale, rather than accept it.

    Thirdly, if CA is dependant on the network of clubs and state entities that are part of the $$ and organisational umbrella, then a more effective franchise model could be created that looks to establish the mechanisms for each entity to flourish and create local engagement and products under the auspice of the parent franchiser. Could it be conceived that we could test small commercial operators to run state entities? This business mechanism has been happening for many years in the real economy, why cannot this be adopted (properly & economically) in Cycling? its a bit silly that an organisation that is funded by taxpayers, that has to pay police huge sums of money, is also primarily funded by taxpayers? There can be a better solution.

    More broadly, CA needs to create a more modern organisation that is customer focused, progressive and business driven (i.e. self funded). There are private, cycling event management companies that make money, successfully. Too often, most events that are CA related are not well designed thus are losing money.

    There is no question that its difficult for this type of business to be successful in the market, but from these signals its apparent that there are many things that can be done to lift the standards, products for consumers and operations. Id like for someone in CA to speak out and clarify these topics with the supporting clarity, for all members. Nick or others?

    James (a CA member for many years, last membership 2014)

    • Dave

      Alternately, how about make the state organisations (plus MTBA and BMXA) the main game and make CA a small office only just large enough to handle the administrative duties required as a UCI member body?

      CA should not be attempting to run events, that side of the business can be handed over to the state orgs and private promoters. If any of the events run by CA are profitable, they could be sold off for a tidy sum.

      The elite development programs could be completely transferred to the AIS, no need to be duplicating efforts.

    • ceedee

      Well said James.

  • Flemish toilet bowl

    I wonder how the Vet’s cycling assoc’s do it?!

    • Dave

      Three letters – U C I

      I wonder how much it cost CA members to buy Tracey Gaudry’s seat at the top table?

      • Cynic

        There’s another person who could do with some actual critical performance analysis rather than just fluffing articles from subservient cycling magazines.

  • Flemish toilet bowl

    Most racing is run by volunteers at club level.

    • Tim Ashton

      I’d actually be alot happier paying my $376 if a much greater proportion of it ended up with my club. There are many people there who volunteer lots of time with few resources.

      • Andy B

        100% agreed.. If that money went directly into my club I wouldn’t have a single gripe

        • Dave

          Especially because you could volunteer with your club, and therefore reduce the amount of money needing to be charged.

  • brucegray

    I’m a MAMIL who raced for 3 years, then gave it away. Why? dubious value for money…
    $10 for one crit track, $20 for another. I could live with that, as long as the handicapping was given due consideration…which it wasn’t.

    Safety was another reason. The Qld club I was a member of consistently had inordinately more crashes than several similar sized clubs in Victoria.
    There was a mentality parroted loudly and frequently that ‘crashin’s part of racin’. Something’s wrong when the parrots are senior club office bearers.

    A lack of considered venues for TTs and road races.

    A third reason was a distinct lack of variation in crit race tactics from week to week. A sit in fest with a flea brained bunch sprint at the end, week after week after week.

    Middle aged men of means and intelligence pretty quickly realize that’s a culture left to others.

    I’ve moved on from racing, to better quality coffee and conversation.
    So long racing, so long CA.

  • ed

    events that have fallen off the calender such as canberra tour means it becomes harder to justify the cost of a licence.

  • Orrsome153

    I do hold a membership with a CA affiliated club. The work, effort and more importantly the cost to stage weekly events with said club is an enormous undertaking for all. I hardly race, if I do it is only a few times a year. I agree with others the licence fee’s are exorbitant coupled with the weekly race fee’s. If one was to race all events with the licence fee and entry fee’s one could spend up to and in some cases above $1000 per year just to race. I personally would rather spend this on other things (new bike or components). We all love cycling. We don’t have to race to enjoy riding our bikes. As Durianrider has correctly stated a bunch ride can be as competitive as any race (however, with a degree of risk). The big movement in cycling in this country is in recreation and fitness. The gran fondo scene is literally cashing in on this growth in a big way. The entry fees for such events are also exorbitant they are pretty steep. I will not be renewing my membership with CA. As a middle aged cyclist riding for pure enjoyment when time allows I do not see value in the licence. Organised cycling has become revenue driven to the point of exploitation. If you wish to race chapeau or pay for over priced fondo’s on roads that are free to ride every other day of the year good for you. I just want to ride my bike.

  • Tim

    I don’t race as much as I would like but the main reason I take out a licence is for the insurance cover. I made a claim a couple of years ago that covered the cost of 2.5 years worth of membership fees. I’m gonna keep my licence up to date.

  • Stompin

    Public liability insurance, ugh.

  • Cynic

    That $1m is probably just Nick Green’s corporate credit card bill.

    Seriously, that guy has attended a few functions, but sheesh talk about a lame duck. For a sport that has seen unprecedented growth, access to all business and politics, and a ‘flavour of the month’ run that has gone for a few years, any muppet could run the show. Clearly he does.

    “overall membership risen 3.5%” ? Woopty do, that’s about 10% less than it should be.

    Seriously the level of under-performance from a CEO would not be allowed in the business world, but working for taxpayers becomes a gravy train they can’t get off.

    What’s the $50k paid to a Director-related party and a $2m loan from a Director (is it from Gerry Ryan)?

  • Cynic

    All the comments below will be downloaded and re-issued by the CEO in his strategic presentation, over lunch..

  • Lulu

    As a family who race BMX, Crit/Road and MTB – did you know we have to get a seperate licence for all of these “cycling bodies”? (At least there isn’t a new CA body for cyclocross yet). Why not have one central group that do all – and that doesn’t suck money/ funnel money into the “Gold medal” track fund. Simply not issuing a new plastic card for all 4 of us every year for every different discipline would be a cost saving measure! There is serious competition for cyclist from the bicycle network that anyone who doesn’t race seems to be a part of. It would be better if they worked together?

    My kids play hockey too. Their membership is 200 per year now. Goes up to 600 per year soon. They also play cricket – 120 for first year.

    No other sport that we play has such a diversity of organisations that you have to be a member of to participate in. Imagine if cricket australia had a t20 body, a test body and a one day body, wouldn’t that be a joke. So why as cyclist do we put up with this?

    • Dave

      As much as it’s a bit frustrating for those who might like to race in different disciplines, can you really blame the MTB and BMX organisations for wanting to remain independent? If they get swallowed up by Cycling Australia there is a very real chance that all their good work would be thrown away.

      If CA cannot be fixed, the way forward would be some sort of mutual recognition allowing discounted licences for road/track riders entering BMX or MTB and also the other way around.


Pin It on Pinterest

October 27, 2016
October 26, 2016
October 25, 2016
October 24, 2016