 addison
|
Posted: 5 August 2009, 11:27 AM
Robbie not too sure if growing weed when out orienteering is the solution to all our problems....
|
|
thomasr
|
Posted: 5 August 2009, 11:48 AM
We all continue to go to Europe, the cost is prohibitive but we all make sacrifices to get there. I know from my trip this year I am doing all i can to get back next year for as long as possible. I don't think funding our teams to world champs will help with results.
I think it would be much wiser to focus on building competition here. The superseries seems to be stumbling dangerously this year with the loss of a few key elites and we need to keep it going strong. We need to have a solid national base before we try and conquer the world.
|
|
James
|
Posted: 5 August 2009, 1:53 PM
Simon, im not forgetting about any sponsorship from contact, im well aware of the contribution they have made to the sport. They are the title sponsor for the national series, the sport itself as well as individuals..........but how did they get the quantity of sponsorship? Not just because of one CEO, the sport put forward a fantastic sponsorship opportunity to Contact, which they supported.
I dont think the two sports are that different, both starting off as minority in the 70's in NZ. Triathlon is now a huge sport in this country and orienteering is barely a blip on the radar. So that got me thinking, what did triathlon do differently?
You can simply through away ideas or suggestions, or you could look at them and try and do something about it.........
I very much agree with Tom on our own national series, it feels like it has lost any significance? Not many athletes appear to take it seriously, and dont make much of an effort to attend the events. i also wish there was a bit more of a team element to it, which i feel will help to encourage depth and excitement in each team, and ultimately the competition. I always notice going over to aussie for their nationals, there is much more excitement around the results, and the relays, and who is ahead of who......points....titles etc...
|
|
Paul I
|
Posted: 5 August 2009, 1:55 PM
Completely agree with Thomas and Jamie re good new maps being important. If you are really hungry to go overseas and follow your dreams you will find a way to do some exra work to fund it, just as many before have.
Are there any youngsters keen to put up and run an event similar to Waitangi or learn to do some mapping on the side???
Most ametuer sports in NZ are in the same predicament, we simply cannot up the costs to fund the future kids, unfortunately, unless outside sponsorships or the like can be encouraged. We certainly don't want to be a sport where some young one take on the sport because they see it as a chance to head to Europe at someone elses expense, they need to work for it!
|
|
robbie
|
Posted: 5 August 2009, 3:25 PM
James, Carter won a gold medal and the sport received $2 million from sparc annually We get $20,000
Thanks everyone for the feedback but the first question was "How can we develop a fund to support our athletes to get overseas". Nobody has answered the question.
Keep it going
|
|
valerie
|
Posted: 5 August 2009, 3:33 PM
Just a little bit of now useless info or is it.....It wasnt that many years ago that Triathalon NZ went cap in hand to NZ Athletics and asked to be under their umbrella and Nz Athletics told them that Triathalons wouldn't get off the ground! Funny that!?!
|
|
HeadHoncho
|
Posted: 5 August 2009, 3:56 PM
For James: http://www.hickoksports.com/history/triathlon.shtml
Basically James, what becomes popular in America generally spreads throughout the western world (and beyond). And triathlon became hugely popular in the US thanks significantly to the Hawaii Ironman, which grew from a 12-person race in 1978 to one that had 608 reporters (and a TV audience of 36 million) in 1987, less than 10 years later.
To suggest that somehow triathlon in NZ has grown because of actions taken within this country by those responsible for the sport here is a bit like saying Katchafire is responsible for the popularity of reggae in NZ.
|
|
mick finn
|
Posted: 5 August 2009, 4:33 PM
On the TV coverage front - it's possible to get say two half hour slots on a channel like SKY TV for a significant cost. For camera crew for a day and for editing you might spend in the region of $20K; my experience has been that it's useful for annual events like a multisport race where you are advertising for next year, or for events like National x/c where big numbers attend and local sponsors/grants will assist with the cost. Its hard to justify the investment for one-off events, but it occurs to me that a wrapup of the years SILVA Superseries might be an avenue to pursue, particularly if we reduced costs by providing footage and paying for editing mainly. Any other ideas floating around?
|
|
nick
|
Posted: 6 August 2009, 2:45 AM
O Club Co-Op: every o club member chip in $100(?) per year to be held on deposit until there is enough to purchase forestry assets which we can then use to do some funky carbon-credit dealing to reap sufficient profits to sustain the growth of our sport.
(thats brainstorming - i've no idea if it would work)
|
|
pcbrent
|
Posted: 6 August 2009, 3:21 AM
I like Nick's idea, but instead of investing in foresty and selling carbon credits. We gamble it all on Rulette a quick and easy way of doubling the money.
|
|
James
|
Posted: 6 August 2009, 6:04 PM
Rob, I realise that Rugby, Cricket, League and Netball (arguably, 4 of the most significant/popular sports in NZ) are also huge in the US&&&&& Isnt our goal to improve the sport in NZ?
I think that the huge drive in kids participation in the sport has been driven from the top end NZ performance and success on the world stage (Ric Wells, Erin Baker, Hamish Carter, Bevan Docherty, Sam Warriner.......etc), coupled with good strategy, organization and marketing, which is an example I think we could follow.
The sport has over 20, 000 kids competing in the kiwi kids triathlon series each year. If they each pay $5 affiliation fee to triathlon NZ&&.do the math. Not implying that orienteering is likely to get the exact equivalent numbers, but it could be mimicked on a relatively smaller scale.
Robbie, I am aware that carter won the gold medal, and then SPARC dishes out the dollars. But what about before he won the gold? What was the funding status before he was established as a world class athlete? He went over to Europe to race on the bones of his ass, compete against the best, in hope, that one day he too could foot it with them at the business end of the race. Pretty similar to how a few NZers are doing it at the moment&&&&&
I am not suggesting that we are ever going to get amazingly huge amounts of funding from SPARC. We are not an Olympic sport, and probably never will be, so under their current regime, I wouldnt bank on orienteering getting any earth altering sums, but the funding could be increased following improved results, which could definitely aid our cause. But more significantly, better results will promote better exposure. Which supports the strategy above&&
|
|
HeadHoncho
|
Posted: 7 August 2009, 1:50 AM
Sorry James I'm not letting you get away with changing the argument.
You're the one who stated (in relation to O and Tri) "I dont think the two sports are that different, both starting off as minority in the 70's in NZ", and you continue to think there are lessons to be learned from the sport.
So please, no more refs to rugby, league etc - my point was and still is global/external influences have had much more to do with the rise of Tri in NZ than anything done by the sports administration. And I think there wouldn't be many ppl within Tri who would agree that "good strategy, organisation and marketing" have been catalysts in Tri's growth. The growth of Tri was mainly fuelled by private race promoters trying to make some bucks cashing in on the sports-flavour of the month. You do realise the three most common forms of recreational activity (if you exclude gardening) are running, cycling and swimming, don't you? Navigation doesn't make the list.
I can do maths, and I can also read. I'll take your word there are 20,000 kids participating in triathlon. I'll also take Tri NZ's word as stated in their Strategic Plan that they hope to have 4,000 affiliated members in 2009. Gee, a sport that is supposedly the fastest-growing sport in NZ (and probably the world) and by their own admission has about 75,000 active participants can only attract 4,000 to affiliate with their national body. Yep, they must be doing something right.
And another piece of history for you - Carter was one of the highest paid (as in Government funded) high performance athletes in the late 1990's before his Sydney 2000 failure. He didn't have to race "on the bones of his ass" for very long.
I do accept we can look at other sports and try and learn lessons from them. What I don't accept is O and Tri have similarities and I don't agree there are some lessons we can learn from the growth of Tri in NZ. It is apples and oranges stuff.
|
|
addison
|
Posted: 7 August 2009, 1:56 AM
Brents idea sounds great
Or we could bet it on horses, and if they lose enough we could buy them really cheap and use them for horse orienteering.
|
|
nick
|
Posted: 7 August 2009, 3:07 AM
now you're talking!
Or we could create a new format to attract an untapped market for our sport: boy racer orienteering! Lets take illegal street racing to the next level. With sponsorship from the automotive and alcohol industries... it could be huge
|
|
Hamish
|
Posted: 7 August 2009, 3:40 AM
I love it. I rush in at morning tea to see the next posting.
Robbie - maybe people don't want to develop a fund to get our athletes overseas - they're more worried about the sport in NZ. Can someone please tell me which orienteers haven't (really) been able to get to get to JWOC, NZSS etc. because there hasn't been funding. As Jamie says if you really want to get there you'll make it happen.
Good posting Paul.
|
|
© Ruffneck Productions