Race wants prize money back

So then, as you mentioned, it was actually perfectly appropriate to refer to you as "Race Director"

You may be an "old dog" (your words), but hey never too late to work on reading comprehension!

thanks

Listen guys, i've been try'n wrote:

You can like it or lump it or take it down the road and dump it.

Signed: Chuck U Farley :)

It is entirely your choice but whilst you post under numerous random handles any points you make valid or otherwise will always be dismissed as being from someone with ulterior motives.

Obviously It's misleading because someone skimming through the thread might miss the one post where you Acknowledge using multiple usernames, and think that you are more than one person.

But that was probably your intention

Oh wait you're a maverick, or was it an "old dog non-conformist"? Both? I guess they aren't mutually exclusive.

You sound like an experienced, albeit super jaded and terrible, race director...maybe you could volunteer some time with the Surfing Madonna Project?

Esquire wrote:

So then, as you mentioned, it was actually perfectly appropriate to refer to you as "Race Director"

You may be an "old dog" (your words), but hey never too late to work on reading comprehension!

thanks

more than one poster accusing me of being the RD in question. Just trying to clarify that. There is nothing wrong with my reading comprehension, just tired of being accused of being "THAT RD."

But I do appreciate your well intentioned corrective criticism.

Also, I'm retired from the RD business. If you all like, for future reference you may refer to me as a "use-to-was rd."

"Old dog"/Jaded former race director-

Then why didn't quote one of those alleged posts? You quoted mine which only says "Race Director"

Maybe clarity in writing can be a "new trick" for you. Or is that too "conformist"

ExpertKipWatcher wrote:

Listen guys, i've been try'n wrote:

You can like it or lump it or take it down the road and dump it.

Signed: Chuck U Farley :)

It is entirely your choice but whilst you post under numerous random handles any points you make valid or otherwise will always be dismissed as being from someone with ulterior motives.

point. I really do. I have been lurking/posting on here for 3/4 months before beginning to post the way I have on this thread. Your point is well taken as for being dismissed or having posters thinking I might have ulterior motives. Perhaps and with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight vision this may not have been the best decision to begin with on this thread.

I appreciate the tenor of your post and I'll take your advice to heart while I consider how to address my future posts. :) H.J.

actually I'm not. I'm full size ( for people my size) and own a business but I like to say that to confuse people.

My I will answer any call that comes into my company phone from 10 am to 10 pm can I say I work 12 hours a day?

Esquire wrote:

"Old dog"/Jaded former race director-

Then why didn't quote one of those alleged posts? You quoted mine which only says "Race Director"

Maybe clarity in writing can be a "new trick" for you. Or is that too "conformist"

replying to your post. I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, you've probably read all post on this thread. If you have then there's no need for me to quote them, is there?

Esquire, have I offended you personally somewhere during this thread? If so, I apologize. If not then may I ask, "Why are you up my a** so much? Can't we agree to disagree without all the ill will worded posts? Or are you like me, an old dog too?

Esquire wrote:

Their revenue for 2014 was 151k, expenses were 83k most of which is listed as those "60 hours/week" salaries and "other expenses". (about 30k of the 83k is alleged to have gone back into the community.)

The "other" expenses look padded- especially over 10k for advertising/promotion, almost 5k "information technology", 3500 for telephone

Of that 151k total revenue for 2014 they added 67k straight into the bank acct.

Esquire wrote:

Do we really think the "treasurer" is working those 60 hour weeks non stop too? B Nichols isn't the only putting in the hours!

Mind you they are also allegedly spending almost 2k per year on accounting (in addition to the treasurer's salary), so I can't imagine Big Bob's treasurer buddy needing to put in that kind of time

Some of you clearly don't understand the time commitment it takes to put on even small races. Your ignorance is even more evident on running a non-profit.

This thread epitomizes the need for getting rid of anonymous posting.

once an RD wrote:

Some of you clearly don't understand the time commitment it takes to put on even small races. Your ignorance is even more evident on running a non-profit.

You're probably right...but at the same time, if you're not going to organize and direct the race properly, than don't do it at all. There are too many groups (for-profit and non-profit) and people who are glad to take advantage of the running scene and make a buck, but don't educate themselves beforehand in how to properly host an event.

Do it right or not at all wrote:

once an RD wrote:

Some of you clearly don't understand the time commitment it takes to put on even small races. Your ignorance is even more evident on running a non-profit.

You're probably right...but at the same time, if you're not going to organize and direct the race properly, than don't do it at all. There are too many groups (for-profit and non-profit) and people who are glad to take advantage of the running scene and make a buck, but don't educate themselves beforehand in how to properly host an event.

with you. Before a person decides to RD a large event with prize money they should start out on a much smaller scale. Try putting on a fundraiser for the local food pantry for example. Gain experience then move up the ladder one rung at a time.

Hey Bob,

Why don't you go play with tile and leave us alone:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surfing_Madonna

once an RD wrote:

Some of you clearly don't understand the time commitment it takes to put on even small races. Your ignorance is even more evident on running a non-profit.

Their official report says they spent 7500 man hours over the year, so it apparently does take a lot of time.

Actual person not a puppet wrote:

Hey Bob,

Why don't you go play with tile and leave us alone:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surfing_Madonna

not Bob. It's Daniel.

I don't enjoy playing with tiles. However I do enjoy composing lines with hand set type. If I'm being a bother please feel free not to read my posts. How difficult is that?

Legally, if a contract (terms and conditions) is confusing it benefits the non-writer of the contract. Thus if there is any confusion, it will benefit the runner not the director. The fact that the people working for the race are confused enough to send the wrong amount is prima facie evidence that the contract was unclear. Thus the court should find in the runner's favor. Further had the runner only received half of the printed amount, he would have a strong case to sue the RD for the full amount that was listed on the website.

The way a lot of these scam non-profits work is the "non-profit" pays its board and directors peanuts and then funnels its revenues into another organization where the same people are now paid a huge salary. The front company can say look we gave all out money away and worked for peanuts, and we're non-profit. Then the back company shells out the big incentives to the same dudes from the money received from the front company. Probably what's going on here with this dumb ocean charity.