I was there as well, and based on having buses and satellite parking, they were clearly expected more runners. I give then credit for forking out the advertised prize money when they were not obligated to do so. They'd like to grow it into a much larger event and probably want to maintain a good appearance. I did recommend that they move the date earlier, have minimum but reasonable performance standards when asked by the organizers what areas could be improved.For those looking at the HM times, I for one did not think the brisk headwind for the first 3.5 miles and last 1.5 miles did much for my time. But hey, I realize that most of you can run sub 1:07 barefoot in the snow against gale strength winds.
clarksonxc wrote:
I was there, I ran the half. I gotta believe the race organizers are taking a loss this year, or a really slim profit margin. There was an asterisk on the application, inferring that prize money was subject to participation levels. The way they made it sound after the race, the 'checks are in the mail' and we'll be getting the full amounts. I am aware that only 100 people ran the HM and 200 ran the 5k, and the money collected from entries looks like it covers the full prize structure. Still, it was a great event, especially for the inaugural year.
What you guys are not seeing is the other part of the event; the online donations from the 'Angel Runners' (people who donated but did not race). Nearly all of the labor was volunteer and like any typical road race, much of the food and other amenities were donated. So even if the entry fees barely covered the prize money, the event as a whole made some money. I think they were aware that their participation goals were extremely ambitious (25,000?!), but hey, there is plenty of room to grow.