https://www.chronofhorse.com/article/latest-area-i-loss-reflects-eventings-shifting-business-model/
I’m curious what other readers thought of this article.
Area 1 has so many things working against it. Rising cost of living, burgeoning pressure on development in increasingly urban areas, loss of generational legacy, the short and often unpredictable season, retirement and/or death of long-time organizers or volunteers, the prohibitive costs associated with organizing a recognized venue, and finally, competitor entitlement forcing long-standing venues to close their doors for good.
The article mentioned “eventing’s shifting business model”. What does this mean to us?
We are the birthplace of [American] eventing, the powerhouse of eventing, and the reality is that our demographics are changing. Because of the numbers that go to Florida and other areas [to compete], we just can’t get the same number of entries that Area II and III can get.
Area 1’s best talents go south if they want to be competitive. Others move south because it’s cheaper, easier, and more assessible. A contingent of serious competitors go south for the winter. They enter southern venues, supporting them which is fantastic. But they also come back home and expect southern amenities in their northern venues. Small venues can’t feasibly meet these expectations. This H/J model of eventing is hurting our grassroots that don’t or can’t go south for the winter.
“Area I was built on the backs of privately held land. In the mid-Atlantic and other parts of the country, about 50% of events are running on public land,” Burk said. “Maybe that’s what we’ll see in the future for Area I. There’s also a pretty healthy unrecognized event environment happening in Area I, and those grassroots efforts are still feeding into the sport.”
This statement fails to acknowledge the reason there is such a healthy unrecognized scene in Area 1. No governing body to cannibalize their profits. We have several big venues that shut their doors to recognized but still offer unrecognized - same tracts, some licensed officials, a fraction of the cost. Isn’t USEA curious why this would be?
Contrary to the article, I don’t think offering Recognized Start is going to “boost venues in Area 1”. The divisions below BN (AKA unrecognized) were often where shows saw a slim profit margin that helped offset the enormous cost of putting on a recognized event.
The article was thought provoking. While the message to volunteer was appreciated, as a volunteer who volunteers more than competes, I felt the article put some blame on competitors that really ought to be shifted towards our governing bodies. USEA (and USEF) has long stood there with its hands raised out, while volunteers and show organizers do all the hard work. It is not so simple as just “entering” events when the event costs $400+ for recognized and $95 for unrecognized. The pool of people that can afford $90 is much bigger than the $400 pool - drawing more competitors, more volunteers, more interest. Not to mention when you are not having a significant chunk of the entry fee cannibalized by your governing body, you can take that money and put it towards capital improvement and prolonging the life of the event.
There is a lot more involved than just “entering and volunteering” to help keep events afloat. Our governing bodies should be doing its part to keep cost[s] down for the member base, not using our money to subsidize all new equestrian venues in other areas for other disciplines.
)…but I don’t have the budget to enter many events at that price tag even if I did.
). If being unrecognized lets us do this, it may well be worth it. Just my 2 cents.
