trail wrote:
Slowman wrote:
they pay a shitload more than cycling does.
I agree with all your other points. Triple counter point for triggering the roadie.
Cycling in the U.S. - absolutely, if talking strictly about prize money.
But comparing top global long course triathletes to top global pro cyclists? No way.
Top cyclocrossers can win $10K-$30K every weekend. Sometimes on back-to-back days. Almost every weekend all fall and winter. This isn't even the far more lucrative World Tour. And not including very significant appearance fees. And not including team salary, which goes into the millions.
And more lucrative sponsorships. Canyon presumably sells way more Aeroads, Luxes, and Grizls than they do Speedmaxes.
European pro cycling has done a better job of monetizing media feeds (e.g. Eurosport) and a better job of extracting money from spectators (CX and some other events).
Ironman and triathlon haven't figured out those two income streams yet, so they're maximizing direct corporate sponsorships and extracting money from age groupers.
I'd wager that the top 20 each male and female pro cyclists make something approaching an order of magnitude more than the top 20 each male and female long course triathletes.
If you're *not* a top pro, things can get ugly quick. But I believe that's about equal between triathlon and pro cycling. If you're not podiuming at big events, you might need a second job to get by.
i think you hit on the important point. sponsorships. this is what fuels cycling. not prize money. for some reason athlete endorsements are the way money is earned in far larger sports, like T&F and cycling, and that's not challenged (at least in this forum). swimming is a far larger sport than triathlon. lots of prize money there?
the problem with IM is that you can't do enough of them to make your prize money. so, IM eventually did what many of us thought it should have done in the early 90s, which is to build out the network of 70.3 races. this allows racers to earn more in both prize money and sponsor bonuses.
who's paying more prize money? in cycling, running or swimming? there are 4 main ways to earn money: prize money, start money, endorsements, stipends from NGBs. IM is a private race org, like ASO. what's ASO's total prize money on offer throughout the year? i don't know. are they paying more than IM? i don't know.
now, as for the weekend crits, fine. but IM shoulders the load for the entire sport. what i see in triathlon is that HyVee decides to spend a lot of money on pros. then stops. same with Lifetime. nobody's got any staying power. i've seen this since the 1980s. want the exhaustive list of mister moneybagses that showed up for their chamois sniff cup of coffee then receded after a few years for the next shiny object? IM - with which i have had big differences of opinion in business practices in the past - has been there with prize money since 1986.
finally, on the earnings of cyclists and triathletes, i would say this. i don't believe the top earning cyclist earnings anything like an order of magnitude more than frodeno. on the women's side, i'll bet the delta is closer yet. i'd guess than the combined total earnings of the top-5 female triathletes are right there with the top-5 female cyclists. where i would agree with you is in IM's struggle to monetize coverage and this is the silliest thing going in triathlon right now. IM can't do this well. PTO says this is the one thing it is hanging its hat on. the natural synergy is right there: for the PTO to handle IM's coverage. why that isn't a deal that's in the works is god's own mystery.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman