You are preaching to the choir. So many people get lost in the weeds and are too close out...

Step back, look at the TV coverage and you see half of it is really human interest stories.

Keep that coverage, and replace the "race" story of "Craig Alexander" with Joe AGer versus Jack Wanna be and the product is EXACTLY the same. Some of the "Industry" sponsors may not be as keen for branding, but when you have 'Ford' or 'Subaru' as the main sponsor, all they care about is how many eyes are watching.

Hell... 95% of the TV audience would have no idea they were watching a FOP AGer versus a Pro

This is the world of reality tv where more people are famous for being famous and when the likes of Kim Kardashian rule the airwaves....

Hell... You want ratings... Go back to the Battle of the Network stars format... Have the Kardasian Family go up against the full cast of the Bachelor in a 1 hour sprint triathlon with silly contests in between and you could put that in an 8PM time slot and get 4x the ratings of the {cough} Pros.

LOL... You are making my point... How many PRO TRIATHLETE races do you see on TV today, yesterday or tomorrow.

I see more local coverage of High School sports than PRO triathlon.

How much coverage of IMLP was there on the national news?

I can tell you in Boston, I saw NO MENTION... Though did see the bench clearing brawl between the Nevada minor league baseball teams.

LOL... You are making my point... How many PRO TRIATHLETE races do you see on TV today, yesterday or tomorrow. //

Thats easy, 100% of all triathlons on TV are pro races. I watch about one or two new ones every week or so..Not sure how i made your point..

I've done dozens of races, only two had a pro field. And in those two races, I paid no attention to the pro field other than watching the swim start. Not having pro's at a race doesn't bother me at all. I don't pay attention to what pro triathletes are wearing, racing, etc.

But I CAN talk to you for hours about the pro cycling transfer market, who won the latest races, what gear they're using. I have riders and teams I cheer for when I watch the races. I can say none of that about the pro triathletes. Maybe only Jordan and Brandon who spend their time building their brand on these boards. Other than that, I couldn't care less for the pro's. I race triathlon for me, not them.

Here's the real kicker, I consider myself an active triathlete. 80% of those that I see at races are new or infrequent participants. They have no sense of the triathlon community outside of their local area races. What value do the pro's bring to that 80%? That 80% doesn't even know they exist.

>No way they move the recap to online and get anywhere close to same viewers. With nbc atleast you can get accidental viewers not so much with online recap show in dec.

You might be correct now. But times are changing. Many young people don't even have conventional TV anymore. Online streaming media is taking over. Monty claims to watch several triathlons per week on TV. But he's way old. I have no idea what he's talking about. ITU on some Euro channel?

I think there's a space here for someone to make a compelling media format to market pro triathlon. A compressed-time format that creates a narrative out of half and full IM pro races. Super low production costs, etc. Available like the week after the race, comprised of GoPro and a few moto cameras, along with narrative by knowledgeable people.

I've done dozens of races, only two had a pro field. And in those two races, I paid no attention to the pro field other than watching the swim start.//

So i guess you never watch triathlon on TV or the internet? You follow bike racing because it is only a pro race on TV. If they had the local cat 3 race on tv, you would give two shits about it. Now maybe you are just not a fan of the sport, that is entirely ok, but I'm guessing you have watched some on the tube and enjoyed it..

No you will not have the same coverage. It's a compelling show because you have two parts to it. The pro race and a few AG sob stories with a celebrity or two. It's the contrast of professional to housewife that keeps people watching.
And no just tossing fast AG people in is not gonna cut it. When they interview the pros before the race it says "professional triathlete" below their name. Interviewing Sam Gyde and saying "firefighter" just doesn't have the same awe factor. (Sorry Sam, just using you as an example.)

I want one of two things to happen-

1) Pros at WTC events should start making more money

2) Price of WTC entry fees needs to go back down (or at least level off)

Not because the two are so closely linked stats, but because it bugs me that racing IMLP is now at $725, and the product has not changed (in any way I am aware of). If WTC thinks their pro field justifies a price increase for any reason, the pros deserve some improved compensation. If they do not... Then why the f*** has the entry fee gone up so much?!

Admittedly, I don't know everything that goes into making a race. If anybody has better knowledge of why the price has jumped over the years I'd love to know.

---

Tim Russell, Pro Triathlete

Instagram- @timbikerun

Economics 101: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand

---

---

Brian Shea
http://www.PersonalBestNutrition.com
Open-Water/Masters Swimming at the Jersey Shore:
Monmouth County NJ Ocean Swim/Masters Workouts

Yes, there are too many pros. The pro field is watered down with 2nd and 3rd tier guys. The top guys in the world are the ones who I would like to see competing for all the loot
You see the 'watered down' argument in the major league sports whenever expansion is discussed. You can only have so many teams in the NFL, NHL etc before we are paying to watch minor leaguers and thats what we see at many IMs now. A couple top guns and then the rest...2nd/3rd tier Pros who are essentially real fast AGers but with more time to train

I'd be interested to see a different scenario .....
1. ZERO pro purses at any IMs but Kona points
2. Top 20 qualifiers show up to the big dance in October to compete for ohh??..a 7 million dollar purse? split between womens and men
3. Everyone -particularly top 9 - making it to the Dance takes home a nice paycheck for a year of hard work...
Winner 700
2nd 500
3rd 400
4th 350
5th 300
6th 250
7th 200
8th 150
9th 100

~ 1 million divided among remaining 11 pros... ??



.

725/700 = 3.5% increase. That's fairly in line with inflation.

Supply has gone up with more races to choose from, is demand really outdoing it? It isn't selling out like it used to, so perhaps a different price would be more appropriate.

---

Tim Russell, Pro Triathlete

Instagram- @timbikerun

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/


Just a quick google search, but looks like the entry fee is a bit higher. Also just responded to a supply and demand comment above, not sure the demand is keeping up (still not sold out), so I'm curious what the tipping point would be to bring it back to an instant sellout. Hope this isn't WTCs way of slowly stepping away from Placid.

---

Tim Russell, Pro Triathlete

Instagram- @timbikerun

Nope. Not buying it. You are over estimating the value to the general public and again, most people watching the Kona coverage have NO vested interest in it, have no idea who the athletes are... It is not like someone watching baseball for a pitcher, or football for a QB...

You could have that same interview at the beginning and say "Juan Valencia - Ironman Lake Placid Champ" and it will have the same weight as "Pro triathlete"

You are too close to this... You know who the pros are, you have more ties to races, etc. The majority of the people watching the broadcast are watching it because of the IMAGE from Wide World of Sports

Now may affect how YOU perceive the broadcast, you interview people like Juan Valencia, Antonio Colom, or Samuel Murphy and it will have as much meaning to the average viewer as Sebastian Kienle, Kyle Buckingham, Cameron Brown...

Heck, play pick the Pro with Cyril Viennot, Kyle Buckingham, Sebastian Kienle, Antonio Colom, Juan Valencia, and Gilian Oriet, and to the average public probably the number one answer would be Juan Valencia...

And hell.... for some of these guys, there is probably equally compelling stories about going up against other AGers in and out at different venues, being so close to winning and bonking or having to overcome something stupid.

And yup... I am saying that to the 350 Million people in the US who don't do triathlons, they have no clue whether you have Juan Valencia - IM LP winner and Cameron Brown "pro" triathlete. Those people will also be more interested in seeing the Gordon Ramsey, Ward Hines, Kim Kardashian,or the flavor celeb of the month

There are two major errors made when discussing this topic:

1. The difference between a pro athlete and a celebrity. We've gotten used to the celebrity athlete (aka Tiger Woods), those are the ones making big plays, with lots of name recognition and lots of sponsorship potential. Athletes that can become celebrities get lots of money, the rest of them make shit (probably still more than pro triathletes). What I've noticed is that very few if any pro triathletes are able to get themselves into celebrity status, even within the triathlon community. It's fine to blame some of that on WTC, but most of it is the athlete's fault for not promoting their brand.

To really drive this point home, Lance was an athlete celebrity, and as soon as he mentioned triathlon the media took notice. There would have been bigger prizes to follow as events fought to get Lance racing against the best pros.

2. The difference between a pay check, and a prize. Do all pros that show up deserve money? Do all pros that finish deserve the same amount? As soon as we set up a tiered system based on where they place we are eventually going to have to pay someone zero. At IMLP is was 7th, but there is no correct number. Could be 10th or 20th, but then you're going to have to spread the wealth. Does someone that goes under 8 hours deserve proportionately more than someone that takes 11:30? The point here is that at least in my opinion the salary for these guys should come from sponsorship. Prizes are just that, a bonus for success.

Sorry for the spelling.

Most people were wearing club jerseys or just standard brand gear actually. Besides, I never said that pros didn't help sell gear, I said I don't believe they sell races. If I was buying a bike, does what the pros ride have any influence on my decision? Yes, a fairly minor one, but at the very least knowing that a successful pro rides it gives it some additional credibility over a bike that no pro rides. Does the presence of pros make any difference to which events I enter? None whatsoever.

That is contradictory and basically false.

If a pro riding a bike gives credibility, then they have some form of influence. A pro can influence what people wear/buy and where they race (and if you think they don't, by all means take a look at all the people kissing up to MaccaX and hashtagging the shoes, bikes, sunglasses, food and races) then that same pro coming out and saying "Mdot is a greedy company, they overcharge their participants, underpay their winners and pad their bank account" would be influential as well.

It's clearly not false, since there are plenty of large cycling, running and multisport events with no pro fields that have absolutely no problem selling all their places.

It's not contradictory either. The livelihood of pros is dependent on them being fast. Pros have way more time, motivation and resources at their disposal than I do to figure out what the fastest bike/wetsuit/shoes/nutrition/etc is (for them of course). The top pros have at least some choice in what sponsors to go with. Clearly the money on the table from a sponsor is a big factor as well, but it's reasonable to assume that there is at least some correlation between what the top pros are racing with and what the best products on the market are. Race choice is completely different. A pro chooses to race based on the prize money on offer, sponsor influence, strength of competition, whether the course suits them and how it fits with their training schedule. None of those things matter a jot to me, so they have no influence on where I race.

If WTC decided not to offer any pro prize money at certain races, then it's possible that those races would sell out more slowly if some competitors were only planning on entering so that they could hashtag Macca's shoes. On the other hand, if they used the money saved on pros to reduce the entry cost to age groupers then who knows...

You don't understand Ironmanomics yet. Let me enlighten you...

Lets say you have two races... Ironman Mont Tremblant and Ironman Lake Placid...

You make Ironman Mont Tremblant a P-3000 race with a $150K purse... same race points... a little more cash Slight bump in the middle and the end and you pay out 10 deep, or boost 1st $5K each so winner does better.

You take the AG slots at IMMT and you reduce them... more on this in a bit.

You take IMLP... Cut the purse. ZERO. NADA... ZILCH. You leave some points, less than a P-1500... Maybe make it a P-750 race... pro wants points, it is there. But... You add 25 - 30 more Kona Slots. Lets face it... You add more Kona slots.... Pros.... What pros... I may get to kona finishing 6th... Sign me up...

OR... Since AG points are coming for Roll Down.... Both IMMT and IMLP have WIN and IN for Kona, but you give 50% more points for IMLP since it doesn't have any pros.

The fan boys who care about the hype will go to IMMT because of the atmosphere and the heavy weight of pros... IMLP will sell out in minutes because the glut or better chance of getting Kona.

IMMT becomes a premium race, charges a little more, has nicer swag and is more about the pros and IMLP is meat and potatoes, but those on the Kona-Kool-aid will salivate at extra slots.

Without the pros, they can reallocate a lot of the resources, increase the entries, etc., and wind up having a slightly smaller field at IMMT a larger at IMLP and make MORE money in the process.

Ironmanomics... It aint that tough...

Unless things have changed, WTC has paid for the production costs and own all production/storylines/etc end to end (logical given how it turns out) - which, for a production of this site is quite substantial compared to the costs for a typical stadium event of equal or longer broadcast length. But it hasn't historically been clear if NBC is paying for or charging for the actual airtime slot. It is clear that WTC does a portion of the ad slot arrangements, with some also left to local affiliates and the remaining to NBC.

---

-
My tiny little slice of the internets: dcrainmaker.com

???? IM was on Wide World of Sports long before there was the concept of a "pro" triathlete.

Likewise, without pros, there is still going to be a winner. Do you think the average person watching Kona on TV would blink if the winner was an 8:55 AGer instead of a 8:20 pro?

This whole IMLP thing just underscores why WTC doesn't pay pros 7 deep, the 7th place pro could not even beat the AGers

"Pro" triathletes are "pros" in name only, most of them don't perform at a high level and the IMLP 7th place prize money thing is so bush league it is hard not to feel bad for how delusional these "pros" are about their abilities and what they contribute to the sport.

The reason pro golfers, tennis players, marathoners, footballers, etc. make bank is that they add value and nobody would pay attention to these sports without them. It is not some vast conspiracy going on in IM. The AGers paying $600 entry fees are getting hosed as badly as the pros not getting much prize money. IM is youth soccer for adults, continuing to compare the general financial black hole (WTC aside) that is IM to other sports is ludicrous.

Wide world of Sports was a long long time ago. And that's been covered before. Collegiate sports and Olympics aside, what sporting events are on a network that feature just amateurs?

And anyone comparing IM pros to any of the big sports is ridiculous. Completely different worlds.

Just because Wide World of Sports was a long time ago does not mean that now no one would watch Kona on TV without the pros. Take a look at the broadcast and tell me what % of the coverage is dedicated to the pros as opposed to everyone else. The pros are mostly irrelevant to 80% of the people who watch the IM broadcast. Without name recognition and people having no concept of what a good winning time is, the broadcast would be just as popular if Joe Bonness won Kona instead of some euro dude no one knows.

Little league world series. NCAA football. NCAA basketball. Jeopardy. Many Olympic sports (swimmers are making their money off endorsements, not FINA purses. Triathletes should observe something here. If you really add value, sponsors will pay you lots of money, prize money is an afterthought. No, there is not a conspiracy, sponsors just don't derive a lot of value from triathletes).

The whole point of complaining that IM prize money is too low is based on comparing it to big sports. If not for this ridiculous comparison, what was the point of this thread? IM prize money is exactly what it deserves to be, despite incessant whining and delusions by the narcissists who compete in IM and think anyone else cares about it as much as they like watching monster trucks, pro fishing derbys and lumberjack games. Yes, that is the actual objective popularity level of IM triathlon and that is probably being generous.

That would be a complete showstopper ;-) And I don't fight fires anymore either (or at least not literally)...
People want heroes and drama. I am not a hero and fortunately my life has very little drama (apart from the occasional little statement)
Sam
samgyde.com

Just because Wide World of Sports was a long time ago does not mean that now no one would watch Kona on TV without the pros. Take a look at the broadcast and tell me what % of the coverage is dedicated to the pros as opposed to everyone else. The pros are mostly irrelevant to 80% of the people who watch the IM broadcast.

I haven't read all the comments, but it appears that many of you are not making much sense.

Of course having the top triathletes in the world competing in the Ironman World Championships is extremely important. Else you don't have an event. You can have an amateur race, or a race that features mediocre pros, but it isn't going to be a World Championship (even if they call it that) and it isn't going to garner near the attention and $$$ it does now.

Of course they don't care if some mediocre pros are upset about the prize money. They don't need *them*... at all. So long as they can entice the Best athletes in the world who have a shot at winning, all is good.

To force the issue of higher prizes for the mediocre pros, the *Top* Pros would need to organize and boycott. *They* are the ones the WTC cares about and you can be damn sure they care a lot.

But... the best athletes are highly unlikely to organize and fight for pros farther down the ranks, especially since it would mean jeopardizing their own sponsorships and careers. So here we are...