The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000

Aug 23, 14 10:57

Post #1 of 50 (9310 views)

During several of the threads about pro prize money one point keeps coming back. The pros are getting what they deserve for an half or full Ironman win.
Today it was exciting ITU racing in Stockholm and as you can see from the front page of Slowtwich and on the ITU web site, the market price for a sprint victory is USD 19,000. Number 20 gets USD 1,000 http://wts.triathlon.org/series/prizemoney

I am quite sure that the race organizers also subsidizing travel and/or hotel/food for the top ranked racers also.

So if a sprint pays $19,000, what was the market price for a full IM again......

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [Halvard] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 11:03

Post #2 of 50 (9292 views)

Much, much less because Ironman is unwatchable. Where's the broadcasting revenue to back up this payout for IM?

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [BLeP] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 11:17

Post #3 of 50 (9246 views)

exactly. No marketing potential for TV equals no money

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [BryanD] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 11:32

Post #4 of 50 (9197 views)

BryanD wrote:

exactly. No marketing potential for TV equals no money

I hate to pile on (actually, no I don't), but... yeah, that's exactly what some of us have been saying over and over. TV revenue is everything. Ironman has none.

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [Toby] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 11:48

Post #5 of 50 (9149 views)

Toby wrote:

BryanD wrote:

exactly. No marketing potential for TV equals no money

I hate to pile on (actually, no I don't), but... yeah, that's exactly what some of us have been saying over and over. TV revenue is everything. Ironman has none.

Chess has no TV revenue but pays a lot.

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [Halvard] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 11:55

Post #6 of 50 (9134 views)

According to the Google, between 100-200 MILLION people followed the 2013 World Chess Championship. It was held in India, home of >1B people.

Just because its not on in the US doesn't mean there isn't any tv $$$

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [btmoney] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 12:06

Post #7 of 50 (9088 views)

The world championship in chess is special, especially when a chess icon from India is playing.

London Chess Classic pays EUR 50,000 to the winner, number 16 gets EUR 3,125. It was streamed.
http://www.londonchessclassic.com/classic.rulesregulations.htm

Maybe when you know that over 60 of the best triathletes in the world shows up you will have interest.

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [Halvard] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 12:06

Post #8 of 50 (9086 views)

Am I the only one that thinks IM and 70.3 would be awesome if it was draft legal? It would certainly be more watchable and dramatic, like ITU. Just saying... and just think of the team racing potential and incentive for companies to build up and sponsor strong teams!

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [Halvard] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 12:21

Post #9 of 50 (9043 views)

$19,000 son of a bit****. I was at the wrong race. I won a sprint tri today and only got paid $200 for the win.

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [BryanD] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 13:03

Post #10 of 50 (8947 views)

exactly. No marketing potential for TV equals no money

Are you sure about that? I'm not into tris but Ironman seems to stand out as the true icon of the sport. It's like you haven't really done a triathlon unless you've done an Ironman. That's what people dream of. And the Ironman pros seem to be way more well known... at least around here.

Maybe TV race coverage is lacking, but there are greater opportunities for marketing in other ways. Plus what are those $500+ entry fees spent on? You're grossing $1M if you can sell 2k entries.

I'd venture that something different is at work... so many people want to do Ironmans that there are enough decent pros that don't care about making a living. The organization and promoters take advantage of that.

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [rruff] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 13:14

Post #11 of 50 (8923 views)

Without tv or an real media stream (that's what Itu does with it's live coverage), you simply can't get the advertising you need to actually support a pro structure.

IM is the icon of triathlon but that doesn't mean shit when less than likely 100 pros can be supported from the sport.

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [desert dude] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 13:33

Post #12 of 50 (8879 views)

desert dude wrote:

$19,000 son of a bit****. I was at the wrong race. I won a sprint tri today and only got paid $200 for the win.

For sure, you were in the wrong race....yours was not on TV....but you needed to get an invite to the other race, and you and every triathlete in the world other than those who were invited are too slow!

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [desert dude] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 13:44

Post #13 of 50 (8838 views)

Beats $0 for mine in the PNW.

Last edited by: JTolandTRI: Aug 23, 14 13:44

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [Halvard] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 14:12

Post #14 of 50 (8789 views)

Great! Now we can all stop bitching about WTC, at least as far as this is concerned. If pros want to make money, they can go race ITU. If they choose a race with little to no prize money it's on them.

And if as a result WTC feels they are losing profit, perhaps they will raise their prize awards.

And if as a result WTC feels they are gaining profit, they'll probably drop pros all together.

All this without a stupid publicity stunt, protests, petitions, or hash tags.

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [Aqua Man] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 14:24

Post #15 of 50 (8754 views)

Aqua Man wrote:

Great! Now we can all stop bitching about WTC, at least as far as this is concerned. If pros want to make money, they can go race ITU. If they choose a race with little to no prize money it's on them.

And if as a result WTC feels they are losing profit, perhaps they will raise their prize awards.

And if as a result WTC feels they are gaining profit, they'll probably drop pros all together.

All this without a stupid publicity stunt, protests, petitions, or hash tags.

Just needed to quote this...well said!

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [Aqua Man] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 14:33

Post #16 of 50 (8737 views)

Yes WTC isn't the bad guy really. The sport of long course racing is the bad guy. It's boring, it's long, and the "racing" sucks. Until you get more advertising and figure out how to market it, the sport is the issue not WTC or rev3 or challenge.

The race production companies can't be the ones that fund the pros. Advertising is what allows sports to support pros not the organization.

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

Last edited by: BDoughtie: Aug 23, 14 14:50

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [BDoughtie] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 15:01

Post #17 of 50 (8681 views)

Kind of on the same topic. Do any races (amateur only) offer free or reduced entries to their next year's event for podium finishes? Seems like this would be a good way to keep some competitive individuals at some local/regional races and also offering some additional incentive for a top finish.

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [Halvard] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 15:18

Post #18 of 50 (8627 views)

Halvard wrote:

.....So if a sprint pays $19,000, what was the market price for a full IM again......

Why should they pay more to people going slower :)

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [Halvard] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 16:33

Post #19 of 50 (8526 views)

Halvard wrote:

The world championship in chess is special, especially when a chess icon from India is playing.

London Chess Classic pays EUR 50,000 to the winner, number 16 gets EUR 3,125. It was streamed.
http://www.londonchessclassic.com/classic.rulesregulations.htm

Maybe when you know that over 60 of the best triathletes in the world shows up you will have interest.

Saw it, what an epic event! Is the Ironman on TV?

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [seanlove22] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 16:51

Post #20 of 50 (8493 views)

Budu Racing in the PNW

Race winners get free entry the next year. They also run a Championship Series that uses an age graded system similar to USAT to crown an Olympic and Sprint distance Champion, 2nd, and 3rd who get 3, 2, and 1 free races respectively the following year.

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [desert dude] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 17:05

Post #21 of 50 (8469 views)

desert dude wrote:

$19,000 son of a bit****. I was at the wrong race. I won a sprint tri today and only got paid $200 for the win.

But I guess you got a technical shirt and a swag bag. I do not think yo will get that in Stockholm.

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [rruff] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 17:22

Post #22 of 50 (8426 views)

"Ironman seems to stand out as the true icon of the sport......the Ironman pros seem to be way more well known... at least around here."

That's a bit myopic.

As already mentioned ITU is far more exciting to the TV audience. If anything ITU should be shortened to a sprint format for the benefit of the TV audience. It could be completed in an hour TV slot and could be run as a complete series. Nobody is going to watch a full day long coverage of an IM. Might as well just watch paint dry on the wall.

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [BDoughtie] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 17:26

Post #23 of 50 (8418 views)

Without tv or an real media stream (that's what Itu does with it's live coverage), you simply can't get the advertising you need to actually support a pro structure.

Do you know the actual cost breakdown for the IM organization and race promoters? Because I'm fairly certain you are wrong. There is way more than enough money in entry fees alone to support a large pro purse. They just don't want to and don't need to.

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [gantaliano] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 17:28

Post #24 of 50 (8413 views)

"Am I the only one that thinks IM and 70.3 would be awesome if it was draft legal?"

I don't think there's anything that could make long course triathlon awesome to the TV audience. Our concentration spans are just too short. What's the most TV exciting running event at the Olympics - I'd say the 100 m. And that takes about 8 seconds, not eight hours.

Re: The market has spoken, a sprint tri should pay the winner $19,000 [desert dude] [ In reply to ]

Aug 23, 14 17:53

Post #25 of 50 (5273 views)

Haha...., i won a cat 4 road race and got paid more than that, triathlon sucks in terms of payout.

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.