Jack was pretty chill and to the point. If you are going to act like a dick, then why bother going on the podcast at all!? Like you said, did himself zero favours. Will be interesting to see what others think...

Cliff notes? Link?

I cannot find an interview with Andrew Messick on how they train. Am I missing something? I hope not!

---

He who understands the WHY, will understand the HOW.

I am conflict-averse to the point where I find listening to heated debate quite stressful, I'm not sure I can listen to this! Could someone summarize the main points?

Paid subscription currently but I’m sure he will release it in a few weeks.

But wow

OK Thanks. Been listening for a while did not realise there was a paywall on some of the podcasts - but I do now!!

---

He who understands the WHY, will understand the HOW.

He has a subscription through Patreon. It's on there if you want to listen.

Can you please give us a summary of the interview? Key points here? Otherwise, this feels like click-bate

---

Death is easy....peaceful. Life is harder.

And also how he said Elon Musk is taking Ironman under Tesla brand... so crazy.

Or maybe somebody post what was actually said?

Or did Elon Musk make it into the Exec challenge and got a slot to Kona....racing with the women this year? And riding an electric bike? lol


(above should be pink)

---

Death is easy....peaceful. Life is harder.

Meh. This is more fun.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

Nothing here, wasted my time.

---

Team Zoot So Cal

How do we know?

so how does he train... give a week.

I have this one friend from high school who I essentially lost touch with and who never posts on Facebook anymore. She is a stay at home mom and I assume is pretty busy with her three kids. Now periodically, she will make some random post about selling teeth whitening toothpaste, and within ten minutes, over a dozen people from different parts of the U.S. will comment saying "oh wow, that worked so well for my family" or "we need more, will send you an order". This thread has that vibe so far. :D

This thread: OMG CWOT.

• no, we're not going to tell you how much we make
• pro long course triathletes only exist because of the ironman brand
• the pros can fuck off. we're not paying them more money
• 60+ ladies are hugely important and will always have a place at world championships. we're not shrinking the field.
• women and men will never race on the same day in different locations for world championships

I knew nothing about Messick going into this, but I can't understand why anyone here would like the guy at all. He's very much the CEO of a private company interested in maximizing profits and couldn't care less about the sport. He doesn't give a shit about pros or even the most competitive people around here and he'd rather maximize the number of age groupers he can get to each and every race.

And there is the issue.
Ironman is a business. But if they actually wanted to maximize the business, they would have started growing the sport, not the business, in 2007. (2007 is when they started setting up the current situation we're in)

Being a big fish in a small pond is always a bad idea in the long term.

I don't want to spoil the podcast by summarizing it and hope everyone gives it a listen, it's interesting ("It's not a popularity contest, it's about what's best overall for Ironman." - Messick from the interview).

Andrew Messick comes off extremely aggressive and disrespectful to Jack (he is eating in the middle of the podcast lol). I really don't understand why he went on the podcast as he comes off awful. Seemed completely unwilling to listen to what Jack was trying to say/ask.

---

My Strava | My Instagram | Summerville, SC | 35-39 AG | 4:41 (70.3), 10:05 (140.6) | 3x70.3, 1x140.6 | Cat 2 Cyclist

"I knew nothing about Messick going into this, but I can't understand why anyone here would like the guy at all. He's very much the CEO of a private company interested in maximizing profits and couldn't care less about the sport. He doesn't give a shit about pros or even the most competitive people around here and he'd rather maximize the number of age groupers he can get to each and every race."
---------------------------------------------------
I have NOT listened to the pod cast (most aren't very good). I do know Andrew personally and I can say for a fact that the tone of your statement above is completely false. I "like the guy" a lot. He is really pretty amazing in all he does. Of course his job is to a run a profitable company (so is mine). Yes, he cares deeply for the sport. Yes he cares about pros. Of course he wants to maximize the number of age groupers. He/they deliver an exceptional product. Now, that certainly doesn't mean I agree with everything, and we can chat about that if you like.

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

Growing the sport brings more profit in the next decade. It's hard enough to get people to see past the next quarter, let alone the next year.

There's probably also a risk analysis. Growing the sport brings the risk of others eating some of the pie. Trademarking and copyrighting everything allows you to charge $900 for an event because there's no competition to drive prices, only what "60 year old ladies" are willing to pay.

I'd be curious to hear if you still like the guy after listening to this conversation. He does not seem to care deeply about the sport nor does he seem to care at all about the pros. I get his job is to maximize profits and he seems to do that well so I guess that makes him a good CEO of IronMan.

Yes, he is a friend. I promise I will still like him.

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

You should listen to the podcast.

---

My Strava | My Instagram | Summerville, SC | 35-39 AG | 4:41 (70.3), 10:05 (140.6) | 3x70.3, 1x140.6 | Cat 2 Cyclist

Messick is in a no win situation. He simply has to take the "hate" from all of us. They have ~50 events that has a pro prize purse, and still get shitted on. They could totally pull a PTO and make 6-8 "pro" events combining all the money they spend and cut out any race with less than an $100k prize list (IE- kill any "pro development). Would we want that? IM has already culled pro prizes at "AG only" events, so if things get spicy between all these organizations, I could totally see that happening. IM imo treats the pros like a needed cog in the wheel to make their events pop and that's about it.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

do you think his stance on any of the above bullet points is wrong as it relates to his position in the triathlon world?

Sounds juicy.
Long course pros do pretty much only exist because of Ironman. The inverse is not true, although obviously, the pros give Ironman some media credibility. Whether it's good "for the sport" to have pros milking companies for money to support a lifestyle that consists of doing nothing but train and recover all day every day is another question. It might be better for the sport to have more joe-schmoes. I can tell you my wife signed up for a race after getting inspired with tears in her eyes watching a mom push a stroller across the finish line in the World Champs broadcast, not after watching me train, and certainly not after watching Sanders, Iden, or Sodaro clips or PTO races. So growing the sport might involve more spotlight on tear jerker stories. Keeping that growth engaged -- that's where I can see and agree a valid argument can be made to include the pros.

The other points I don't see as really controversial. They want a large field of women, and of course they can't split themselves logistically for two high profile races in two locations on the same day. That seems a huge strategic mistake to give up multiple weeks of people talking about your race and cram it all into a single day that you are inefficiently throwing resources at trying to be in two places at once.

I don't see a principled reason why it shouldn't be a goal for Ironman to turn 20-30% women into 40-50% representation. Watering down the field? That's elitist borderline nonsense.

Now, Messick might actually be a smarmy jerk that is milking his position for all its worth. I've never had the impression that he's a cool one of us guys, whatever that means. And maybe this interview didn't help out but I think the points you highlighted all seem pretty accurate. Ironman makes a lot of fanfare about the pros and certainly uses the visuals of the pro race to sell the sport and gain access/prestige in various venues. But if the pros of today didn't exist and were replaced with office types who train on their personal time and race "pro" Ironman, I'm not sure the sport would be worse off. But the market dynamics mean that there will always be some "pro" willing to live in their parents basement and grind out 30hrs a week training to "break even" if they win, especially if it means there might be some endorsement contracts. Why should Ironman and race entry fees subsidize more pros spending more time training? Local mom or high school gym coach that gets inspired to go do an Ironman doesn't want to pay an extra 50 bucks on their fee to pay for a pro to live comfortably and train all day.

To argue with myself.

Let's assume there are 100,000 Ironman and 70.3 entrance fees in the USA every year. Let's have each fee collect an extra $50 for pro development. That's $5million. Let's have 80% of the pro development fee go to the host nation. 15% goes to international development, and 5% goes to Ironman owners dividend (gotta get them excited somehow).

So the USA pro scene would have $4milllion to work with. Let's say Ironman divides up that $4 million with $2 million going to pro development salaries for the top 100 US pro racers, 50 male, 50 female and the remaining $2million being allocated to event prizes over the 42 (if I googled right) Ironman/70.3 races in the USA.

Bottom 50th US pro gets 20k salary and it scales up from there to the top pro who gets $80k.

France has 6 Ironman/70.3 races. That would leave 600k to be divided up for French athlete support (or it would get lumped into an EU fund).

Is this a good way to use the money? Pros from individual nations may be disproportionately affected, but why should USA race fees subsidize pro development in foreign nations. And those foreigners can still earn revenue share from races in their nations as well as prizes from races wherever they attend.

Will ya'll vote for me when I attempt a hostile takeover at the annual Ironman board luncheon?

It’s not Clickbait.

https://www.instagram.com/...?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

1) the field in US races and in France and everywhere else is quite international. So its not USA races subsidizing anyone. Its AGs racing there subsidizing. Same is true for France, Germany, etc
2) the bigger question is why AGs should subsidize the Pros. As someone pointed out above - its someone’s choice to grind 30h in the basement. If sponsors want to pay for that fine - maybe better if IM reduced the fees and cut out the Pros?

Just beeing provocative :)

This is very sad.

The way he acted and bullied is not someone I’d want to be friends with.

Anyway. Have a listen maybe in the car with your wife and see what she thinks of Andrew’s behavior after the interview

Didn't listen yet so I cannot comment on the podcast.

but people keep talking about the growth of the sport???

Do you tell concert promotion and entertainment companies on their world tours they aren't growing the music???
Of course they aren't they just fill stadiums with what the customer wants. And not everyone wants the same thing.

Ironman is only providing us a safe view in tourism location to do these events. That is there business!! Not triathlon or sport development.

Those are other organizations and companies, talk to them.

---

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

He's probably not used to a triathlon outlet actually asking hard questions.

First time for everything I guess.

Are we supposed to guess what podcast this is?

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

it's in the title :-) The "how they train" podcast.

It's "Rich CEO takes advantage of workers and customers and we are all supposed to bow to them and think they are superhard geniuses working 700 hours per week running 16 companies" podcast. lol. Been a lot of them lately.

You’re 100% correct and sadly true.

IM never, ever wants pro athletes as employees with a salary.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

Assuming it’s not deleted there’s a thread on this forum with Messick acting quite similarly to what is being described in this podcast. Seems par for the course with this guy.

---

Dimond Bikes Superfan

That thread is over here, if anybody is inclined: https://forum.slowtwitch.com/..._reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

I'm going to wait on commenting further until I listen to the podcast. Which, admittedly, the only triathlon venture I currently subscribe to is Kelly O'Mara's new outfit.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

Of all the podcasts I listen to, I'd put them in the following category

Best technical info category
Best training info for AGer category
Best pro interviews
Best amateur interviews
Best cycling racing category
Best "we want to give you our opinion although we don't really no any more than you" category
Most noise category......
Best "try to do all categories" category

I think how they train falls in the best pro interviews category.

We are waiting for the ST podcast to see if we need another category

Dammit, fine, one more post before I eventually listen:

The ST podcast will, most likely, not be guest dependent. Occasional interviews, but having to do one for every episode is not something we want to do.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

well you may have to wait. I don't think it's public : #hell_ya_paywalls

You can reference this thread at a later date if I turn out to be a hypocrite:

If we ever have a Patreon, or paywall for content on this site, it is my last day as EIC.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

I just wish it was videoed so I could watch Messick respond like a child while he was eating during the tough questions. He was not at all ready for the tough questions. Dude drinks his own Kool-Aid.

Don't need to listen to a podcast to know Messick is a dick.

I'll recall one Kona broadcast where IIRC the women's winner had just finished and he took that opportunity to announce a new Ironman program, something about priority fluffing and ball rubs for rich people.
His indifference was obvious.

How do you active such an outcome? Do we chase equally of opportunity or equally of outcome? People are still ticked about all of the extra women's slots for WC.

This is exactly correct. I was reading the earlier posts about what he cares and doesn’t care about and it seemed what the CEO of an events company should be focused on.

Talk to USAT about their failures in growing the sport in the US.

Now, that doesn’t excuse Messick from being a dick to someone asking questions on a podcast.

Quotes, capitals, podcast would have all been very useful things to understand. It sounds like Messick said something about how people trained.

honestly, no. he's the CEO of a for profit company and he seems to be doing a bang up job even if he comes across as a prick. the bummer is that we're all stuck supporting this prick because he runs what is essentially the only game in town.

Bob Babbitt has made a career out of being the nice guy with soft questions. He’s done very well financially

But I do think deep down sometimes he wishes he could or had asked real questions.

and whose "fault" is that?

Partly USAT has been working to undo what WTC/Messick has done. WTC has bought most of the once very popular short course races, 5150 series, Memphis in May, St. Anthony's, Hyvee, Boulder tri series and within 2 years those races were shells of themselves. The exception might be St. Anthony's

They've bought popular indy IM races and killed them. Beach to battleship for example

They've also come in to many places and took over existing venues putting in contracts that state no races within X months on either side of their race. They did this in Raleigh to name but one city.

When you're USAT and your biggest customer is actively working to shrink the # of opportunities/drive business to only their races you're, int this case USAT is stuck between a rock and hard place.

Now IDK if USAT's push, current push to grow the sport from the youth, HS, collegiate side will pay off short term. Long term it'll probably bring people back to the sport who did it when they were young, moved on and are now circling back for some reason in their late 20s early to mod 30s.

Will it be enough? IDK

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Sure maybe he's a genius for creating such a good product that no one else can compete. Or maybe his company militantly copyrights everything surrounding them. They've done a great job of creating a barrier to entry for any other LC Tri brands. Running "the only game in town" and making a profit isn't exactly impressive, IMO.



"WTC’s IP includes, but is not limited to, the following:

• 5150
• 70.3
• ACROSS THE BAY 10K
• ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE
• ANYWHERE IS POSSIBLE
• COMPETITOR
• IRON GIRL
• IRONBABY
• IRONDAD
• IRONFAN
• IRONKIDS
• IRONMAN
• IRONMAN 70.3
• IRONMAN CERTIFIED COACH
• IRONMAN FITNESS
• IRONMAN FOUNDATION
• IRONMAN STORE
• IRONMAN TRIATHLON
• IRONMAN VC VIRTUAL CLUB
• IRONMAN XC
• IRONMANLIFE
• IRONMATE
• IRONMOM
• IRONWOMAN
• KDOT
• KNOWLEDGE IS POWER
• KONA
• KONA INSPIRED
• M-DOT
• ROCK ‘N’ ROLL
• ROCK ‘N ROLL ½ MARATHON
• ROCK ‘N’ ROLL MARATHON
• SANTA CRUZ HALF MARATHON
• STRIP AT NIGHT
• SUPERFROG
• TIME TO TRI
• VELOTHON
• VINEMAN
• VR
• WOMEN FOR TRI
• YOUR JOURNEY, YOUR CAUSE

Now there's a podcast worthy topic to explore.....

They registered KONA but not NICE? It's so unlike them.

---

"FTP is a bit 2015, don't you think?" - Gustav Iden

Years ago when 50 Women to Kona was happening...Messick when on a podcast/article and said "If i put more racks on the pier it will be for age group athletes not pro women"

---

Inside The Big Ring: Podcast & Coaching

looking forward to listening. Messick is a former McKinsey consultant. Having worked with them as a client they care about one thing: $. Thankfully it was not my $$ that was paying them! He has made an incredibly good living between that, the NBA and now Ironman. I won't begrudge someone for making a great living. I might not buy the product they sell, but I won't begrudge running their business the way they see fit. I can vote with my wallet.

He has grown the Ironman brand to be global (yes on the back of debt). I mean the UK market is ridiculous right now never mind Asia, middle east etc. America is not their number 1 market anymore and Ironman doesn't need pros to succeed IMO. I cannot see AGers going to race PTO. It seems to me select triathletes want Ironman to be something it just will never be again. Accept what it has become or move on. They put on great races. They pay pros just enough to keep them coming back but no more because they don't need to. Kona pays the winner $125K while darts pays $1MM. But they put on great races.

As far as the podcaster. I have been listening to a few of these podcasts. Some are pretty good but holy I just had to fast forward all his "questions" in his Alistair Brownlee interview. The level of fan worship was over the top. It was nauseating (to me anyway). That at hand, he sure gets some serious guests on his podcast and good for him!!

---

@rhyspencer

Sometimes he is really bad and goes on a monologue. The first episode with Bu was bad. But the quality of his guest greatly makes up for it. I liked the Snowsill interview for example.

I think you're Canadian ? Wonder if PP's comment that Justin gave McKinsey a contract until 2100 is true?

Off to the LR for that one :-)

i didn't listen to the podcast, but here's my contrarian view to your contrarian view:

- why is it any private company's duty to disclose their financials to the world?
- pro long course triathletes DO only exist because of the IM brand.
- IM pays a pretty good prize purse. they pay a shitload more than cycling does.
- as i am a 60+ man i have a soft spot for 60+ ladies. what is your beef with them?
- as you know if you read any of what i write, i'm a big fan of split WCs.

of course he's interested in maximizing profits! what CEO of a private company is interested in minimizing profits? as to whether he cares about the sport, i have known every CEO of IM, and the only one who cares about the sport - and who, believe it or not, cares about and has affection for the pros - as much as messick is the original CEO, valerie silk. unless you have insight or data that i don't have, which i'm happy to read.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

There's an development gap in triathlon as compared to other individual sports (in the US at least).

In cycling you race through categories that have nominal prize money and work your way up to Cat 1 and sign with a pro team, all the while having a basic progression pattern laid out in front of you.

In track/swimming there's a classic scholarship model that carries athletes into their 20's.

In triathlon you basically race age group until you can get a pro license, and then you try to beat all the other pros at the ~200 prize money triathlons in any given year.

You're not even allowed to even race in IM events until you're 18. How are you supposed to grow a sport when you can't even do 75% of the events until you're 18?

wait, Ironman has a copyright on this?

• STRIP AT NIGHT

That's a whole industry I had no idea they have moved into!!

---

@rhyspencer

Triathlon is more than just ironman. A country’s development programme etc is always going to be about Olympic sports.

As I said later in the thread I think he’s bang on with all his points considering his role as CEO of Ironman.

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.

Neither can PTO. See cancelled Canadian race and cancelled US Open AG race…

So...clearly not an objective assessment.

Messick can claim to like whatever he wants, but Ironman's actions say otherwise and that's what matters to most of us.

in fairness, Canada was not cancelled per se. The park is closed where it was held so the event has no venue. That said, I do agree I do not see it coming back to Edmonton. The race was basically a government subsidy event.

US Open is not cancelled. It is moved to Milwaukee.

That at hand, PTO revenue model is not AGers. It media content.

---

@rhyspencer

My comment was that the PTO US Open AG race is cancelled. It is not loved to Milwaukee. There is no option for a 100k PTO race for AG there

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

Dang, my first search hit was net worth of $85M for Frodo. I had no idea (if that's anywhere near accurate). That is, indeed, in the realm of Peter Sagan and anc-Lay.

Dan,
If you had to choose one organization to run the sport of triathlon, would it be IM, USAT(or any NGB) or WT?

Why?

---

"Good genes are not a requirement, just the obsession to beat ones brains out daily"...the Griz

Perhaps Messick has heard some of Jack's comments on his podcast. Jack frequently comments on how terrible and unfair Ironman is.

You do not want a "player's coach" running the show. Make no mistake... being a "dick" is the job when you're a CEO. Running a company is a game of survival and there are no prisoners. If PTO could kill IM today to grow, it would. I work in this type of environment and most people don't understand how it works because they are not in it. Nick Saban is not a nice guy but he wins championships. That's why any team would take him despite his demeanor.

Ironman puts on the best races and 2nd place isn't even close. I've competed in Challenge races and they are top notch but I leave them off the list because their business plan is not sustainable. They operate at a loss and if they cannot grow their age group participants they will fail.

Off topic, but a real world example of this is Tesla and everyone knows Tesla. Tesla is about to be hit with a tidal wave of electric car offerings from car companys that can build ten times the electric cars at a substantially lower cost due to years of manufacturing experience, infrastructure and supplier relationships. Tesla has 2 options... get bought out or fail. The only thing that can prevent this is if consumers decide they don't want electric cars. Then the big manufacturers will go back to gas and Tesla can continue selling to a niche consumer.

Running a business is hard and doesn't suffer fools

Messick is nailing his job as the CEO of a large corp. Absolutely agree having an aggressive persona is very helpful for success.

The only thing that confuses me about what I’m reading above is why Messick would take the tone he apparently took given he was fully aware it was going to go out to at least a small portion of the consumers of his product. That makes zero sense.

The time to be aggressive (or be a “dick”) is negotiating vendors for a better deal.

The customer (triathlon participant in this case) is not always right, but as a company you’re supposed to at least act like they are.

I hope the interview is released to non patreons. I’m going to assume in this episode we won’t get the typical “ball cupping” (as Jack calls it) we normally hear.

I think this is a false dichotomy and a straw man. No one is suggesting he minimize profits or turn IM into a charity. The justification “it’s my job to maximize profits” provides cover for all kinds of terrible corporate behavior, much of which is perfectly legal but morally wrong or harmful for the larger community.

In an Instagram port it’s being Released next week for free.

Mind you, its $1.50 to download or there abouts

Way off topic, but I don't believe this is true about Tesla. Credible analysis indicates that Tesla builds EVs more cheaply than anyone else and has a much higher profit margin than anyone else per vehicle. E.g. GM doesn't plan for its EV division to be self-sustaining for several years from now Tesla reached self-sustaining profitability a few years ago. Mixed ICE/EV manufacturers have the luxury of using ICE sales to subsidize their EVs.

Your analysis might be right for Rivian.

New rule, not getting outraged by some podcast behind a pay wall.


Nah man, that's not what happened. Park was a think. But the thing that happened was the race was dependent on funding from Edmonton to pay a host fee, it was an election year and the city government said no thanks.

Which is weird because apparently the Dallas race was a three year deal, guess where they're not racing?

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

Generally, I think most people agree that the realm of harmful things a company can do to pursue profits is pretty expansive. Specifically, in the case of the Ironman, I don't see the beef against them. I often listen to How they Train, and I sense he's basically egging on the athletes to hate on Ironman. Yes, couples have a claim that Kona/Nice screwed them -- fortunately, Ironman is giving the choice to the men how they want to defer. That does take away group vacation/races for couples, which is not a meaningless constituency, and it's very important to have these enthusiasts in triathlon, but you can't base a world championship strategy on couples. The extra money and exposure and increase participants far outweigh the costs to couples. Any other complaints Jack has about Kona from an AG perspective is just silly. He just wants Ironman to come out and say "it's about the money". Well, that's silly. Of course, it's about the money at some point, but the money needs to be associated with a vision. And the vision of more women, more exposure, more participants accompanying that more money is greater than Kona-for-life.

The other complaints Jack often has is how little the pros are respected or paid. The respect, is sadly a function (I presume), of Ironman juggling a lot of balls, and one of those balls seems to always have a thorn in it, so they increasingly get annoyed with it. The point being, the antagonistic relationship that some rabble rousing among the pros often creates does not do anything to smooth things over with the people who have other priorities than running a pro race. Whatever Ironman adds, it's never enough. They need to live stream it, and they need to have it broadcast to networks, they need to have better commentary, they need to have better support to get the pros to the race, they need to have better prizes, better marshals, less drafting, etc. etc. The list goes on. You're hearing all that from one group of customers who pays you very little, meanwhile the bigger group of customers is happy to pay a ton of money and show up and race and swipe a few extra gels and get china bag and a shiny medal.

The pros are important to keep the very active Ironman racers engaged with the brand. I have to assume there are better ways to do that than create an elite group of athletes who feel they are being taken advantage of. The pros are also important to sell Ironman as a global sport to communities so they can run these races in high profile locations. To some degree, there are many locations around the world that are more than willing to pay to support road closures, etc. if it brings in the race tourists. I wonder how much Ironman would lose (over time, overnight it wouldn't be much) if they didn't have the global professional sport as part of their pitch. In general, Ironman is triathlon to most lay people. I can only imagine how much the olympic guys have to roll their eyes whenever they get asked, "so, have you ever done an Ironman, those are probably really hard right?".

for me, there are 2 triathlons: olympic, and everything else. so, certainly not WT because they're great at the olympic stuff but i think i - personally - may have produced more triathlons that include AGers than WT has. okay, i'm being hyperbolic. tho i still might be factually right. but you get my point.

i will always, always, always, always favor the race organizer and to USAT's credit they understand this. their focus is on the RD and that's how they service you. the RD is king. so if you're going to make me choose one org it's IM because IM actually puts on races. that said, luckily i don't have to choose. each of the 3 is very good at what it does; and each of the 3 understands its lane.

what do you think is more important: chevrolet? or independent chevrolet mechanics? because, if you say the mechanic, what's he going to work on if there's no chevy? the race is the chevy. everything revolves around the race. the race is the thing.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

You just LOVE drama dont you :)

---

E-DUB
Chief Janitor @Slowtwitch
Life is short. Dont be mad all the time.

the false dichotomy is the failure to understand that the profit motive and customer service can't coexist. if you look at the post that prodded me to respond, it was:

"He's very much the CEO of a private company interested in maximizing profits and couldn't care less about the sport."

that nexus of "private company", "maximizing profits" and "couldn't care less" has been thrown around about IM since the 1990s and it's not worthy of a junior high school debate.

i've been a business owner, producing a product, for 36 straight years. my goal has been maximizing my profits. but that need not mean screwing your customer right up to his pain tolerance. keep your customer happy, and provide him a reason to continue to be your customer. most IM customers feel that's what IM is doing. whiners gonna whine, and social media is where they do it.

there is one thing, going back a decade or so, that IM did that i felt was just bad for the sport: scooping up independent half-distance races and/or otherwise clearing the calendar of competing races in regions where a 70.3 takes place. i believe IM has learned its lesson about that, and now understands that when you crush races that bring people into the sport it's now your sole responsibility to bring new people into the sport and IM is only partially good at that.

so, if you want to fault IM for that past behavior i'm with you. if you list IM's sins, i'll probably agree with 25% of what you write. but the other 75% is either not a sin at all, or it's a feature not a bug.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Strongly agree on Kelly O’Mara’s new thing!

---

Sharon McN
@IronCharo
#TeamZoot
Clif Bar Pace Team 2003-2018

He's also maximizing profits in the short term which is not always equal to a long term steady return.

It’s the Las Vegas Rock and Roll race, the rare marathon/half-marathon that runs at night. Fun race, and you do run the Vegas Strip. And a whole lotta industrial parks and parking lots.

---

Sharon McN
@IronCharo
#TeamZoot
Clif Bar Pace Team 2003-2018

Nah man, that's not what happened. Park was a think. But the thing that happened was the race was dependent on funding from Edmonton to pay a host fee, it was an election year and the city government said no thanks.

_______________


I am happy to read this fact actually so thank you.

---

@rhyspencer

Oh lord...are you serious? Have you heard of juniors? Many top triathletes have been doing tri specific training an racing since their early teens. These are the guys that are usually winning all distances from sprint to IM (i.e. Iden, Blu, Laidlow, Frodo, Brownlee)

Sorry man, but are you really into mathematics and got this one so wrong?

.
Holy shit mate you need to take those M-Dot blinkers off. The sport of triathlon isn't "Ironman" and if you think that the almighty M-Dot hosts 75% of the worlds triathlons then you do really need to get out more..

I’m more into reality shows. Not drama.

Yeah. There is more to triathlons that Ironmans.

Sadly, those brainwashed are unable to see that until they realise they have lost the cult obsession

The problem with Jack is, his bias detracts from the quality of his work. He will ball cup the shit out of someone he likes and be extremely rude about someone he doesn't like. He is unashamedly so and I suspect he's actually trying to create controversy for the sake of controversy. In other words - trolling.

---

"FTP is a bit 2015, don't you think?" - Gustav Iden

When has he been extremely rude to anyone?

He was rude ABOUT people. On Protrinews, he said Bob Babbitt knew nothing about today's triathlon and he was only getting all those guests because of his connections. In his criticism of various parts of the triathlon community, Jack was shitting on a lot of people, including, by implication, the hosts (which they pretended not to understand).

---

"FTP is a bit 2015, don't you think?" - Gustav Iden

This is just beginning. When the large manufacturers get up to speed, it's just a matter of time. Tesla doesn't have the capacity to compete and cannot build the infrastructure to compete. It doesn't matter how much money you have. There are not magic fairys that build assembly plants. It takes years to build infrastructure and the workforce that builds them is limited. You can't get workers from the unemployment office to build assembly plants. It's a skilled trade.

Another real world example.... The Tesla truck was announced 3 years ago. Have you seen one? No. There is no way to build it. Ford announced the F150 Lightening 18 months ago. By the end of the year Ford will deliver 150,000. It's over for the Tesla truck. I don't even consider Rivian. They were done before they got started. Rivian in auto manufacturing is essentially you building bicycles in your garage and trying to compete with Trek. All this is pedicated on the consumer buying electic cars in mass which has not been proven yet.

This may seem off topic but it directly applies to a CEO's scope of responsibility.

This... This.... This

"Not worthy of a junior high schoold debate" I'm just mad I didn't think of that.

Correct!!! all of these points are correct :)

---

E-DUB
Chief Janitor @Slowtwitch
Life is short. Dont be mad all the time.

Didn't WTC end up buying out HyVee and Lifetime? Then killing the races?
I remember some pro's I had racing in HyVee raving about it one year then the next bitching about how it had been neutered and I'm pretty sure that's the year ironman bought them out.

correct me if I'm wrong.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Per an earlier post i put up its this reason i can barely get to end of Alistair Brownlee episode. Its cringe worthy listening to his going on about Alistair as the GOAT. In another one he went off re IM splitting Kona and Nice and their (in his view) blatant disregard for pros.

Not sure how he gets these amazing guests. Podcast is worthy of listen because of the star power of his guests. But if someone is great at interviewing we engage to learn from guests we know nothing about vs tuning in because star power of guest.

Maybe we just need to bring back The Real Starky😂

---

@rhyspencer

DD,

The title sponsor (Hyvee Grocery store) pulled its aponsorship from the race. After that I can’t remember if the race changed hands and obviously couldn’t find the money to keep it as the “richest prize purse in the sport”.

Funny enough I had no clue who/what Hyvee was until was in Iowa for a race and saw the store. And I was like “huh so that’s who sponsors the biggest event in our sport”. It was a very funny / weird moment.

Same light “every man jack” I had no clue was a male shaving/ skin care company for years. I just assumed it was some random word association on the “John doe” type of idea. It never once made me look up what every man Jack was.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

No they did not. Both of those companies simply lost interest in the sport having seeing very little to no ROI.

---

E-DUB
Chief Janitor @Slowtwitch
Life is short. Dont be mad all the time.

Which points? Jack’s point that if it were not for Babbitt’s connections, athletes wouldn’t want to talk to him?

This being a bit ridiculous is one thing, but it’s also about how Jack expresses his criticisms. You can be critical without acting like an arrogant disrespectful prick. He’s probably a lovable guy in person but his online persona as shown on PTN was nothing but.

---

"FTP is a bit 2015, don't you think?" - Gustav Iden

Your points on jack and how he acts towards his guests and others are very correct. I just don't understand how or why he feels like he needs to be that way towards other people that have clearly grown the sport.

---

E-DUB
Chief Janitor @Slowtwitch
Life is short. Dont be mad all the time.

You know, I was gonna say that some of this confrontational style feels like a very discount version of Ben Hobbs.

There's exactly one guy who was good at that, and it's Ben Hobbs. For all the shit-stirring, he could do a guest interview like nobody else in the sport, and hold somebody's feet to the fire without it feeling performative, nor did he come across as navel gazing.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

i am a bit surprised that you have an opinion about him him, since i think you did not know about him, till a few days ago.
I guess i have listened to 35 or so of his podcasts , not the messick one, and i guess he was confrontational in maybe 2, and there is not much shit stirring either.well the one with pro tri news was really bad but the tri news guys were even worse.
it is clear he thinks he is the only one who should do a tri podcast and he does not like ironman. but i think your assessment about him, most likely form a few snippets,is off the mark.
at the end of the day , his main subject is how they train and coach. and he does that ok.

I have listened to enough to draw a conclusion. Ben Hobbs did this -- highlighting pro athletes on a podcast -- better in 2014-2015.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

That's true, but the economics driving triathlon are IRONMAN. And it begs the question where would the sport be today without their financial engine. It reminds me of one of my favorite lines from the film "The Right Stuff". NASA administrator speaking about the need to make the Mercury 7 astronauts famous to help support their funding. "No bucks, no Buck Rogers".

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

Absurdly false.

Tell me you are from the USA without telling me you are from the USA.

From the standpoint of amateur racing, not national federations supporting their Olympic efforts.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

168 working days to build

Is that fast?

https://www.pmi.org/...gigafactory-shanghai

i liked what ben did a lot, he was very good. but honestly i think this has not much to do with the how they train podcast. i would say if you compare it with ben you have not listend enough. as by and large it is really about how they train.

I guess us peasants will have to wait for the podcast but in what context was he even on the “how to train” podcast. I mean I get it, that’s just a name and so the content can cover all kinds of material. It was an interesting decision it seems by each party to take up this particular podcast. Maybe Messick has done the tri circuit podcasts, but I don’t remember him doing many (again maybe I’ve just not paid attention to them).

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Here's the ProTriNews/How they Train combo:
https://podcasts.apple.com/...1865?i=1000586614274
I had never heard/listened to Kelly before but, boy can he talk. Trouble is, by the end of the question you've forgotten what the key point was, if you haven't lost the will to live.
Perhaps I should steel myself and listen to a few of his direct interviews, so I can have a more balanced view of his style.
Perhaps he should interview some of the old no-hopers who still roll up (in Ironman's pocket) to provide an ignorant commentary (his words).
Anyone want to suggest an interview which offers some quality insights?

In 2018 Ironman brings in $90million per year in revenue.
In 2019World Triathlon, has 5 million in cash/short term investments. They have $8 million in revenue, about $3.5 million from the Olympics. World Triathlon operated at a loss if not for the income they receive from investments, which barely keeps their nose above water.

Is there anyone larger than Ironman that could be said to driving the economic engine of triathlon? Tell me you are a knee-jerk anti-American without telling me you a knee jerk anti American.

The observation that Ironman is the largest financial impact on triathlon is not an "American" one. It seems to be a factual one. Unless you're saying it's false an "American" to view the one with the most financial interests being the driver of the sport. If you think that's the case, that pure sport can't be reduced to economics, ask how far the pure sport of World Triathlon would go if it didn't have $2-3 million in Olympic revenue coming in every year. WT EBIT in 2019 was -500k. Only return on financial investments put its nose above water. It's not American to view money as the best approximate means to measure and compare value. It's literally the principle of which the thing exists and is used.

I just recently found his podcast and listened to the Collin Chartier and Alistair Brownlee episodes. The Chartier one was fine and interesting. The Brownlee one was definitely interesting but as others have mentioned it was painfully awkward with how much the host was worshipping Brownlee, especially the very end.

Regardless of what you think about this guy, I think we could all agree he gets good guests and that he really needs to work on the delivery of his questions. It's painful to listen to.

---

Dimond Bikes Superfan

The PTN/HTT podcast was by far the worst, nobody came out of that one well. I forget what point he was trying to make, but there was a long analogy about triathlon being like sticking with a partner while they were fat and ugly that was a particular low point.

To be fair, once he’s finally asked his never-ending question, he does pipe down and let his guests answer at length without cutting them off or interrupting. I just forward through his question and then work out the gist of it from the answer.

i tried again today to get through the Brownlee interview. I turned it off with 30 minutes to go.

---

@rhyspencer

Last clause: you and me both!

Haha I dare you to listen to the last 5 minutes!

Pointing out local bias makes me anti-American? SMH. Get over yourself.

Except my post did not bely local bias, it made a statement of fact.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

stop being a quitter. get more coffee, refuel and finish off that podcast now. ;)

---

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

Election year for who? Municipal election was in 2021. But yes, the city did not/could not commit to the money early enough to make the event happen.

I had to sign in just to second your post! I can't think of a person triathlon misses more than Hobbs. If he were still interested, he is probably the one person who could actually draw people in from outside tri... but alas isn't he into roofing now? Long live TRS

"Unfortunately the event is dependent on government funding, and the Edmonton City Council wasn’t able to commit funds for the 2023 race in time. While provincial funding might have still been an option, with Alberta heading into an election this summer, any decisions on funding were likely to be delayed, forcing organizers to pull the plug on this year’s race."

https://triathlonmagazine.ca/...n-open-out-for-2023/

I guess provincial. Was the contract for Edmonton a rolling agreement I wonder. Because if Irving was 3 years I asked about penalties the PTO had to pay out. I wonder if Due North owes the PTO or if Edmonton does.

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

HTT should stick to its title if the guests are open to sharing about training but the host has to be knowledgeable enough to have a conversation and be ready to follow up. Case in point, he had Seipp who brings up blood flow restriction. I don’t know of how many other triathlete train with bfr. Why? When? What are the expectations? What results has he seen? Lauren Phillips runs 100s at 18-19” for rhythm and form. Are you telling me she can only run a 76” 400m? Are you running in spikes? Are you allowing for a run in? All questions that pop into my head as I’m listening walking my dog. A host needs to be prepared, be knowledgeable and be curious.

IM is still at it, they have a new 70.3 in Springfield Mass a week before the Patriot Half in the same general market that is going on its 16th year.

What’s actually absurd is your repeated use of the same catch phase over the years.

Well then, what are the economics driving triathlon?

.
Triathlon is a lifestyle sport,a hobby,a pastime.That is the driving force.To say that Ironman is the main driving economic force behind "the sport of triathlon" makes the assumption that not only does Ironman host the vast majority of races around the world (which they don't) and that the vast majority of triathletes enter the sport specifically because of the lure of doing M-Dot races (they don't). This is a USA based forum with a huge USA bias,a country which I would suggest has the highest Ironman leaning in the world.
Now I would suggest that if you break down the industry as a whole then in certain sections of the triathlon community,the lure of the almighty M-Dot is THE only reason they exist at all (take triathlon coaching for example).I would suggest that the average Ironman triathletes are waaaaaaaaaay more likely to be coached than your average Sprint and Olympic triathletes who never do Ironman.
To hand wave off World Triathlon and its influence around the world is just ridiculous as they do far more for the development of the sport around the world than Ironman will ever do.They are the governing body of the sport THEY are Triathlon.

Ironman is the largest Triathlon event promoter in the world. Challenge isn't even 1/3 the size. To say it isn't the main economic engine of the sport is just ignorance.

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

.
.
The fact that you only mention Ironman and Challenge proves the point that so many people like yourself fail to understand exactly what World Triathlon does.Look outside your little bubble and you may see that there is a big wide world out there.

Do you really consider what the ITU does an economic driver? The WTCS Grand Final isn't the Rugby World Cup or anything.

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

.
There is a lot more to World Triathlon than the WTCS Grand Final.

The largest triathlon in the world, with 10k+ age group athletes partaking, is called Hamburg Wasser World Triathlon (a side event to WTCS Hamburg).

Also, to my amusement when I found out, it’s organized by a company called Ironman Deutschland GmbH. You couldn’t make this up.

It really is an apples to oranges comparison. The two organizations have different structures, sources of funding, goals and means to achieve those goals. Pros are an afterthought to Ironman but the #1 focus to World Tri (despite there being age group events). World Tri doesn’t even operate events, to my knowledge. Ironman does (in addition to licensing).

Also, nobody here has defined what the fuck being an “economic engine of the sport” means, will someone enlighten me? How do you discuss something so vague? What is the yardstick and what is the threshold in that yardstick? Ironman fanboys seem to believe that Ironman having, say, 11% of whatever makes it an “economic engine” as long as nobody else has more than 4% of that whatever.

---

"FTP is a bit 2015, don't you think?" - Gustav Iden

..
Yep,I don't know why people want to compare a for profit race production company with a not for profit sports governing body.
The largest triathlon weekend in Asia is Challenge Taiwan with 6,000 competitors which is something you never hear M-Dotters talk about.

Lets talk Australia..
Ironman has three Ironman's and eight 70.3's with Noosa and Mooloolaba Tri's thrown in as Ironman owned.

So approx total of Ironman events at 13 with a few I may have missed..

According to the TA 2021/2022 Annual report there were 677 Triathlon Australia sanctioned events raced that year with 115,000 starters and 14,000 Triathlon Australia members.
There were 219 Triathlon clubs registered and 599 World Triathlon certified coaches.
There was a general increase in competitors and the most popular distance was Sprint Distance at 26% of all events raced.

Throw in the TryStars schools programs, 7,000 kids in the junior exposure programs and the Ph3onix Foundation junior races, can someone please,pleae explain how Ironman is the driving force for triathlon participation in Australia.

Triathlon Australia Annual Report 2021/2022 by Triathlon Australia - Issuu

I can tell you my wife signed up for a race after getting inspired with tears in her eyes watching a mom push a stroller across the finish line in the World Champs broadcast, not after watching me train, and certainly not after watching Sanders, Iden, or Sodaro clips or PTO races.


I get it that IM has a bigger platform - but Announcing at over 30, running, cycling and triathlon races as I do each year all across North America, these sorts of things are going on at EVERYONE of these races and events at EVERY Finish Line of EVERY Race/Event! It's not just an IM phenomenon!

Want to be inspired? What to get more people inspired? Invite them out to a local race/event - to volunteer (they are all DESPERATE for Volunteers post-pandemic), or to do that race/event with you!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

One of the goals of any CEO is put the competition out of business....or at least leave them around limping so there is some semblance of competition in the market....but that's about it. It's either "eat or be eaten". It's not all love and hugs and cumbaya over in that layer. On that front, Tesla's market cap has reached a point that it is not so easy for any existing entity to gobble up Tesla. Maybe a merger. As an example Tesla's market cap today is around $600B and Toyota is right at $300B. I literally can't buy a Prius Prime (there will be 12 delivered where I live), but I can get Tesla Model3's like they are falling out of the sky.

Earlier in this thread, David said that listening to the podcast would not change his view on Andrew Messick. I can't consider Messick a friend like David, but I have had enough interactions with him that I won't let one interview change my overall positive views of him. You Gotta be a dick from time to time in a CEO role, at least one group of stakeholders will not like your actions, while you make those actions for the benefit of another group.

On the balance, in his 11 years at the front of Ironman, he has done good to expand the sport internationally. I would say, he has not done great to intake young blood into the sport. I think some moves by Ironman to squeeze out local races which are the conveyor belt of participants into Ironman have been short sighted (I do around 50-80% of my events in the local sphere annually....last year was 4 Mdot 9 local). But in the last decade Ironman has done well to expand internationally...I would say that impact has been dramatically better than World Triathlon who are only World in name and if you boot triathlon from the Olympics, World Triathlon dies the next day as it would have no remaining purpose. Olympics are the keystone that keeps World triathlon working. Ironman can survive even without Kona

It just went live for free now on all platforms - here is the Spotify link

Just listen to it, not fun of Ironman this days yet sorry to say that this Podcast host lack respect and bring assumption without data and not listening to Andrew facts.
Will be nice if Jack will be less a d!ck and more curious

genuinely shocked that you thought the host was the dick during that conversation

Just now listening to the free version, it came across as 2 people bullishly sticking to their side of the argument at times in the interview. The only point I thought Messick truly was not truthful was when they talked about pro's and letting them race any series they want. 10 years ago when Rev3 came into the sport with an almost $2.5mi prize series over I believe 5 races, IM's counter was to suddenly change the process to KQ. So instead of win or podium and you KQ, it went to something like 3 best WTC events scores, etc (I cant remember the specifics of how many races they counted). That was purely to force pros to decide which race series was important.

Now with PTO offering $5mi, I dont think for a sec IM will behave in that same manner, as they will certainly lose as they won't compete with that type of prize purses. As I've said previously I would imagine if PTO is here long term, you'll end up seeing IM cut low wage prize purses and funnel it into their A championship level events only.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

If I remember the timeline correctly:

~2012 or 2013 is the move to Kona Points Ranking qualification. Top 3 races counted, one HAD to be a full distance IM, max of 5 finishes counted. And that set the majority of the field, with the month of August through the first weekend of September being the "last chance qualifiers" whereby you had those final 5 or so slots in the MPRO and FPRO fields being determined.

Coincides with Rev3 expanding from 3 races (2011) to 5 races (2012) to then 10 races (2013). And yes, big pro prize purses, but also lots of volume in certain age group fields (Maine had 1800 or so racers in 2013), while also some sizable duds (Branson, Missouri had I think a total of like 250 people at it). And those duds hurt big. 2014 the interest in Rev3 died down outside of their classic big races in Knoxville, Quassy, Maine. 2014 offseason the money dried up, events were cut back, and the pros were considered a line item expense that needed to go to make the company survive going into 2015. (Trust me. I was there.)

Pros were always free to race elsewhere -- and some did. The Wurteles almost always came to Quassy, Mirinda was there a lot, Starykowicz and Thomas were also key names. But it usually was a case of the Rev3 races fitting into their schedules versus making their schedules around hitting Rev3 races. Sponsor bonuses were still almost always tied to IM.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

I still to this day laugh at a conversation I had with desert dude back then. He told me he had an athlete get on the podium at a pro Rev3 race, and thus asked their sponsor (who btw was a sponsor of the Rev3 series race said athlete just raced at, lol) for a podium bonus. Said sponsor said hell no, IM only for sponsor bonuses.

It made me laugh because it was from a sponsor that the athlete raced at of a race. It just kinda had me cringing, that's just how much of an Importance IM brand has always had on the sport.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I recall an offhand conversation at the time whereby Charlie was talking to one pro asking why they didn't race Rev3 more often, and they said they couldn't get X sponsor to give them bonus for wins. Charlie asked another pro nearby who shared same sponsor with the pro in question about whether she got sponsor bonus for her Rev3 wins. Answer: "yup, sure do, just had to tell them how important these races were to me."

Always stuck with me.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

I just listened to it and I agree. I find the Host painful at times and really tried to use his bully pulpit to "vent" to Messick, not to seek answers.

Like it or not, Messick was concise and answered the questions. The host simply refused to accept the answers. The host is stuck on the amount of money a private company makes, and how it pays the pros. Messick's answer about the revenue model being driven by the AG registration and not the "Eyeballs" that the pros bring to the table in viewership is a blunt, yet accurate reflection of the reality of the IM model.

I have done a couple of IM events and can honestly say that I feel I got my money's worth at both. The pro's are cool to watch and follow on IG, however they do not influence me to where I spend my dollars for races.

I do think the pros are underpaid, however it is still a fringe, fringe sport. The average salary for a CFL (Canadian Pro Football) is around 65-85k CDN. Tonnes of "Fringe" pro sports athletes are not getting by. Hell, the biggest example of a working poor is an Olympic Athlete if you want to follow the % of revenue argument.

This could have been a great interview instead it was a was of time, Messick had answers (whether you like or agree or believe him is your choice) and the host was an asshole. Especially at the end. A large part of the podcasts are in the 1:15 range, to assume they were jut getting started was a dick move. Messick stated he thought it was 45 minutes and offered to set up more time later. The host would have kept up all day, asking "Questions" in the form of bitching.

I felt the opposite. The host was professional. Messick was not. And when the questions got tough it appeared to me like he lied and stated that he was told that the interview was only supposed to be an hour. Who told him that? The host always appeared calm and professional IMO. Messick did not and he was the only that sounded on edge and anxious.

Messick was unprofessional, no argument there. Especially for a CEO of such a large, global organisation. Yes, Jack's approach can be tough to listen to at times, but he kept calm, and reiterated the sentiment that MOST AG athletes feel, as Messick would not answer truthfully.

IM has seen what a two day event can bring in terms of dollars... BIG dollars (and then jacked up the cost to enter- which is bullshit! how can a race cost $2400 Aus dollars to enter- seriously!). At the expense of a TRUE WC race. This isn't just any IM race, this is the fricken WC! But by rolling down slots to 20th+ is watering down what a WC race is, and that was what Jack was trying to say. In the end, IM don't care because they have now got a "bucket list race" where even if you walk an IM run, and finish 20th, you too could race there.

Jack was right- reduce the field so the top AG around the world race (and professionals), and skim off those that scraped in by a roll down (like it used to be). Then the race could be on the same day as there are less athletes on course. Get better television coverage for the females, stagger the starts to allow the females a fair race without AG interruption, and the race continues.

It isn't that hard, but guess what, it means nothing to IM as it would cost them the fortunes they now see they can make. It really isn't hard to see IM's motivation here.

How are you going to get better race coverage when the males and females are racing at the same time? At some point, something has to give (PTO's CC has this issue as well).

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Speaking very generally:

Opportunities to speak to Andrew on the record (whether for print, audio, video) you are usually working with a contact at IM to receive a specific window of time to talk with him for a pre-determined amount of time, which in my experience will never exceed a 45 minute window, which Andrew (being gracious with his time in certain instances) will extend to an hour maximum.

I find it very, very hard to believe that this podcast would have occurred outside of this protocol, which would mean that Jack would have known exactly how much time he was afforded.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

Now with PTO offering $5mi, I dont think for a sec IM will behave in that same manner, as they will certainly lose as they won't compete with that type of prize purses. As I've said previously I would imagine if PTO is here long term, you'll end up seeing IM cut low wage prize purses and funnel it into their A championship level events only.


I think it's important to illustrate that the business models of IM and the PTO are different enough that it's worth pointing out.

To date - the PTO has existed and done almost all of what it's done via one significant benefactor writing VERY big checks The PTO has been working very hard behind the scenes to change this and the news late this fall regarding some significant broadcasting income, is a significant development!

Whereas, IM's business model is based on revenue it get's from participants - I don't know what the exact ratio is, but I don't think it's that much different from other large mass participation endurance sports race/event organizers in that about 80% of the revenue comes from participant entry fees and the other roughly 20% comes from Sponsorship and maybe some merchandise sales and other retail.

I know that PTO is trying to build up participation in some of these races that they are putting on but with all due respect those are very small numbers compared to where IM is at.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Here is the dynamic of any CEO interview with the press.

The CEO at hand always has something to lose when there is a public facing element to the product/service portfolio. It is almost never that the CEO can use these channels for marketing offence (that is what you use your other marketing channels for). You are always playing defence in these press interviews, or with Wall street analysts, or investment banks. It comes with the territory of being the CEO of a public facing company, with a wide employee and cosumer base.

The journalist on the other hand is in a "nothing to lose scenario". It is almost always, if the journalist can bring someone in power "down to earth" then the journalist has been able to show their power to the masses who will consume said journalistic content. If the journalist makes the CEO look like a superhero, when arguably the there is a wide swath of consumers who are disgruntled, then the journalist kind of failed. But it is really really easy for the journalist to come out looking good and the CEO to come out looking bad. This is literally the opening position of these types of interactions.

When the CEO of such a corp gives a journalist interview, knowing their not so hidden agenda, the CEO may be trying to propagate "in the market" the position of the company on a controversial set of topics, and drum up momentum from sympathetic ears, because they know they can't do ANYTHING to appease those who hate them.

That's just how these things play out.

Easy. Equal amount of motos covering both races with split screen coverage. Problem solved.

And then you’ll have Jack from HTT and others bitch about “moto drafting” of which he was going to ask Messick about. How many of the pros now bitch about it? And you want to double the number of motos?

Problem not solved

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Perhaps I'm the only one, but at the end of the interview, when the host just wouldn't let go of what seemed a petty vendetta to make Messick look bad by berating him for wanting to end the podcast as his allotted time had run out, I found myself sympathetic towards Messick. The host had spent the better part of an hour trying to get him with 'gotcha' questions and didn't seem to appreciate that sometimes busy people have multiple commitments scheduled one after another.

Same. (well, and the ST newsletter)

---

Dr. Alex Harrison | Founder & CEO | Sport Physiology & Performance PhD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📱 Check out our app → Saturday: Pro Fuel & Hydration, a performance nutrition coach in your pocket.
Join us on YouTube → Saturday Morning | Ride & Run Faster and our growing Saturday User Hub

is there a part of the interview one should listen too or is it best to give it a total miss ?

 


Personally I didn't find it bad.

The eating (or drinking) on Messik's side was not necessary and the way he terminated it was not the most tactful.
But he had good answers to all the questions and stayed calm until the end. I am not sure I understand the outrage of the OP.

The host could have been a little less combative but at least he wasn't lobbing easy questions that the rest of the media seem to do. I am sure he would do that interview identically

I am re-listen today. Maybe I was expecting worse

No I felt as if Jack was simply “going at” Messick over IM’s business practices more than having a conversation, which in turn made Messick get bullish as well. It didn’t come across as only 1 was looking like the dick, but of course when your Messick any moment like this is headline news: The Messick walked out of the interview was a bit overblown by Jack as well. He told host he could talk more another time as he had extended almost 30 mins past the “ allowed” time and then left.

I kept laughing when Jack wanted Messick to explain IM is first and foremost a business. It’s like “I don’t need to hear him say it”….they’ve been around for 40 years now, no duh they act as a successful race production does. Yes the pros “get screwed” but at the same time, in our niche sport what are the pros bringing to the table. I want pros to make all they can, but this idea that IM is this big bad guy in pro ranks, I just ain’t buying it. They have what 50 events paying out pros, 1 of the top 10 events in the world and we think IM is always the bad guy.

They spend 45 mins dissecting the Kona 1 day / 2 day issue and moving WC around but nothing really “new” was brought up.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

 
The big thing for me is he kept coming back to making the fields smaller because it's volume of people on the island.
And his idea of making the fields smaller was to make the qualifying time more stringent and thereby, as Messick said, you are cutting out older age groups.

Correct me if I'm wrong but winning your age group guarantee's a WC slot regardless of time.
So the 65-69 year old women who wins her AG in say 14 hours, wouldn't get to go to the WC because that AG winning time doesn't qualify?

Sorry, you don't get ticket to Kona, but congrats on your AG win at Tulsa.

I think I'm kinda Team Messick on this one.

We are in agreement about CEO's job is to put competition out of business. Admittedly off topic and in the weeds here but we are not at the point where Tesla is in jeapordy. The competition is has not begun producing electric vehicles in mass. When they get there, it's done. Tesla isn't capable of producing enough vehicles to compete. Once the market is saturated, Tesla can sell every vehicle it can produce and it won't be in the top ten which equals failure. That's why there is no Pontiac, Saturn, Oldsmobile or Mercury anymore. As for market cap... You realize Ford once bought Jaguar, Volvo, and Mazda in the same year as well as buying and selling Rivan last year.

Again this goes to the CEO's scope of responsibility. It's very macro.

I agree with your initial assessment. I just finished it today and except for a few disrespectful things by Messick (eating… that was a bit annoying for the listeners), this seems to be a case of trying to manufacture outrage.

Every question was a blatant loaded question and Messick gave pretty clear answers that one would expect from a private company.

I might catch a lot of heat for this, but why should IM pay pros more? The analogy to the NBA was an apt comparison, IMO. But then again, I’ll never be a pro looking to make a living in the realm so I guess it’s easy for me to disregard and move on.

---

@floathammerholdon | @partners_in_tri

It's a good question.

There is a question of whether pros can make a good enough living. I guess we will get the level of pros we pay for.

Then we have to ask who pays for that. We shit on IM a lot. People have this idea that sponsors give them loads of cash.

No way José.

Maybe sponsors should be footing part of the bill. Maybe it's the fan through youtube, or others.

Maybe the pros have to find other ways to monetize through other types of partnerships.

But it's not only up to WTC, IMO.

BTW, people would be SHOCKED, on how little some sponsors pay. I remember not so long ago a top 10 (maybe top 5) Kona athlete getting a few framesets and bonus money for podiums. That's it.

I remember seeing applications for the very best athletes and their ask was minimal.

I remember once the person taking care of applications asking me "what do you think of this Norwegian guy". LOL.

But this is all hidden. The only publicly seen compensation paid out as race awards.

How in the world is it an apt comparison? Messick answered it exactly as it should be.

The NBA, NHL, NFL, MLB et al are spectator sports. The players are the product. Without them, it doesn't exist....They should be paid...

Ironman puts on a participation sport. You are paying to actually do the event. Not watch it.
If you want Ironman to put on a pro only event, charge tickets to watch, PPV with obviously better than current coverage...then sure, pay the pros more......

The interviewer should have just taken the L, his arguments were terrible and he makes some wild assumptions about "speaking for the fans" of the sport.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

I though they both came off looking like dicks at times--but Messick also came off as disingenuous. Suggesting the decision regarding Kona/Nice was driven by anything other than money is just BS. Do what you want, but be honest--or just don't answer the question.

And why are the cutoff times for a world championship the same as every other IM race? Shouldn't people racing a world championship race be faster?

Why would the cutoffs be faster when certain age groups may qualify in times that approach those that comprise the 17 hour mark?

And why would the cutoffs be different when the mindset, at least for Kona, has always been that there should be opportunity for non-qualifying athletes to be able to race there?

As has been articulated elsewhere (including the New York Times recently) -- the sport has grown significantly. We've outgrown a single day of racing by an enormous magnitude.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

I made the edit in my original post as you may have misunderstood my post.

The apt comparison was in reference to how he answered (and exactly as you have articulated here) - spectator sports vs. participatory sports. I agree with you, and that's someone who watches every pro race I can (every PTO race, all the big IM ones, normally all the streamed 70.3's).

---

@floathammerholdon | @partners_in_tri

Messick did not do himself any favours, but then again neither did Jack Kelly.

You would expect the CEO of a big company to be able to handle interview pressure and stupidly loaded questions a lot better - but Messick is out to make money for shareholders. It's not his job to create an industry for professional triathletes. It's for professional triathletes to make a living and grow the industry - and they are finally making headway with the PTO events.

If you want more money and the kind of perks you get in other professional jobs you need to grow the sport. NBA, Tennis, Golf etc. all have their models to be able to support highly paid professionals and its based on the model the PTO is trying to build.

I don't think Messick does himself any favours and he might not be brilliant in interviews, but he is not exactly at fault in what he says in this interview. Come on people - support the PTO and stop moaning about Messick. If you don't like him supporting the PTO is the best thing you can do!

---

He who understands the WHY, will understand the HOW.

Fair. I must have misread it.

Because the "world championship" for all non-pro's is mainly an exercise in ego stroking, and those types of athletes spend a lot of money to finish slowly.

Most Euro Ironman's have 16 hour cutoffs.
I once did an independent iron distance race in Europe with a 14 hour cutoff.

A 17 hour cutoff also gives time for the all the non-qualifiers (special interest stories, legacy, corporate slots, etc) and older athletes time to finish. Because if they don't get their finish, they'll be pissed and/or won't make a good story for the post race broadcast.

Qualifying for the World Championship across the board is not time based necessarily. It's placement in your age group....
As mentioned, a 65 year old (wo)man winning his/her age group doesn't mean she did it sub 10.....and couldn't go sub 10 at Kona...or Nice.....


Also, not sure if this was posted yet, but Jack Kelly is not done.

https://tri-today.com/2023/02/jack-kelly-ironman-have-officially-banned-me-from-their-brand/

As someone who has done the long course ITU World Championships 3x, it was fun, but "world champion in your age group" is a joke.
World Championships are for pros.

I read that link and I have to wonder if Ironman has heard of the Streisand Effect.

Ironman is doing a nice job of pissing off the ultra running world too... but that's for another thread.

LOL IM aint going to catch shit for this. This is all peanuts, and yawn at IM "censoring" someone.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

That is quite a trip listening to that. Because on one hand, I don't agree with Jack at all, I think this change is good, and I was hoping it would happen someday, and I'm glad it did. I don't like this stronghold that Kona has on the sport.

However, it is very very clear that Andrew wasn't prepared to get pushback or challenged on his position. Probably being the CEO he is used to getting his way or everybody agreeing with him at all times, and the first moment he saw that didn't eat his bullshit about "caring about the 70 year old grammas racing" he got pissy.

"Why do you hate old age groupers?"!!!! That was so bizarre to hear from the CEO of a company. Gaslighting a podcaster? Seriously?

I didn't get any new information from this interview, but basically confirms what we all know: Ironman doesn't care about the pro field, and they really really loved the two day racing format because it got them more attention. Not surprising at all.

People in here simping for the CEO of a corporation are fucking funny as hell.

There was that article on here recently about the guy who went fastest AG at Kona. All I could think was how he'd be a mid-pack pro but instead sandbags to win AGs. Hard to call it an AGWC when there's pros in your age group at the same race beating you by 30 min.

How long before you are attacked/criticized? I say 10 minutes. BTW, I agree.

I actually think that Kelly spent too much time badgering Messick on his opinion that limiting the field to be more exclusive is what the majority of triathletes want. I think Messick made fair points that limiting the field by more than the standard Ironman standards would unfairly affect the older age groups. Although Messick should have been open that they also do not want to have a World Championship event with a small field due to money concerns. I think it would have been fair to him to say that they need a fairly large field but that they also want a fair competition for the women. You really can't have both with a one-day event without significantly reducing the size of the field through more exclusivity which would indeed affect the older age groups.

I think Kelly makes a good point in expressing his opinion that Kona, first and foremost, should be a World Championship, although he was very aggressive at expressing his point and Messick was very aggressive at trying to defend his. Where Messick failed in the podcast was in failing to own up to the fact that Ironman doesn't necessarily see Kona first and foremost as a World Championship, they see Kona as what it is: the ancestral home of Ironman. I have to say that while I disagree with Messick on many things and for the most part do not like the way he is running Ironman, I have to agree with him on this point of view.

The new format may be less competitive in the short-run but it will absolutely be every bit as competitive as Kona has historically been in the long-run. These changes are absolutely for the long-term health of Ironman as a sport and the international growth of the brand. Many may not like it but Kona is Kona and it will always be special to all of us triathletes. The World Championship should be and will be a separate event. I totally agree with this change, I just wished Messick would have been more skilled at arguing his point. Kelly also was also unnecessarily aggressive and he is making this "controversial" interview to be more than what it really was.

---

------------------
http://dontletitdefeatyou.blogspot.com

Messick basically said the reason Ironman can't have the WC in Kona on a single day is because some older athletes would not be off the bike before dark with the existing cutoff times (because of the need to space out the male and female pros from the fastest age-groupers). That being the case, I would prefer the race be on one day in Kona and if older athletes (and I am one) can't get off the bike before dark, so be it. By age 60, they've had over 40 years to try to race Kona. You define world champion narrowly enough and we can all be world champions.

I totally agree here. Jack needed to be more professional and move on when he knew he wasn’t going to get an answer he wanted.

Here is the magic statement. Messick has been the boss for 15 years?

And Ironman has never turned a profit under his control. They keep borrowing more money and playing funny figures with the books but actual profits from events has never occurred.

So he’s failing badly at his job.

Not questioning the accuracy of what you say, but where did you get this information? For most of it's existence, hasn't the WTC been privately owned?

I found this https://www.businessinsider.com/...idence-equity-2015-8

which states:

The Wanda Group release said that WTC's gross revenue has risen at a compounded average growth rate of 40% for four consecutive years, while net profit has grown at 40% a year.

When all is said and done the interview solidified for me that, like it or not, the World Champs has outgrown Kona.

For all the problems Jack was berating Andrew about, and taking into account that growth is the only acceptable business model for Ironman, we may as well accept that Kona should turn into a normal Ironman race and the World Champs needs to move to a location that can handle the increased numbers.

Hell, I’d love Kona to become a destination race without all the hype.

100% agree...

---

------------------
http://dontletitdefeatyou.blogspot.com

With the IM World Champs location that has the infrastructure, course, spectator appeal, and can cope with two days racing (probably 48 hours apart) for the separate genders, with men and women alternating between weekday and weekend.

cheers for that account , i listened to it and apart from the end when both became unbearable and i stopped listening . it was ok.
but boy, were both childish at the end.

I think Ironman is saying that they can't see a path to scale out any more than they have out of leveraging pros.

For Ironman pros are a replaceable commodity. There will be another fast girl or fast guy who Ironman can replace. Pete Jacobs yesterday is as disposable as Faris before him as Frodeno after him or Iden now. There is another champion in the wings.

PTO raised a multi million dollar series B round to try to leverage pros to create an entertainment/media product.

In essence Ironman is an event company, PTO is media company. Media companies need personalities to make revenue happen. Event companies (ex trade shows etc) can have a revolving door of personalities...the event is the product.

Event companies don't really need to depend on personalities

They both came off like childish clowns. The difference is one is a podcast host and the other is one of the most powerful people in the sport with a history of acting this way.

It's hard to believe multiple PE firms and a major international conglomerate have allowed this guy to continue as CEO for so long.

*cough* Elon Musk *cough*

I fixed the link for you.

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.

He is paid to be the CEO of a private company and maximize profits for his shareholders. You may have not liked what he had to say or the way he said it, but he is delivering against the objectives he was hired for. Comments from the host like "why can't you make the WCC 600+ people to make it work in one day?" may sound like the easy fix, but not profitable. IM is in business to make $$, the same as Apple, Google and all the rest.

I am sure I will get scorched for saying this, but so be it.

Finally got to listen. Messick strikes me as someone who was annoyed to cover the same ground that had already been debated 100 times internally months ago, and then having to cover it again for a "know it all" wannabee or Monday morning quarterbacking race director who absolutely knows best how to spread out times and waves.

It's like I'm reading every Ironaman Facebook ever where some one complains that they absolutely know why it's stupid and unfair that their AG starts at a certain time.

HTT wasted a good opportunity and spent a ton of time talking about start and finish times.

I actually think Messick did a good job laying out the issues initially. He got a little too annoyed and played the banter argument game rather than the PR game. He did hide behind the old ladies a bit, but that's such an irrelevant point for both of them to debate cut off times. But HTT got stuck there because Messick cornered him by essentially citing operational complexities.

At the end of the day HTT seemed to be objecting to women having their own day, and I do agree that there's almost nothing you can do to equally highlight women if the men's race is happening at the same time. Or rather... you can't give women all the coverage, if you are giving men half the coverage. And if the men are racing the same day you are sharing coverage time and also have the real impact of men and women sharing the course, for better and worse. It was awesome to just watch the women's race and then just watch the men's race. That was a cool weekend, and it's probably even better to spread out the events.

I think this was mostly more bark than bite. It's just the same old arguments and same old gripes about Kona that has been debated since St George.

When Messick jumped off, I could sense his annoyance at the loaded question. That was pretty lame to ask if IM pays them what they are worth. It is either in bad faith or is asking for nonsense like, how can you calculate the worth of a soul. IM pays out them at regular events, what $5-15 per AG racer? That doesn't seem unreasonable. What's amazing is how much the AG guys are fine with a podium spot and just going home with a desk trinket. If the pros are worth more, why are AG worth nothing? Why not give the 45-49 AG a percent of their revenue, etc. You can see the deserves and worths questions can never end if you feel IM has something and you deserve more.

I would have liked more conversation but HTT was a little obtuse to the business reality -- but so is most of the consumer market, so it's good to see the discussion.

What this thing does make me think it's IM needs a PR person who can make the case rather than sticking the ceo in the hot seat. That's more valuable than an extra 2k added to 50 pro events.

Yep agree

I've seen this comment repeated a few times in this thread and find it quite surprising. Especially in this modern age of social awareness and cultural sensitivities more now than ever a CEO's role extends much further than just making money.

They have a responsibility to also act in societies interests, and perhaps they are with the approaches towards gender and race equality. But surely, as such a huge player they also have a responsibility as custodians of the sport.

If Messick's sole responsibility is making money he could simply drive the business into the ground, cut costs, increases prices and boost short term profit at the expense of long term gain...like many CEO's unfortunately tend to do...there needs to be a balance. But many seem to feel this is the approach he is leaning towards..

Yep agree entirely. People can be so funny-being critical of HTT when it's just some kid who loves triathlon trying to make something of it, hardly a polished let alone trained 'journalist' as some seem to expect. The saying Champagne taste on beer budget comes to mind...the podcast is free FFS...what do you expect?

Then you have Messick on the other hand, a very experienced and well-paid CEO but who acts amateur hour like he runs a corner store...embarrassing.

I've now listened to this MMA freak fight of an interview. It was a cringeworthy experience and a full-on guilty pleasure. Fight report below.

Round 1: was it OK to make IM WC a two-day race and why?

Jack claims Ironman did a terrible thing; should've kept it a one-day race and it didn't because it is greedy. But that's not Jack's opinion. That's our opinion, that's what the community says.
First, Messick proves through reasoned argumentation that a two-day race could not be held on Hawaii island (no real counter there), and that in a one day race, the PRO women's competition would've been affected by male age groupers. So for women to "have their own race", it had to be two days, and one of those days could not be in Kailua-Kona. A torrent of blows lands on Jack's torso and face, in addition to a solid kick in the nuts ("why do you hate old people?") which prompts a brief interruption in this round, followed by Jack repeating the same thesis over and over again: women are not why Ironman split the race. Ironman split the race to make more money, that's what the community thinks, that's not just what Jack things. No specific argumentation there, just same old same old. Jack can't prove Ironman did the right thing for the wrong reasons, because he can't make a dent in Messick's narrative about caring for women.

Messick starts to eat, and they're not yet 35 minutes in.

Messick scores repeated knock-downs, Jack's face turning into mush at the end of this one. Yet he is eager to jump into...


Round 2: does Ironman pay PROs the prize money they deserve?


The Aussie decides to "fake it till you make it" and unleashes question after question (actually, the same question) at Messick, who dodges and evades as best as he can. But he can't help getting a bit closer to answering the question, which he finally sort of does, saying "PROs can race Challenge and Clash and we encourage them to if that's what they want" or something to that effect. The intelligent listener will understand that Messick is saying "we are paying little because we can, and will - to maximize profits - and if PRO athletes don't like it, the door is right there". Ironman "provides a platform" for PROs to do whatever they want, the money doesn't come from broadcasts and sponsorships but from age groupers, and PROs play a small role in the business. What does Jack do? Repeats the question "do you think PROs are getting the prize money they deserve" ad nauseam. Jab jab jab, all landing in the air. A skilled podcaster would've rephrased Messick's answers to make them more direct (and him look like the profit-maximizing CEO that he is), but that requires skill and not just drive. Jack only has the latter, it sems.

Messick continues to eat. Better yet, he eats while talking, despite Jack's rants giving the CEO ample opportunities to eat while listening. Age groupers are loving this, a big eater is someone who must be training 25 hours a week and never going below LT1.

The round is tied, sort of. Messick stuck to his lead and engaged in direct confrontation as little as possible.

Round 3: can Messick go now?
The judges are divided over whether Messick was legitimately out of time or whether he was just fed up with "difficult questions". Some triathlon media outlets framed this as an escape from "difficult questions". That's preposterous. Jack only really asked two questions, and a question you hear for the umpteenth time gets easier to answer, not harder. Why wasn't there enough time? Because Jack was neither able to counter Messick nor move on to further question, and because Messick's answers were long and winded, especially at the start. Preventing both problems is the responsibility of the podcaster. Apparently his skills were lacking. Messick's CEO skills are fine, he got away with selling BS in Round 1 (we're about women, not about money) like a true champ.

Fight result: Messick, by unanimous decision. Jack has a strong jaw and that's about it.

Post-fight: Messick gone
Jack cries.

LOL! 100% spot on.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

Not a big Messick fan (never was, but especially after this) but he IS the CEO of a privately held and owned company. He has a set of obligations to live up to and standard answers, that he has to deliver to the press. He cannot even express his own opinion on these matters and I doubt that he does.
He has lasted for 15 years, through several crisis, Chinese ownership, etc. The private companies behind WTC (i.e. Advance & Orkila) must see something in Messick.

Messick was in the lead through all that and has undoubtfully been instrumental in the success of WTC and growth of the IM brand. Kudos either way.

Banning Jack Kelly (or any other press) from any Ironman event is so low, what a douche move, that will only shine darkness over the brand - seemed more like a Chinese Wanda thing to do.

Getting popcorn for listening to a greasy next BTS of HTT.

This is classic niche triathlon echo-chamber stuff (which, let's be honest, happens here on ST a fair amount). A very small tempest in a teapot. This guy Kelly is a terrible interviewer. And Messick was just running his playbook, as he's paid to do.

"Outrage" by the few hundreds of people this all actually affects. For those outraged and who say - no more IM WC for me - plenty more hundreds of people all over the world to gladly take their place, be it in Nice, Kona, or wherever.

Thank you for today's "coffee through nose" rinse. Needed that with the kiddo bringing home yet another undetermined virus.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

Happy to see that someone appreciates this half-assed attempt at entertainment. I get a ton of free material from this site, feels like giving back 0.01%.

---

"FTP is a bit 2015, don't you think?" - Gustav Iden

My favorite :

A torrent of blows lands on Jack's torso and face, in addition to a solid kick in the nuts ("why do you hate old people?") which prompts a brief interruption in this round, followed by Jack repeating the same thesis over and over again

Agree, and thank you for the same here.

If this Kelly guy was trying to build up his listener base with how he promoted this podcast I'd have to say (in my opinion) he failed. I'll never listen again. Of course, I am one of those "older" athletes.

Well done, Andrew.

Was this👇 a comment to me? Or am I missing something in pink :)

Not that this thread needs another voice in the cacophony but finally listened on the trainer this morning. I was expecting much worse, although I still have 10-ish minutes to go. I think both of them came off poorly altho I agree with the decision going to Messick.

The host has his opinions, some of which I agree with some I don't, but he doesn't "speak" for all triathletes as he repeatedly said or at least implied. He speaks for a subset that want Kona to be more exclusive/ difficult. He also believes in the mythical "world championship" aspect of a privately owned corporate race series. He also seems of the opinion that IM just never thought any of the stuff through that he brought up and just threw Kona/Nice together last minute without thinking about it, and that his solution was just easy to implement (yeah, reducing the field to 4-500 men on one day and 4-500 women on day two isn't gonna make people angry)

Messick just came off too defensive. I think all of the points he made were valid (although the "why don't you like old people" crack was dumb), but he didn't present them well enough IMO. He had a real opportunity here that he missed

End of day, it wasn't the bloodbath some of the hyperbolic posts on this page made it out to be

Sorta feels like Kelly is gonna milk this victim thing for a bit. Gonna play the "I'm being canceled card." And I didn't think his questions were particularly "hard," nor did he really seem interested in hearing IM's reasoning (which Messick also missed out on, but I think there was tension going in)

If this Kelly guy was trying to build up his listener base with how he promoted this podcast I'd have to say (in my opinion) he failed. I'll never listen again. Of course, I am one of those "older" athletes.

________________

My first listen was his great interview of Emma Snowsill. Then i went to listen to Alistair's and i couldn't get through it. Then this Messick shit show. I won't listen again. Really terrible.


in podcast he says he hasn't seen athletes this angry in his time following the sport since 2004/2005. I guess i too am old because i remember the Ironman Roth days-:)


now he's going to do a patreon sharing email interactions with ironman ahead of his announced ban. that's just cheap.

---

@rhyspencer

ST HOF post right there!

---

"Good genes are not a requirement, just the obsession to beat ones brains out daily"...the Griz