Andrew, I'm not really sure what you are expecting with this post. I can only foresee this thing devolving into criticisms and insults directed towards your company, deserved or not. If you are trying to start a conversation about professional prize purses I think you have an audience. This post though is not going to win over any new fans for you.

Besides IMLP, last Sunday was IM Canada, a race with a $75k pro prize purse that paid 8 deep. We had 8 male pro finishers and 7 female pro finishers. Every pro finisher got a check. And for the women, there was no one to give the 8th place check to.

I think that's a function of a few things, but the two that pop out in my mind are:

3. Location (relative to IMLP) - The bulk of the pro field were able to drive to IMLP, as it's relatively accessible to the majority of the NE.

Besides IMLP, last Sunday was IM Canada, a race with a $75k pro prize purse that paid 8 deep. We had 8 male pro finishers and 7 female pro finishers. Every pro finisher got a check. And for the women, there was no one to give the 8th place check to.

>too much racing dosnt support high performance model at those long distance

That's one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is to ask the question why the pro long-course athlete base hasn't scaled up with the age group athlete base.

Besides IMLP, last Sunday was IM Canada, a race with a $75k pro prize purse that paid 8 deep. We had 8 male pro finishers and 7 female pro finishers. Every pro finisher got a check. And for the women, there was no one to give the 8th place check to.

Your races have the best execution, yet the worst reputation. Somewhere there is a real disconnect. Paying pros is only part of it. If you cant see that, you're worse off than I thought. To come on here and try to win something back in the eyes of the customers is silly and makes you and Ironman©®™ look even worse. You are the CEO, act like it.

And thats too bad about there only being 7 female pros. Im sure you took that 8th place check and donated it to a local youth charity or a women's organization right?

You want it back? I thought that the idea was to give it away.

No, XTRI is just silly copy and paste

You want it back? I thought that the idea was to give it away.

Guys, maybe I am still too new to ST, but how do you know that CEOIronman is actually Andrew? Can't anyone just create that username? lol

I thought that too. Especially how the OP is one of the worst things an owner of a business should do to their customer base. This would be like Comcast going into Tech forums bragging about their service. If this is the CEO, I would suggest they run things through their PR person before making such elementary mistakes like this.

CEOIronman wrote:

You want it back? I thought that the idea was to give it away.

You're too clever by a half.

Let me break character and explain a few things that you don't seem to be grasping. 300 of your customers contributed their hard earned money in a tremendous show of support for the struggling professional triathlete. Thousands more from all over the world used social media to voice their support. We admire, respect and appreciate the talent, hard work and dedication of these athletes and the value they add, in terms of excitement and atmosphere, to the events we choose.

Someone with the same respect for these athletes may have approached our little stunt like this: "We respect our athletes and value the input from our loyal customers. Ironman understands that there is room for improvement in developing our talented pros and we are working internally and with select members of the pro ranks toward a better way. Thank you to the donors for supporting these 7th place finishers. As an organization we recognize your support for the socioeconomic well-being of the athletes and we will consider your voice moving forward."

Instead, we got something similar to, "DON'T YOU HAVE A JOB?"

IM Canada was an outlier and it might be fair to say that Lake Placid was an outlier too. We chose that particular event to stage the stunt because Mark lives in NY. Debating one event versus the other is probably silly, so let's look at the bigger picture. According to Fortune, since the acquisition of Ironman, Providence has increased its revenue 7 fold to $150 million per year. Furthermore, according to Triathlon Business, you just borrowed $240 million in order to pay Providence a $220 million dividend. Now, it is probably close to impossible to quantify the value added by pro triathletes, but based on my personal observation of your advertising strategy, they seem very important to you. Your Kona broadcast is focused on marketing the pro athletes. More focus has been on them than the sob stories as of late.

1. Have pro prize purses increased since the Providence acquisition? Has the increase been anywhere close to 7 fold?
2. Regardless of the other events going on, is it morally reprehensible to pay a pro athlete roughly the equivalent of 1 (of >2500) entry fee for 6th place and NOTHING for 7th place?

You seem like an arrogant leader of an arrogant organization. The confiscation of Ray Bothelo's 7th place check by Jeff Edwards, your VP of Operations for North America, was an interesting metaphor for your approach to your customer. As a man was slumped over, having just given everything he had for over 9 hours, a volunteer (probably unpaid) helped him hold the check. They stumbled together with his support toward your executive Jeff, who snatched the check from the volunteer and bent it in half. Jeff then walked it over to a garbage can and disposed of it. One of your customers (me) who cares about the athletes (Ray Bothelo) spend $80 dollars on that check, $500 on a flight and >$500 more on prizes/merchandise and shipping for our 30 donors. That would have been an amazing keepsake for Ray to remember this weekend of legend. And Jeff, who seems to be an arrogant fucking asshole, modeled perfectly the attitude and value system of the WTC in that single act of customer disservice.


You owe Ray Bothelo and the 300 donors who care about people like Ray an apology.

CEOIronman wrote:

You want it back? I thought that the idea was to give it away.

You're too clever by a half.

Let me break character and explain a few things that you don't seem to be grasping. 300 of your customers contributed their hard earned money in a tremendous show of support for the struggling professional triathlete. Thousands more from all over the world used social media to voice their support. We admire, respect and appreciate the talent, hard work and dedication of these athletes and the value they add, in terms of excitement and atmosphere, to the events we choose.

Someone with the same respect for these athletes may have approached our little stunt like this: "We respect our athletes and value the input from our loyal customers. Ironman understands that there is room for improvement in developing our talented pros and we are working internally and with select members of the pro ranks toward a better way. Thank you to the donors for supporting these 7th place finishers. As an organization we recognize your support for the socioeconomic well-being of the athletes and we will consider your voice moving forward."

Instead, we got something similar to, "DON'T YOU HAVE A JOB?"

IM Canada was an outlier and it might be fair to say that Lake Placid was an outlier too. We chose that particular event to stage the stunt because Mark lives in NY. Debating one event versus the other is probably silly, so let's look at the bigger picture. According to Fortune, since the acquisition of Ironman, Providence has increased its revenue 7 fold to $150 million per year. Furthermore, according to Triathlon Business, you just borrowed $240 million in order to pay Providence a $220 million dividend. Now, it is probably close to impossible to quantify the value added by pro triathletes, but based on my personal observation of your advertising strategy, they seem very important to you. Your Kona broadcast is focused on marketing the pro athletes. More focus has been on them than the sob stories as of late.

1. Have pro prize purses increased since the Providence acquisition? Has the increase been anywhere close to 7 fold?
2. Regardless of the other events going on, is it morally reprehensible to pay a pro athlete roughly the equivalent of 1 (of >2500) entry fee for 6th place and NOTHING for 7th place?

You seem like an arrogant leader of an arrogant organization. The confiscation of Ray Bothelo's 7th place check by Jeff Edwards, your VP of Operations for North America, was an interesting metaphor for your approach to your customer. As a man was slumped over, having just given everything he had for over 9 hours, a volunteer (probably unpaid) helped him hold the check. They stumbled together with his support toward your executive Jeff, who snatched the check from the volunteer and bent it in half. Jeff then walked it over to a garbage can and disposed of it. One of your customers (me) who cares about the athletes (Ray Bothelo) spend $80 dollars on that check, $500 on a flight and >$500 more on prizes/merchandise and shipping for our 30 donors. That would have been an amazing keepsake for Ray to remember this weekend of legend. And Jeff, who seems to be an arrogant fucking asshole, modeled perfectly the attitude and value system of the WTC in that single act of customer disservice.


You owe Ray Bothelo and the 300 donors who care about people like Ray an apology.

Besides IMLP, last Sunday was IM Canada, a race with a $75k pro prize purse that paid 8 deep. We had 8 male pro finishers and 7 female pro finishers. Every pro finisher got a check. And for the women, there was no one to give the 8th place check to.

I agree with you. That's why I keep racing WTC events, but I am talking about "WTC" and their reputation. Would you hold them up there as "well respected company" by the above average user?

If CEOIronman was a regular forum member and consistently contributed to the community, I would respect him. But as someone else said, this is a "michi weiss"

CEOIronman wrote:

You want it back? I thought that the idea was to give it away.

You're too clever by a half.

Let me break character and explain a few things that you don't seem to be grasping. 300 of your customers contributed their hard earned money in a tremendous show of support for the struggling professional triathlete. Thousands more from all over the world used social media to voice their support. We admire, respect and appreciate the talent, hard work and dedication of these athletes and the value they add, in terms of excitement and atmosphere, to the events we choose.

Someone with the same respect for these athletes may have approached our little stunt like this: "We respect our athletes and value the input from our loyal customers. Ironman understands that there is room for improvement in developing our talented pros and we are working internally and with select members of the pro ranks toward a better way. Thank you to the donors for supporting these 7th place finishers. As an organization we recognize your support for the socioeconomic well-being of the athletes and we will consider your voice moving forward."

Instead, we got something similar to, "DON'T YOU HAVE A JOB?"

IM Canada was an outlier and it might be fair to say that Lake Placid was an outlier too. We chose that particular event to stage the stunt because Mark lives in NY. Debating one event versus the other is probably silly, so let's look at the bigger picture. According to Fortune, since the acquisition of Ironman, Providence has increased its revenue 7 fold to $150 million per year. Furthermore, according to Triathlon Business, you just borrowed $240 million in order to pay Providence a $220 million dividend. Now, it is probably close to impossible to quantify the value added by pro triathletes, but based on my personal observation of your advertising strategy, they seem very important to you. Your Kona broadcast is focused on marketing the pro athletes. More focus has been on them than the sob stories as of late.

1. Have pro prize purses increased since the Providence acquisition? Has the increase been anywhere close to 7 fold?
2. Regardless of the other events going on, is it morally reprehensible to pay a pro athlete roughly the equivalent of 1 (of >2500) entry fee for 6th place and NOTHING for 7th place?

You seem like an arrogant leader of an arrogant organization. The confiscation of Ray Bothelo's 7th place check by Jeff Edwards, your VP of Operations for North America, was an interesting metaphor for your approach to your customer. As a man was slumped over, having just given everything he had for over 9 hours, a volunteer (probably unpaid) helped him hold the check. They stumbled together with his support toward your executive Jeff, who snatched the check from the volunteer and bent it in half. Jeff then walked it over to a garbage can and disposed of it. One of your customers (me) who cares about the athletes (Ray Bothelo) spend $80 dollars on that check, $500 on a flight and >$500 more on prizes/merchandise and shipping for our 30 donors. That would have been an amazing keepsake for Ray to remember this weekend of legend. And Jeff, who seems to be an arrogant fucking asshole, modeled perfectly the attitude and value system of the WTC in that single act of customer disservice.


You owe Ray Bothelo and the 300 donors who care about people like Ray an apology.

No they got each received a cheque.

Hello Andrew,

Thank you for making yourself accessible on this forum. I'd like to take this opportunity to congratulate you and your staff on a fantastic venue and athlete experience at IMC. I hosted a party of 16 to watch my brother and I race. I have nothing but positive things to say about the community, the venue, the course and your employees.

I do have suggestions regarding the aid station layout.

1. Please consider adding another station between what is now station 8 and 9 on the bike. Most athletes progressed relatively slowly through that section because of the grade, at what was becoming the warmest part of the day. Athletes ran out of water during that section and I heard that BOP athletes found station 9 dry when they arrived. Water for that climb would be welcome.

2. Please consider adding a station between what is now station 2 and 3 on the run. This could be accomplished by combining stations 4/9, 5/8 or 6/7. We really didn't need separate stations for either direction of the trail just a short distance apart. But I know athletes would have benefited from water on the back side of Lost Lake.

Small stuff for a second year venue.

I will add that the pro purses seem ridiculously small. The sport would benefit from an economic model that incentivizes the best to compete.

Scott

Quote:

+1. If they don't like the pay, go do something else. WTC is not a charity. WTC races will continue to sell out and be successfull without the pros. No one cares about them. Go make a living doing something else if the prize purse is not good enough for you.

Didn't work for Rev3.

Andrew,

You guys are doing a great job running WTC with all the races you've built over the past few years. Boggles my mind why pros think they are entitled to more prize money from WTC. If they want bigger payouts, go do other race series or get a job in the real world.

Nearly all age groupers don't care what pros show up - think it's been said many times here that most can't even name 10 pros.

Thanks for the great experiences. Now please go back to running your company.

Didn't work for Rev3.

Compared to dealing with family members who are dying, this stuff is supposed to be fun and helps us keep healthy. This sport was never meant for anyone to make a living, IMO.
We all know before we start something what it pays. If you do not like the pay, do something else rather than always blaming someone else.


+1. If they don't like the pay, go do something else. WTC is not a charity. WTC races will continue to sell out and be successfull without the pros. No one cares about them. Go make a living doing something else if the prize purse is not good enough for you.

REV3 did not have Kona, it is that simple.

I think REV3 would have been fine had WTC not instituted the points race for Kona. In fact I would guess that pay in WTC races would be higher to compete. WTC has the crown jewel and knew that. It was a good business move, but one that has been detrimental to the sport.

Meanwhile in France, Embrunman : 118000eur ... yep, so about $177000.
There is more, but here is the grid
Difference between m and w likely because the field is a lot difference in %.

Men
1st 25000 eur
2nd 15000 eur
3rd 11000 eur
4th 9000 eur
5th 8000 eur
6th 5000 eur

Women
1st 18000 eur
2nd 11000 eur
3rd 7000 eur
4th 5000 eur
5th 3000 eur
6th 1000 eur

I am generally a big fan of races produced by WTC. I think overall it is a great product, I will continue to participate in Ironman branded races and I think WTC takes a lot of crap on this forum that is undeserved. But WTC and Ironman are of course not without flaws. This post I think was in very poor taste. In one fell swoop you:


1. Denigrated the pros at IMC as perhaps not deserving of the money they won since every place got paid.
2. Implied that this justifies the pro purse prizes at races like IMLP and belittles the arguments made by many of your paying customers to the contrary
3. Assumes that the small field of pros has nothing to do with the way WTC organizes races but rather with the pros themselves

And then you go on to make a joke about one of your senior executives stealing and destroying private property, generally acting like a child in public and insulting the 300 of your customers who supported the effort with their own money.

This kind of attitude about your customers and blindness to your own operational shortcomings is likely to lead to a degradation in the quality of the product you provide. The most important characteristic of a line manager in an organization is to be able to look dispassionately at your performance and the performance of your product, understand and accept its failures or shortcomings and act responsibly to improve as best as possible. In this instance, you are not doing that. As a fan of Ironman races, this makes me worry a little for the future.

Also, I believe the practice of PE firms loading up their portfolio companies with debt to pay themselves dividends in excess of their entire investment that guarantee profits to their limited partners while putting the portfolio company itself (and its employees) at risk or at least hampering it's ability to compete is bad business. I know you don't get to make that decision, but I thought I would throw that out there.

Will be interesting to see what they roll out next. What I'm hearing is less races with a pro purse and points. So a lot of amateur only IM's. My guess is that this may make 2nd tier pros start looking for other options. They are out there, but a lot of pros seem to be ignoring them with the idea that they have some shot at Kona. The truth is maybe 20 of the 50 have a shot at top 10 and maybe 4-5 have a shot to win. Otherwise it is just a very expensive training vacation for the rest of them.

Herbert, you are a moderator. Can you confirm that the OP is in fact Andrew Messick, the CEO of Ironman?

This is like having a conversation with Jamie Dimon of Chase and then using the opportunity to ask him to make sure that the pens in the teller line at your local branch are all fully equipped with ink.

I just have a hard time believing this is the real CEO. Given how brand conscious IM is, I just can't believe the CEO would make this kind of marketing/PR blunder.

Wah! Pros have to accumulate points to get to Kona. That’s so hard. This is basically the same as other individual sports. Tennis players don’t get into Wimbledon by winning one tournament, they need to accumulate points throughout the season to be ranked high enough. The same thing goes for golfers. With the exception of The Masters (which is an invitational tournament that is not part of the PGA Tour), players need to be ranked to get into the season-ending FedEx Championship, The US Open, etc. Some of these events have special qualifiers that are held the week before the event where they add a few players to round out the field. Would you support having an Ironman the week before Kona that granted eight slots to the qualifiers? If these athletes are going to actually be Pros, they should have to compete in more than one race and they should compete against their peers to get to the World Championships.

Besides IMLP, last Sunday was IM Canada, a race with a $75k pro prize purse that paid 8 deep. We had 8 male pro finishers and 7 female pro finishers. Every pro finisher got a check. And for the women, there was no one to give the 8th place check to.

Andrew,

You guys are doing a great job running WTC with all the races you've built over the past few years. Boggles my mind why pros think they are entitled to more prize money from WTC. If they want bigger payouts, go do other race series or get a job in the real world.

Nearly all age groupers don't care what pros show up - think it's been said many times here that most can't even name 10 pros.

Thanks for the great experiences. Now please go back to running your company.

Agree

It certainly appears to be Andrew, but lets us also see that comment a bit "in pink."

Wah! Pros have to accumulate points to get to Kona. That’s so hard. This is basically the same as other individual sports. Tennis players don’t get into Wimbledon by winning one tournament, they need to accumulate points throughout the season to be ranked high enough. The same thing goes for golfers. With the exception of The Masters (which is an invitational tournament that is not part of the PGA Tour), players need to be ranked to get into the season-ending FedEx Championship, The US Open, etc. Some of these events have special qualifiers that are held the week before the event where they add a few players to round out the field. Would you support having an Ironman the week before Kona that granted eight slots to the qualifiers? If these athletes are going to actually be Pros, they should have to compete in more than one race and they should compete against their peers to get to the World Championships.

I have no idea what you are talking about. It's a yes or no question. Will you confirm that the OP is Andrew Messick?

triathlon is a highly physically taxing sport. golf, tennis, bowling,baseball are not.

triathlon is a highly physically taxing sport. golf, tennis, bowling,baseball are not.

Yes, it is Andrew Messick, CEO of Ironman.

But I saw a bit of humor in it.

CEOIronman wrote:

You want it back? I thought that the idea was to give it away.

You're too clever by a half.

Let me break character and explain a few things that you don't seem to be grasping. 300 of your customers contributed their hard earned money in a tremendous show of support for the struggling professional triathlete. Thousands more from all over the world used social media to voice their support. We admire, respect and appreciate the talent, hard work and dedication of these athletes and the value they add, in terms of excitement and atmosphere, to the events we choose.

Someone with the same respect for these athletes may have approached our little stunt like this: "We respect our athletes and value the input from our loyal customers. Ironman understands that there is room for improvement in developing our talented pros and we are working internally and with select members of the pro ranks toward a better way. Thank you to the donors for supporting these 7th place finishers. As an organization we recognize your support for the socioeconomic well-being of the athletes and we will consider your voice moving forward."
..........

You owe Ray Bothelo and the 300 donors who care about people like Ray an apology.

He didn't steal the mic from Mike Reilly...they were at a bar in LP

Have you ever played tennis?

Can't say I exactly agree with your approach. Just saw the pictures from Twitter. I seem to remember some music awards show where Taylor Swift was onstage accepting an award and Kanye West stepped on stage, took the mic and started some rant about how the award should have gone to someone else who deserved more recognition. Seems to me that is what you were doing.

I have no problem if you want to give more things to someone because you think they deserve it. Want 7th to get more? Pony up for a burrito and bottle of water at Chipotle and give them all the cash that's left. Good on ya. But jumping into someone else's stage that they've paid a lot of money and invested a lot of time to put together and taking the spotlight away? Just doesn't seem quite right.

Raymond didn't say anything out loud after crossing the finish line...nothing that anyone could hear anyway

Pretty sure this isn't a bar in LP....

https://twitter.com/...s/495008056447492096

Wolves don't lose sleep over the opinions of sheep.

Get used to it. Supply meeting demand is a long way off.


http://fortune.com/...hlon-private-equity/


"Messick sees room for three times as many North American races, four times as many European events and a big push in South America. Ironman is most at the saturation point in New Zealand and Australia, two key markets for the company."

So in your mind, that moment was Mike Reilly's. He is Taylor Swift, young, white and innocent. Ray (Kanye West) and his check (Kanye's big black angry penis), stole that moment from Mike. Fascinating thought process.

Dang, got the impression from your blog you were a bit brighter than this. Ok, here goes...

TV networks and big music companies = WTC
Taylor Swift = athletes participating
Kanye West = you

TV networks (WTC) pay a boatload of cash to host an event and reward the people they choose to in the way they like.
Taylor Swift (athletes) choose to attend knowing what they may, or may not, walk away with.
Kanye West (you) choose to steal the spotlight so you can express disdain toward the very organizations hosting the event and are then shocked when someone says you could have handled that better.

Stick with your shepherd. You'll do better.

I've never communicated with Bob.

No athletes were upstaged by this stunt. It was a victim-less crime. There wasn't a Taylor Swift. Clever insults above, but a vapid argument. You seem aligned with the establishment. I wish you all the best with that. You're a WTC fanboy wolf. HOWL!!!!

Besides IMLP, last Sunday was IM Canada, a race with a $75k pro prize purse that paid 8 deep. We had 8 male pro finishers and 7 female pro finishers. Every pro finisher got a check. And for the women, there was no one to give the 8th place check to.

You want it back? I thought that the idea was to give it away.

Wolves don't lose sleep over the opinions of sheep.

I think miniature golf might have a similar payout to WTC triathlon, http://www.dpalumni.com/...ig-in-miniature-golf

Good news is that at least laser tag hasn't surpassed it.

Besides IMLP, last Sunday was IM Canada, a race with a $75k pro prize purse that paid 8 deep. We had 8 male pro finishers and 7 female pro finishers. Every pro finisher got a check. And for the women, there was no one to give the 8th place check to.

Dev, I agree with most of your points, not every race can have a large prize purse. Interesting how no one is mentioning the 125k prize purse in Tremblant in 3 weeks...http://www.usatriathlon.org/~/media/e412b23818084064997c454a7f1e5cc0.ashx

Will be interesting to see what they roll out next. What I'm hearing is less races with a pro purse and points. So a lot of amateur only IM's. My guess is that this may make 2nd tier pros start looking for other options. They are out there, but a lot of pros seem to be ignoring them with the idea that they have some shot at Kona. The truth is maybe 20 of the 50 have a shot at top 10 and maybe 4-5 have a shot to win. Otherwise it is just a very expensive training vacation for the rest of them.

Agree, big PR blunder here. If 'CEOIronman' really is Andrew M, he has made a very big mistake by not taking this opportunity to openly engage with his customers. Some savy and early PR work could have taken the thunder completely away from the famous trio DarkMark, RealStarky and Pay10Deep. Instead they have given Starky a platform and many followers.

However in saying this, IMLP continue to fill in hours.. so the masses really don't care, they just want their IM bucket list completed and tattoo. Amusing sideshow to sit back and watch here and on twitter.

The 'IM VP chalk' email thread was quite shocking and will definitely have an impact on my product choice going fwd. Not that I won't do another IM branded race, just that I will consider alternatives. Not that it really matters.

Is that an IM tattoo I see in your nice pics?

Explain to me then why pros would chose Lake Placid over Tremblant knowing 12 months in advance what the price purse is. Options are there....

Explain to me then why pros would chose Lake Placid over Tremblant knowing 12 months in advance what the price purse is. Options are there....

Explain to me then why pros would chose Lake Placid over Tremblant knowing 12 months in advance what the price purse is. Options are there....

A large part of the awesome experience of these events is the magnitude. Lots of participants mean lots of spectators and a generally spectacular show.

Here is my view. We don't need pros in every Mdot race, just like we don't need pros in every local 10K race. The local 10k or local marathon can run just fine without a pro field.

On Sunday something like 4500 athletes raced between IMLP and Whistler. I am hearing a lot of people complaining on this thread, but i would not take that as a reflection of what is really going on in the market. Sure, WTC can do many things to improve and I'm the first one to tell you where, why and provide you a "how" on the means to improvement.

Andrew, a better response to this entire realstarky pro uproar would be a roll up of the entire year's WTC prize purse for the year. My understanding is that overall prize purse is bigger than it has ever been and WTC keeps these prize purses in Tier 3 level pro events like LP or Whistler to give up and coming pros a chance to earn a living. I am not an idiot and also realize that having a pro field is part of your overall "user experience", so it is not purely charity.

You feel you need some type of a pro field at every event. To that one i say you don't. Like Marcag said, when we go to Kona or 70.3 World's I want to see a pro field, but I don't care at Syracuse, Galveston or Whistler (it was cool seeming Marino crush that bike course, but it really would not change my user experience if he or any of the pros were there or not).

It really does not matter how big WTC gets in terms of top line revenue, no one deserves any piece of it other than those in the company that puts it on and its shareholders (I come from the business world and get it). So all this complaining that WTC make a pile of revenue so pros deserve more makes no sense.

I feel you would be better served nuking the pro field from most of your "local events" that are the equivalent of every medium size city marathon in North America. They draw 10,000 racers with no professional runners ,because runners just want to do a marathon. Likewise triathletes, just want to do an Ironman.

Take your total prize money and put it in 5-7 MAJORS world wide (Kona, Frankfurt, Melbourne, Arizona, Nice, one of Tremblant/LP/Cour d'Alene, Taupo)...Also make each of these MAJORS 125 slot Kona qualifiers. Get rid of the Kona slots from minor races and just make them qualifiers for the MAJORs instead. Make the majors KQ points heavy for pros. Continue to offer some KQ points for any pros that want to race the minors for experience or podiums that they can leverage with sponsors (which is effectively the scenario today anyway) and also offer podium guys at the minors a guaranteed invite to the majors.

Basically now you have a minor league and a Major league. Real pay at the majors where the pro race is packaged up and marketed. More competition for amateurs at the majors where there is more depth of Kona slots compared to the minors. Perhaps use the age group points system (well a modified version of it...it is currently flawed in some ways) to award year end KQ slots from points accrued by non KQ performance at majors plus points accrued at minors. That way the minors offer path to Kona too, but your best shot is at a major.

In any case I personally feel that there is now plenty of pro prize money and opportunity to earn a living. You just happen to have it spread out between too many races. The competitive model in our sport (Ironman) is broken both from pro prize money allocation and amateur Kona slot allocation. You should just concentrate it and stop diluting it across so many events. That's the root of the problem. Keep many events as it gives us all many opportunities to race, but don't make them all the same in terms of prizes.

PS: To all the guys hating on Messick, this is also the same guy that offered the road to Kona to 12x finishers who are not 'fast enough'. We don't need to like everything he does, but that was one of the first things he did at the helm. As a marketing guy, i would have suggested to him to steer clear of a response on ST, but he's not exactly like your normal Fortune 500 CEO and is much more accessible. In reality, WTC is a fairly small company in terms of revenue, which just happens to have a crazy passionate customer base that feels they own the product of the company as much as the company itself. I can't think of that many companies where the customers are this strongly vested in every breath of a company's executives.

I think he's a positive dude. With deep roots in the most basic "why" of endurance sports and equally deep roots within the corporate world. I think a TRS / Babbitt competitor radio podcast could be pretty amazing. Funny, insightful and potentially constructive. //

Ya Bob could be considered the Pope of triathlon. He has been around since forever, been knee deep in every decision every made about the sport, and he has empathy for all sides that seem to be at odds here. IF he had any kind of holding back, or leaning towards because he was working for the man these past years, i never saw it, and no that he no longer works for the man, he is free to let his freak flag fly!!!


I would love to hear an interview with TRS and Bob, and bet he would love to do it.

Because if you're a new guy/ gal in the sport, you have a better chance at winning some cash, any cash, if less of the big guns show up. Especially when the purse pays only 7 or 8 deep and the lower peeps on getting a check barely make enough to cover gas money, food, and lodging. If you're the 8th place guy/ gal at the IMMT, you get (what?) $2000. Let's say you have the capability to do this once a month, which equates to $24,000 a year before taxes, or near the poverty line if you have any children. And, that's for the people who actually get paid and are good enough to get 8th place in 12 races throughout the year. And don't destroy themselves in the process.

Here's what needs explaining to me:
Why would 15 of the top pros even show up to IMMT knowing that half of them won't make a dime from their efforts?

I can't imagine being a new pro and heading out to a race that I trained my ass off for many months and years with a high probability that I won't get any money or on the outside chance that I did win something it'll barely be enough to pay my mortgage. I think the better solution for the pros is cutting the purse from several of the events, pooling the resources, paying more, to a deeper field.

Explain to me then why pros would chose Lake Placid over Tremblant knowing 12 months in advance what the price purse is. Options are there....

For a World Championship, it's not really very much money.

It's equal to 7% of the Darts World Championship, which offers ~$1.7 million as its prize purse.

It's also less than Horseshoe pitching and a bunch of other random sports with a much smaller participation market.

Of course, this is what happens when a private company is charged with 'developing' the sport.

Pretty sure this isn't a bar in LP....

https://twitter.com/...s/495008056447492096

These threads are always very interesting to observe. The peanut gallery can really criticize a company that has had phenomenal success under the current leadership. Criticize (not you specifically, but but the ST community at large) all you want, but they deliver a great product that satisfies a growing customer base better than anyone else in the industry, which is why they continue to be so successful from a business point of view.
-

That check shows this guy got paid, by fans, when WTC wouldnt do it's job. It didnt require and verbal or direct interruptions and im sure had there been a sprint to the line for 7th TRS would not have handed him the check til after.

Wolves don't lose sleep over the opinions of sheep.

For the record, Ray Bothelo's very nice, very excited girlfriend was right there when we handed him the check, which he gladly accepted and carried over the line. In fact, she may have been the one to physically hand it to him. She definitely was the one who got his attention.

anyone know what the last place pro at a PGA event or pro bowling event makes? Just wondering.

triathlon is a highly physically taxing sport. golf, tennis, bowling,baseball are not.

Well said! I would tend to agree, but us mere mortal AG's would be hard pressed to race a minor league race to qualify for the majors in hopes of qualifying for the championship race. Depending on the timing of races, you're talking about doing 3 Ironman's in a year (to qualify and get to Kona). That would be tough and would require a fair bit of extra $ and travel.

You, Marc and myself are on the same page with respect to cutting the prize money a variety of smaller events and pooling them and paying deeper.

The pros should unionize. They currently have no leverage. If they get organized they could bargain. Imagine an October where every pro got sick on race morning. It would take huge balls but it would certainly require a response.

anyone know what the last place pro at a PGA event or pro bowling event makes? Just wondering.

triathlon is a highly physically taxing sport. golf, tennis, bowling,baseball are not.

Dev,

You make lots of good suggestions here, as you always do. But I'm curious why you continue to make them to an organization whose ceo has just come here and said he doesn't give a rip what his customers suggest.

It's clear to me that fixing this system will have to be done outside the scope of wtc's involvement. They currently have control of the race most-recognized as the world championship, so they have the power to call the shots. And they're clearly not willing to share any of that power.

To fix the system, we need another race to become the most important race in triathlon; one that's run by a company that's interested in the long term health of the sport, not just their bottom line.

Because he's completely invested in the WTC and has proven it repeatedly. He's a good guy but anything he says on the subject has to be taken with a grain of salt because of his ties there. Kinda like anything Rapp says on the subject should be ignored with the way he's proven he'll say anything for a paycheck.

triathlon is a highly physically taxing sport. golf, tennis, bowling,baseball are not.

Because he's completely invested in the WTC and has proven it repeatedly. He's a good guy but anything he says on the subject has to be taken with a grain of salt because of his ties there. Kinda like anything Rapp says on the subject should be ignored with the way he's proven he'll say anything for a paycheck.

Completely disagree. Rapp has completely lost my respect over the years with his continued use of his position on this forum to trash products other than his own sponsors. His continued interactions on twitter over the past few days just go to further demonstrate his status as a corporate shill. Ben Greenfield with a Ivy League degree.

Tennis isn't a highly physical taxing sport??? What planet are you from?

I havent read as much of that as I should have it seems. I'll watch with a critical eye towards that. I dont remember seeing him knock others. I have seen him push his sponsors in a comparative fashion, but otherwise nothing directly hitting another product.

You've never played golf or tennis at a competitive level, have you?

John

Here is my view. We don't need pros in every Mdot race, just like we don't need pros in every local 10K race. The local 10k or local marathon can run just fine without a pro field.

On Sunday something like 4500 athletes raced between IMLP and Whistler. I am hearing a lot of people complaining on this thread, but i would not take that as a reflection of what is really going on in the market. Sure, WTC can do many things to improve and I'm the first one to tell you where, why and provide you a "how" on the means to improvement.

Andrew, a better response to this entire realstarky pro uproar would be a roll up of the entire year's WTC prize purse for the year. My understanding is that overall prize purse is bigger than it has ever been and WTC keeps these prize purses in Tier 3 level pro events like LP or Whistler to give up and coming pros a chance to earn a living. I am not an idiot and also realize that having a pro field is part of your overall "user experience", so it is not purely charity.

You feel you need some type of a pro field at every event. To that one i say you don't. Like Marcag said, when we go to Kona or 70.3 World's I want to see a pro field, but I don't care at Syracuse, Galveston or Whistler (it was cool seeming Marino crush that bike course, but it really would not change my user experience if he or any of the pros were there or not).

It really does not matter how big WTC gets in terms of top line revenue, no one deserves any piece of it other than those in the company that puts it on and its shareholders (I come from the business world and get it). So all this complaining that WTC make a pile of revenue so pros deserve more makes no sense.

I feel you would be better served nuking the pro field from most of your "local events" that are the equivalent of every medium size city marathon in North America. They draw 10,000 racers with no professional runners ,because runners just want to do a marathon. Likewise triathletes, just want to do an Ironman.

Take your total prize money and put it in 5-7 MAJORS world wide (Kona, Frankfurt, Melbourne, Arizona, Nice, one of Tremblant/LP/Cour d'Alene, Taupo)...Also make each of these MAJORS 125 slot Kona qualifiers. Get rid of the Kona slots from minor races and just make them qualifiers for the MAJORs instead. Make the majors KQ points heavy for pros. Continue to offer some KQ points for any pros that want to race the minors for experience or podiums that they can leverage with sponsors (which is effectively the scenario today anyway) and also offer podium guys at the minors a guaranteed invite to the majors.

Basically now you have a minor league and a Major league. Real pay at the majors where the pro race is packaged up and marketed. More competition for amateurs at the majors where there is more depth of Kona slots compared to the minors. Perhaps use the age group points system (well a modified version of it...it is currently flawed in some ways) to award year end KQ slots from points accrued by non KQ performance at majors plus points accrued at minors. That way the minors offer path to Kona too, but your best shot is at a major.

In any case I personally feel that there is now plenty of pro prize money and opportunity to earn a living. You just happen to have it spread out between too many races. The competitive model in our sport (Ironman) is broken both from pro prize money allocation and amateur Kona slot allocation. You should just concentrate it and stop diluting it across so many events. That's the root of the problem. Keep many events as it gives us all many opportunities to race, but don't make them all the same in terms of prizes.

PS: To all the guys hating on Messick, this is also the same guy that offered the road to Kona to 12x finishers who are not 'fast enough'. We don't need to like everything he does, but that was one of the first things he did at the helm. As a marketing guy, i would have suggested to him to steer clear of a response on ST, but he's not exactly like your normal Fortune 500 CEO and is much more accessible. In reality, WTC is a fairly small company in terms of revenue, which just happens to have a crazy passionate customer base that feels they own the product of the company as much as the company itself. I can't think of that many companies where the customers are this strongly vested in every breath of a company's executives.

I think there are 4 or 5 different discussions going on now?

i guess golf is physically taxing when you are this guys size and have to walk 10 feet to your golf cart.

http://espn.go.com/...66/mark-calcavecchia

Suppose WTC's growth puts out of business events like John Salt's, SavageMan, Tupper Lake, Mooseman, and many others like it. Is WTC still great for your sport? Yes, WTC giveth, but they also taketh away, and I'm not just talking about cash from your wallet.

^^ This. It is not just that WTC puts on good races that determines if they are good for the sport. It is how they affect the sport that determines that.

Dev brought up the Road to Kona program "To all the guys hating on Messick, this is also the same guy that offered the road to Kona to 12x finishers who are not 'fast enough'. We don't need to like everything he does, but that was one of the first things he did at the helm."

Call me cynical , but this is not about being nice to loyal customers (although it might have a side benefit for some), this is about quashing competition. This is their way of convincing the people who have no chance of qualifying for Kona to still keep doing IM races instead of Challenge, Rev3, Beach2Battleship, Mooseman etc. If there is no chance of people getting into Kona, there is no reason to solely do WTC events. Messick has also stated that there is room at Kona for more athletes, but the issue is how many of the same speed come out of the water at the same time and ride at the same time. So they can fill in slower times of the race and convince people to not race their competition's races for essentially no additional cost. If memory serves me correct, it was also timed roughly along with Rev3's big money entrance into the race scene with big large scale events

I see this as similar to the Pro points system which really emphasizes that the pros race almost exclusively at WTC events. They might not want (or feel the need/economic incentive) to pay the pros more, but they apparently need them at Kona and want them focusing on Kona and WTC events to keep their self proclaimed 'World Championship" relevant and keep it as their draw for all the bucket listers.

If I was an investor, I'd love them for this, but that hardly is the same as "being good for the sport"

Also, saying that what WTC has done in the past has been good for the sport (it certainly would not be where it is without IM and Kona) does not mean that what they are doing now is still good for the sport.

^^ This. It is not just that WTC puts on good races that determines if they are good for the sport. It is how they affect the sport that determines that.

Dev brought up the Road to Kona program "To all the guys hating on Messick, this is also the same guy that offered the road to Kona to 12x finishers who are not 'fast enough'. We don't need to like everything he does, but that was one of the first things he did at the helm."

Call me cynical , but this is not about being nice to loyal customers (although it might have a side benefit for some), this is about quashing competition. This is their way of convincing the people who have no chance of qualifying for Kona to still keep doing IM races instead of Challenge, Rev3, Beach2Battleship, Mooseman etc. If there is no chance of people getting into Kona, there is no reason to solely do WTC events. Messick has also stated that there is room at Kona for more athletes, but the issue is how many of the same speed come out of the water at the same time and ride at the same time. So they can fill in slower times of the race and convince people to not race their competition's races for essentially no additional cost. If memory serves me correct, it was also timed roughly along with Rev3's big money entrance into the race scene with big large scale events

I see this as similar to the Pro points system which really emphasizes that the pros race almost exclusively at WTC events. They might not want (or feel the need/economic incentive) to pay the pros more, but they apparently need them at Kona and want them focusing on Kona and WTC events to keep their self proclaimed 'World Championship" relevant and keep it as their draw for all the bucket listers.

If I was an investor, I'd love them for this, but that hardly is the same as "being good for the sport"

Also, saying that what WTC has done in the past has been good for the sport (it certainly would not be where it is without IM and Kona) does not mean that what they are doing now is still good for the sport.

You want it back? I thought that the idea was to give it away.

Well... if you have Lake Placid, Whistler, Zurich and some 70.3 the same day... it's not surprising to see a real weak field at Lake Placid... and it's not helping the sport. Even more when there is no more live webcast... so for sure, Pro are desperate to get exposure (Kona).

WTC should copy the ITU model.
You start at continental cup (small money) to go world cup (medium money) to world serie (big money).
You can enter a race only if you have enough points, end of the story.

Over the past few weeks, hundreds of us have given thoughtful and serious discussion about this issue because we love the sport and we care about its future. And your response is to dismiss all of that with a couple of jokes and then leave?

You fucking arrogant prick.

Go back to running your company into the ground; it is a scourge on triathlon and you don't deserve a role in the sport. I've not only done my last wtc race, but am also certain you've just stoked a fire you're not going to put out.

Dev brought up the Road to Kona program "To all the guys hating on Messick, this is also the same guy that offered the road to Kona to 12x finishers who are not 'fast enough'. We don't need to like everything he does, but that was one of the first things he did at the helm."

Call me cynical , but this is not about being nice to loyal customers (although it might have a side benefit for some), this is about quashing competition. This is their way of convincing the people who have no chance of qualifying for Kona to still keep doing IM races instead of Challenge, Rev3, Beach2Battleship, Mooseman etc. If there is no chance of people getting into Kona, there is no reason to solely do WTC events. Messick has also stated that there is room at Kona for more athletes, but the issue is how many of the same speed come out of the water at the same time and ride at the same time. So they can fill in slower times of the race and convince people to not race their competition's races for essentially no additional cost. If memory serves me correct, it was also timed roughly along with Rev3's big money entrance into the race scene with big large scale events

Jordan and I round about talked along these lines in Calgary. I think that ITU has a really good system for qualification as well as prize money. So, I think that WTC should start with that model even though I do not think that is the inclination. These are my general comments, likely to show up in a blog at one point. WTC, in part, has allowed us to be professional triathletes for the better part of 6-8 years. I've posted before that I am about triathlon, and I'm not WTC vs. Rev3 vs. Challenge. And, further to show how WTC has a role in a lot of pro lives, our two title sponsors have been indirectly because of the IM Brand. I coached before I was a pro, so I have maintained that and it has provided more 'dependable' income. So, regarding your above comments, this is my opinion.

- ITU has a more equitable and deeper prize money structure. i am in favor of this simply because most pros who have sponsorship also have a bonus structure that takes care of them for wins. So, a $25k for 1st at IMMT and a $12.5k for 2nd with money ending at 8th might be $12.5k for 1st with money going to 20th under an ITU type structure. While this is better for more athletes, I know that a lot of the top athletes are not in favor of this. But, the upside of ITU is also that there is a real payout to a lot of athletes based on season ending rankings as part of their bonus pool. That's cool.

- I think that the Conti, World Cup, World Triathlon, Grand Finale system is a good one. That is kind of how WTC sets things up now, but there is no rhyme nor reason to how athletes sign up for races. See my above for bonuses to get at least an idea of why some headliners are at small races. But, if there were a way to either a) assign a quality of field multiplier to events or b) make sure 'developmental' athletes and 'headliner' athletes are not competing at smaller races it would never work. Again, the system as it is now is made that way.

- BIG prize money is needed. No one really gives a rats @$$ about who wins a $25k race. I might, some people on this board might, sponsors might. And maybe a $25k IM should 'only' be for certain athletes. But then the race director gets pissed because his race gets shorted headliners. Is that better than NO pro field at all? I don't know. BUT, Kona is our flagship. It 'only' has $650k TOTAL. Not for the win, but for the entire race. $650k is NOT on any major media outlet period. BIG money races or Bigger money at races or for first kind of legitimizes the sport.

But again, we've got 2 pro ambassadors and a bunch of other loose cannons running around! Herding cats.

Sometimes, I have the feeling that Ironman don't want to gain in popularity, they are just searching for upper class...
__ //

What they want is for you and brandon and jordan and every other pro to keep going to their races for peanuts and points. And so far it is working beautifully. The upper class will keep coming as long as their races have some juice, so keep selling them your juice for those precious points and they will be quite happy..