Slowman wrote:
iron_mike wrote:
Slowman wrote:
if you gave me the chance, i'd take nice over kona. yes, there is "mythology" around kona but, in fact, that place is wanting as a race location for many reasons. one of those reasons is that if you live in europe, or the eastern half of the US, or africa, or most of south america - in order words, if you live in 2/3 to 3/4 of the IM service area - nice is a much more convenient venue. beyond that...
nice is a better course. it's not a valid WC if it's only contested in 1 place, and it never has been valid prior to now because of that. you still get kona every other year for those who worship the myth.
about that mythology. it seems to me the legacy of a place is of value to you when you want it to be, but not when you don't. if there is 1 place worldwide that represents the other half of triathlon's ultradistance roots it's either roth or it's nice.
finally, if i'm IM i'm very happy to have a foot outside of kona jail. yes, i was in nice in the old days. 4 times. but i was at the first ever kona event, racing there, and have been to kona 8 times for each time i was in nice. kona is kona by accident. a bunch of navy guys in honolulu decided to hold an event. it outgrew honolulu but could not be produced (by the race's producers) outside of hawaii. so it ended up on the barren coast of a barren island. fine. it's pretty much similar to unbound gravel. iffy location but there's a reason why it ended up there. nice is not a default location. it's a thought-out location. it's the place you put a WC if you have any place in the world to put one and you have the luxury to choose.
messick negotiated what seemed to me a workaround that should please everyone. if you think it should only be kona, okay, but over the last 30 of those 40 years i've heard from so many europeans who are just sick of the expense and time needed to take that trip. for those europeans who want to make that trip nevertheless, messick retained for you that opportunity, just, every second year.
so, bitch if you must, but at least acknowledge that there's a good faith argument made in favor of the current arrangement.
on top of all this, i'm wondering if the expo/circus around Nice will be better than kona.
example: i live in zurich. if i ran a tri company, getting myself and some reps, some product, our standees, etc., all the way to kona, would be a huge expense. are more complicated still if we wanted to make sales. but Nice? we could fill a van or two with stuff and drive there
really easily from zurich for a few tanks of gas. easy peasy. accommodations are plentiful and cheap. nobody in the EU/schengen area needs any visas. the waterfront area in Nice is massive and if IM want to make it a real carnival there's potential.
i have been an remain a harsh critic of IM's expo. in fact, of IM's sales team and it's whole approach to partnerships. the people in charge of IM's sales and team have not, in the main, to my knowledge been dedicated multisport athletes, so, they see the expo as simply a property to be monetized. for example, let's say IM could be sold as a race contested by 75 well-heeled AGers a quarter-mil each. yes, that's a cheaper race to produce. fewer volunteers. fewer plastic cups for water. but the same revenue. those just looking at the numbers would take that deal. but you'd miss the grandeur of it. you'd miss the feeling of shared experience. it seems to me just as an observer this is how IM's sales team views its expo.
To your point:
Rock n Roll SLC is $5500 for a 20x20
UTMB Snowbird, UT is $2200 for a 20x20
70.3 Jones Beach, NY is $4300 for a 20x20
IM Chattanooga, TN is $7800 for a 20x20
70.3 Indian Wells, CA is $4700 for a 20x20
Kona is $20,000 for a 20x20
~10x20 in Worlds Lahti is 9000€
~15x15 in IM WC Nice is 10,000€
The varying prices in each location suggest to me Ironman has some formula based on square footage available and number of attendees?
Either way the prices, while understandable from one perspective* are unprofitable for most I assume.
* it's costly to hire a guy to map out vendor areas, run a booking website, deal with vendor questions, shipping/setup coordination and inevitable complaints, etc etc. So you can't blame IM for wanting to cover those costs and then build a margin into it.
But it does ruin the "show" to some degree. All that said, it's a positive thing for IM and all its sponsors to have a highly committed ecosystem of companies who want IM to succeed and are actively promoting it to their customers and making it part of their marketing message.
So breaking even on servicing those vendors might be worth it from a growth strategy.