Yes and so my greater point was that whether it's an "union" strike or just all what 80 Kona pros "independently" deciding to strike, those guys on strike aren't always going to see the direct benefit of it. Oh sure some of them will, but some of them on the fringe of their career, what incentive is it to stike? For the "betterment" of the sport, yet no one before them looked after them. So when your in a sport with pretty much zero money, you ain't getting the group to bond together and make a decision- ESPECIALLY this kind of decision that most assuredly will affect careers.

So in a sport like triathlon they are in a might big pinch, and so as monty said everyone knows they cant/wont ever strike. I think they did what once in the mid 80's, and bravo to them for doing that (monty probaly knows the details I believe it had somehting to do with Kona vs Nice as being the 2 big super power races).


And the only reason why unions have something more than "i'm fast give me dollars" is because of media....that's the only reason why sports make the big bucks....TV/media paying the sport/players to broadcast your events.

---

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

Well then Ironman broadcast rights must be in the tank if they're on Facebook live.

Overall sports sponsorship rights and broadcast rights revenues are due for a course correction downward. Since that is what determines salaries of athletes...that will probably get a correction too.

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

It's not going to be the on site crowds that sell imo. I was there in Charlotte MLT 2017 and Charlotte MLT 2018. 2017 I swear to god had 10 people at that race that werent related to an athlete. 10 just random fans, every other person was there was associated as an parent/significant other/coach/friend. 2018 had a large crowd, but I honestly say that the reason why it had more draw was because one of the local colleges (Queen's Uni in Charlotte) has like 40 team members and all those said parents of those 40 athletes came in and "supported" the race. So it had a much stronger crowd presence, but it was still relatively ehh, but the online presence really kicked up a notch.

MLT did a smart thing by bringing in Barrie Shepley to announce this years races, and while likely not making all htat much money, this is likely a great "giving back" opportunity for him. Really good commentary from him and support this year.

The FB live video drew 561k viewers (it looks like the previous 3 race had around 160k viewers), I believe for the final championship that included Vincent Luis. MLT is a super smaller scale than SL, but SL is backed by a Russian billionare, MLT is backed by a regular joe (Daniel Cassidy). MLT is going to have a much harder hill to climb, but imo is doing it. Just in the year I've seen better racing and more sponsors on board. SL and MLT invest in the athletes with both good prize money, and travel stipends.

So you ask, why does MLT or SL give back to the athletes so much that WTC doesnt? Because they need the pros. WTC doesnt need the pros like those race organizations do. And that's why I think short course has the best opportunity to make it long term as a "race organization" and pro money maker.


ETA: The key imo for onsite viewers is to create an "party" atmosphere with tons of beer trucks, tons of food and free viewing of the race. Maybe "VIP" gets you something but dont charge to be on site, but make your money from the party style atmosphere, etc.

---

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

I'd take that bet. WTC obviously realizes that Allen and Scott bring $ to WTC because you see them at the finish line of Kona every year wearing IM branded stuff. I saw them at the finish line of 70.3 Worlds this year and I assume WTC is paying them to be there and at the AWA banquet in Kona this week.

I bet WTC invited all former pro winners to Kona this year for the 40th anniversary and paid for their lodging and maybe their travel expenses. I see that DeBoom, Molina and Baker are in town and they don't normally attend every year.

Take them away from Kona and 70.3 Worlds (where the tri geekdom is higher) and I'd be happy to be wrong, but I'm pretty positive I wouldn't be.

---

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

The tri geek quotient at every WTC IM in the U.S. is high enough that 10 participants would recognize Mark Allen. A WTC 70.3 in the U.S. might be a different story.

Natascha Badmann was a mom when she won in Kona, so that has already been done. Granted, the kid was 13 when she won for the first time.

I'm still doubtful. Sorry.

And you're missing the point in re: why a mom winning now would be more important than it has been in the past. Hint: it has an awful lot to do with a WTC initiative.

---

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

What iniative is that? That if a preggo mom can train, so can you?

---

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

You don't think a massive marketing campaign would come out with Women For Tri if say, Kessler or Carfrae wins? Which will finally prick the bubble on this whole "toughest endurance race on the planet" marketing and move long-course triathlon into a "hey, yes, you too can do this" position?

Because I know which of those leads to more race entries, product sales, and overall health of the sport...and it's not the way we've always done it.

---

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

No I dont think that does anything good or bad. I dont think a mom winning Kona moves the market for the VERY reason you keep saying no one knows about Mark Allen. Couch potatoes dont know the difference between Ryf and Rennie....even if IM can now market that "hey preggo mom is the fastest" in the world now and so it's going to create a revolution in the fitness industry.



I mean of course WTC would market it, I just think if you dont think WTC has already pricked that whole "anyone can do IM" we havent been following the same sport the last 15 or so years.


ETA: The health of the sport has really nothing to do with what WTC can do to enhance it imo. Granted IM is the lifeblood of the sport/industry but they imo can't do anytihng to "improve" it, in fact de-emphasisying it likely would create far better overall triathlon health than greater emphasis on the female sector to turn to IM triathlon. Because what I see is that newbies don't focus on the "correct" pathways, they fixate on the quickest path to getting to an IM, at the expense of their own development be damned...and that comes from the "I just want to finish" mindset and thus they want to quickest path possible to doing IM.

---

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

I got it. I predicted, i.e. guessed, in another recent thread that in 10 years women would outnumber men in short-course tri fields.

You should have used other triathletes to make your point. If Mark or Dave walked into the expo of ANY Ironman anywhere they would be mobbed by adoring admirers within minutes. I think you would see this if they walked into most marathon expos as well. If you had used Patrick Lange, Faris Al Sultan, or Frederick Van Lierde maybe would have agreed with you. Dave and Mark? Nope: wrong.

---

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

I really don't think they've even begun to scratch the surface of what they could do with their initiatives between the Foundation, Women For Tri, Time to Tri, and now with Rock n Roll being under the event portfolio. We've got miles to go there.

And yes, a professional female mom (preferably from the US or Canada) will wind up doing a much broader media tour than, say, a Ryf or a Lange win. Personality helps. Stories help. You know this.

WTC is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. They know that the health of smaller events directly impacts their registrations at larger ones down the road.

---

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

WTC is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. They know that the health of smaller events directly impacts their registrations at larger ones down the road.

----------

Do they?

ETA: Or as a big business they are far more centered on their race organization and profit there, do they have that "long term" viewpoint? Idk, I'm not sure how to decide that either way......I just know that WTC is out for WTC events first and foremost at the expense of other local organization/events for most of their races. And I'm not saying that is a bad move for WTC, because they after all are a huge business that needs to make a ton of money to be profitable, so I would think they are doing what is best for them.

---

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

You missed out on some really healthy dialogue out at TBI this year and the direction WTC is trying to take - particularly with smaller race productions that play in the sprint/Olympic sandbox.

---

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

The other race companies coming in the sport have not offered prizes higher than WTC, and the bonuses from sponsors have always been heavily linked to WTC races so it's hard for a PRO to switch. Challenge doesn't offer very good prize money (apart for the Championship race in Samorin and Roth), and I plan to race in the Championship for that reason.
To talk about the impact of Pro's, I am convinced Age Group participation would be much lower without a pro field. For example, a few years ago, Rev3 Quassy lost 20% of entries the couple years they didn't have a PRO field, and the very year Pro's came back, participation was on a strong rise. I believe it would be the same for Ironman, but I don't have any specific numbers on hand.

Rudy, to be frank, to associate the decline in Rev3 participation with the professional field is really misguided at best. Decline in Rev3 participation started before the pullback in professional prize purses, and was on the rebound after nixing the pro field. It also shows a lack of understanding in the financials of the situation - a $75,000 prize purse requires a significant increase in athlete participation well beyond 20% in order to offset the cost. Numbers alone don't matter. Profitable numbers matter.

Bluntly: have you ever negotiated with one of your sponsors to see if they would pay sponsor bonuses at non-WTC events? Because I've seen it happen, and I've seen some big companies decide "you know what, if it's important to the athlete, then it's important to us." But it requires you to do the work.

---

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

Bluntly: have you ever negotiated with one of your sponsors to see if they would pay sponsor bonuses at non-WTC events? Because I've seen it happen, and I've seen some big companies decide "you know what, if it's important to the athlete, then it's important to us." But it requires you to do the work.

-----

I've seen it happen the opposite. Athletes who were sponsored by one of Rev 3's biggest sponsors were told it wouldn't give sponsor bonuses to events that said sponsor sponsored- would only go with WTC races. If that's not weird, I dont know what it, but that's what they told the athletes.

Now maybe they didn't "negotiate" back enough, but I just find something about that is very odd.

---

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

I saw that, too. But I also saw some other things happen with other brands that had originally insisted they would only pay WTC bonus, and wound up deciding to pay bonus at Rev3 events. Some argued slightly more convincingly than others...

---

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

So if the answer is they didnt try "hard enough" fair enough. I just find it very weird that my sponsor sponsors a race, and if i choose to do said race, they won't consider that a bonus worthy event- kinda makes you wonder why in the hell the sponsor was sponsoring the race.

---

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

I think if you haven't at least tried to negotiate or counter-offer the original proposal, you haven't tried hard enough.

---

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

I was just wondering what the atmosphere was. The reality is that you need either a paying customer or a sponsor that fronts a bunch of cash.

I was interested in going to the Tempe event, because hey go see some pros. But I was in Waco that weekend and there was like no press about it.

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

The atmosphere was so so was again made up mostly of Queens Uni parents/athletes.

I don’t think your ever going to get tri “paying customers” on site cus they’ll just skip that area of venue and go where it’s free. I’ve seen it happen at itu worlds all the time.

What they must absolutely do imo:
-make sure online splits are part of broadcast and/or live tracker site.
-engage local community.

---

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

Festival with beer trucks and food vendors is probably the way forward...beer is where the money will be made of course.

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

This is it. The race on the calendar that generates the most excitement is Kona.

ITU, MLT, SLT races are for triathlon wonks.
For every other triathlete, the race that matters most is Kona.
Hell, I don't even do much triathlon anymore, but I like to watch Kona.

Until a bigger race comes along to replace Kona, WTC can fuck over the pros as much as they damn well please.