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