Alcatraz participation dropped 416 people 2016 vs 2015

There were 1395 finishers in 2016 vs 1811 in 2015, and also less teams and relays.

Clearly the price increase was a total bone head move on their part.

Here is my question- did anyone NOT get in to the lottery? I had been trying for 3 years, I did the race in 15, got in in 16 but I did do it because of their greedy stupidity.

I got in the second round of the lottery as well as numerous emails begging to register.

I would love to hear if anyone did not get in?

If this was their yield they are screwed because they will have diminishing returns from now on out. Once people check the bucket list I dont see a lot of repeat business for paying that price year after year.

It will be interesting to see if they drop the price for 2017. I don’t follow the Escape very closely but do you know what the total registration revenue (excluding DNS/DNF) for the last two years is calculated as:

1811 x 2015 Registration price = ?
1395 x 2016 Registration price = ?

If the delta is slightly negative or positive, they might just hold to the 2016 price for a few years and let inflation devalue it.

It will be interesting to see if they drop the price for 2017. I don’t follow the Escape very closely but do you know what the total registration revenue (excluding DNS/DNF) for the last two years is calculated as:

1811 x 2015 Registration price = ?
1395 x 2016 Registration price = ?

If the delta is slightly negative or positive, they might just hold to the 2016 price for a few years and let inflation devalue it.

2015 was $425 with lottery entry

Actually, everyone that DNS and DNF also pad that. This year appears to be about 25 DNFs,

I paid $425 in 2015, this year it was $750.

1811 x $425 = $769,675
1395 x $750 = $1,046,250

Seems like they made a good business choice and managed to get a (presumably) less crowded course at the same time! :slight_smile:

Of course finisher numbers don’t tell the whole story.

Edited to add in the $25 for the lottery.

Yeah, not a bone headed business move at all.
Revenue increased significantly with assumed slightly lower costs.
(ie 416 less goody bags, numbers etc)

I paid $400 in 2015, this year it was $750.

1811 x $400 = $724,400
1395 x $750 = $1,046,250

Seems like they made a good business choice and managed to get a (presumably) less crowded course at the same time! :slight_smile:

Of course finisher numbers don’t tell the whole story.

The point is not that they made more money, the point is that my guess is that they had to open up the lottery to way more registrants and even doing so acheived a lower yield. There are only so many people who would pay that price year after year.

I guess I see what they are doing as a short term strategy, especially in the context of declining participation rates in triathlon. Maybe IMG is trying to flip this burger.

I would like to hear if anyone on slowtwitch registered for the lottery in 2016 and did not get offered a spot.

Spot-on. Simple economics. At a fixed supply, increase price until demand decreases. Since many triathletes seem to have almost unlimited funds to spend on this sport, they still made more money.

Dick move for the sport as a whole, but Escape is a business so they have to make money to continue the race.

I’d like to know if anyone that raced this year and has done it other years in the past, found it less crowded than before. I’ve heard that as a common complaint for the race (crowded / sketchy bike course).

I paid $425 in 2015, this year it was $750.

1811 x $425 = $769,675
1395 x $750 = $1,046,250

Seems like they made a good business choice and managed to get a (presumably) less crowded course at the same time! :slight_smile:

Of course finisher numbers don’t tell the whole story.

Edited to add in the $25 for the lottery.

Maybe a couple of other points:
a. my guess is more people didn’t finish this year than last because of the swim. Could be wrong, just a hunch
b. sponsorship is based on participants and I know at least one “qualifier” race opted out of the relationship in part due to their costs. So certainly some lost revenue on that side
c. the variable costs for the race are pretty minimal because sponsors pay for those items.

Of course I am just speculating, but I doubt their bottom line was up $300K.

I paid $425 in 2015, this year it was $750.

1811 x $425 = $769,675
1395 x $750 = $1,046,250

Seems like they made a good business choice and managed to get a (presumably) less crowded course at the same time! :slight_smile:

Of course finisher numbers don’t tell the whole story.

Edited to add in the $25 for the lottery.

Maybe a couple of other points:
a. my guess is more people didn’t finish this year than last because of the swim. Could be wrong, just a hunch
b. sponsorship is based on participants and I know at least one “qualifier” race opted out of the relationship in part due to their costs. So certainly some lost revenue on that side
c. the variable costs for the race are pretty minimal because sponsors pay for those items.

Of course I am just speculating, but I doubt their bottom line was up $300K.

a. if the results lists are accurate showing starters and DNF’s, very few DNFs in '15 and '16 (maybe 25-30 each year). But maybe someone without a time at all is not counted there, as all DNFs at least have a swim. Surely some people were pulled and could not continue. But no way it was 300+. Plus getting relocated by the boat does not equal a DNF as I understand it (get a time, but not eligible for awards)— I think.

I paid $425 in 2015, this year it was $750.

1811 x $425 = $769,675
1395 x $750 = $1,046,250

Seems like they made a good business choice and managed to get a (presumably) less crowded course at the same time! :slight_smile:

Of course finisher numbers don’t tell the whole story.

Edited to add in the $25 for the lottery.

Maybe a couple of other points:
a. my guess is more people didn’t finish this year than last because of the swim. Could be wrong, just a hunch
b. sponsorship is based on participants and I know at least one “qualifier” race opted out of the relationship in part due to their costs. So certainly some lost revenue on that side
c. the variable costs for the race are pretty minimal because sponsors pay for those items.

Of course I am just speculating, but I doubt their bottom line was up $300K.

a. if the results lists are accurate showing starters and DNF’s, very few DNFs in '15 and '16 (maybe 25-30 each year). But maybe someone without a time at all is not counted there, as all DNFs at least have a swim. Surely some people were pulled and could not continue. But no way it was 300+. Plus getting relocated by the boat does not equal a DNF as I understand it (get a time, but not eligible for awards)— I think.

The DNF thing is not a factor, the boat will take you to shore if you cant do the swim and you are allowed to resume the race.

The DNF rate was no different between the two years. Between the decline in teams and individuals there were probably 550 less participants in 2016. This may have made the bike course better for people with marginal handling skills.

My whole premise in writing this thread is that they went from a high demand race where there was a waiting list to a lower demand race where I am guessing they could not fill with all lottery applicants admitted because of their price increase. Yes it is a supply and demand exercise. I am sure they would have loved to fill 1800 slots, and they dont give a rats ass about the number of participants on the bike course.

They even posted on their facebook page last fall that they were full, these guys are terrible from a PR standpoint!

Unless they change their pricing model (early bird discounts or other multi racer discounts) they will see a few hundred less participants per year from now into the future until the race is gone in 3 to 4 years.

They could have slowly increased their price and they would have ended up in a better place in the long run.

Trust me, I agree with you. Did it in 2014 and 2015 and though I’d question doing it again (great event, but personally find the bike course quite sketchy), i’d never do it at IM prices (then add in flights/hotels, it’s a $2K weekend for a couple). I think they made a major blunder by (1) increasing so much and then (2) totally ignoring the issue and any call for some kind of explanation. Do they owe us one? nope, but they shouldn’t be made when we look elsewhere for races. I think in addition to the fees they lost a lot of good will as well, which I think in our sport is important

I think in the long run raising the prices the way that did is going to end up being the wrong decision for them…the decline has started and I project it will continue…and that makes me happy because it was a dick move.

They also missed out on several hundred people buying merch to commemorate their bucket list experience there.

What made the large price increase?

New race ownership?

What made the large price increase?

New race ownership?

That was the whole controversy, they just upped it with no explanation. They stonewalled anyone who asked for more info. It was a PR disaster. It seemed like a really bad management call and they left their staff unprepard to deal with the backlash.

This is an interesting question - anybody not get in this past year that wanted to?

I did it in 2013, had a blast, always thought it would be fun to do again, but after the price increase probably will not anytime soon.

I think you should stop using words like ‘yield’. In economic terms that tends to mean maximizing revenue from a limited resource, like seats or slots. Airlines tend to use it to describe their pricing models - yield management. They set prices that generate the most revenue possible with the number of available seats at a given point in time. I think a $300k revenue boost (let’s call the lost merch sales versus other savings related to fewer participants a wash) is pretty damn good yield management. Is it perfect? Probably not, but it’s a damn fine start. And I would wager that most people will get over the pricing next year (being a year further removed from the $425 rate) and that entries will rise.

A bigger issue might arise if the local tourism board who help with permits etc do their homework and challenge them on the lower contribution to the local economy resulting from several hundred fewer athletes and families travelling in the area. That assumes they have that sort of support, however.

  • 1 on that.

They also hurt their charity partners who couldn’t fill their slots at all. I had 3 or 4 charities email me asking me if I wanted a charity slot. Used to be you had to hurry and get one of the charity slots if you didn’t make lottery. This year they couldn’t fill them.