Yeah, and that’s not counting what he’s going to make on Twitch this year (which is really hard to predict since that depends on the number of times/length of his streams, which have been down this year just because of long practice hours).
Do I think eSports and triathlon are a completely separate market? Yes. But I think there are still lessons to be learned from how the industry was able to grow so fast, most importantly from better engagement and donations from the community. All of the eSports stars have their own “brand” and personality, and when fans watch them stream they feel like they are part of their community. Is “streaming” triathlon as entertaining as playing a video game? Probably not. But I think pros can still leverage more connection/engagement with the triathlon community.
A side story: by coincidence I live down the street from Matt Centrowitz (Olympic gold medalist in the 1500m in Rio), and him and his dad have started their own local track team called District Track Club (http://districttrack.com/), and I’ve gotten the opportunity to run with them a couple of times. Aside from Matt who is fully funded by Nike, the other guys on the team don’t have big sponsors. But from what I understand, the team is literally funded by a few wealthy guys who just love running and want to see guys stay in the sport and succeed coming out of college. Is that a sustainable model? Probably not. But it reminded me a lot of how people just make donations on Twitch for no reason aside from how much they enjoy the streamer, without asking for anything in return, and if there is a way to tap into that with people with some money who just want to see the sport of triathlon continue to grow.
But from what I understand, the team is literally funded by a few wealthy guys who just love running and want to see guys stay in the sport and succeed coming out of college. //
This is actually a viable model for pros to pursue. It has been happening since 1982 when Jerry Domenelli poured in 100’s of thousands into his personal triathlon team, then the DuPonts with Team Foxcatcher, and too many to number along the way to our Sheiks who are now pouring their money into teams and races. Hell, the very first prize list at Kona of a 100 grand was from just some guy that lived over there on vacations(actually a builder from San Diego) and he loved hanging with the pros. He would hold a lavish party for the pros before the race and hob knob, and then threw that 100k to Valerie in a way that she could not refuse it, back when there was not one nickel for pros at Kona…
I’m not even joking when I say that I’ll bet with fair certainty that a ‘normal’ AGer like Triathlon Taren who has a strong online media presence and is targeted at AGers, will both be a lot more well known as well as a lot more of an effective product pitcher than nearly all the top pro winners at Kona save the #1 guy/gal there.
It’s a different world out there - the money in triathlon isn’t in the prize purse, and the name recognition isn’t on the podium list outside of the tippy top competitors in the world (and even they drop off the moment they’re not #1.) It’s in building virtual relationships with large groups of people, similarly as many professional youtubers have done.
I know, sounds totally phony and lame to us oldsters who grew up in the era where there was no social media, and the way to money and fame was to be the world champion and that was that. But it’s reality now, and for all its minuses, it does bring a lot more opportunities for creative and enterprising folks to make it a career even if they’re not remotely world champion.
Are you saying that model for USAT should be different? I get what you mean, the athlete commits to a race and something happens… no money. How is this different than
a long course athlete doing a 70.3 or Ironman who gets a mechanical that puts them out of the money?
If you’ve followed ITU and US athletes long enough, USAT recently changed this policy for reimbursement and personally, i think its a very good policy. Athletes who are being funded by USAT (some national team status) should have pressure placed on them to deliver results, its what makes them good. USAT gets funding from IOC, and when results dont come in, IOC doesnt give USAT money. We have seen athletes in the past abuse this who would constantly drop out of races and USAT pays the bill?
If the athlete is younger and racing for a 40th place… IMO they shouldn’t be at WTS races. Thats just poor development. Racing up too quickly is the best way to break and bankrupt athletes.
I don’t want to turn this into an ITU vs. long-course debate and how there is a lot more money in long-course racing, etc.; I am well aware of that, but with the WTS getting an NBC deal and the Olympic cycle kicking into full gear, I’m still convinced that there are ways to unlock more value for ITU racers. Guys like Ben Kanute have had to add 70.3s into their annual schedule, both because they can get a lot more prize money but sponsors also prefer seeing their product at the front of those longer races with big age group fields. I think it’s also very dangerous how USAT does a reimbursement policy for ITU races as opposed to covering costs upfront; currently you have to get top 15 at a WTS race to get reimbursed by USAT, and that creates a tremendous amount of pressure on young athletes who are already struggling to get by. You had a mechanical incident on the bike in Yokohama? Well, guess you won’t get reimbursed for that $2,000 flight/hotel/meal combo. But I think that’s a separate discussion.
But from what I understand, the team is literally funded by a few wealthy guys who just love running and want to see guys stay in the sport and succeed coming out of college. //
This is actually a viable model for pros to pursue. It has been happening since 1982 …
I agree and as you point out there is a long history of this…
I agree with your points, but I think there should be a different mentality for WTS races. If you want to have that reimbursement policy for a World Cup race or something, I totally understand that since the athlete isn’t totally proven. But by qualifying for a WTS race, you’ve already proved yourself in a certain number of races and are representing USAT at the highest ITU level. For a multi-million dollar organization that has this line in their mission statement “USA Triathlon provides leadership and support to elite athletes competing at international events, including International Triathlon Union (ITU) World Championships, Pan American Games and the Olympic and Paralympic Games,” I think putting full support behind its WTS selections is important. If there are athletes that USAT are selecting for WTS races that have no business being there, well that’s a separate discussion.
**Equipment manufactures have slim margins, so if you can get some stuff for free + bonus if you win, that can be a good deal for an up and coming athletes. **
True, and for the most part the key suppliers in a sport like triathlon ounce you move away from, a Trek, or a Specialized, they are all small companies with VERY limited marketing budgets. Trust me, I work this market, and what i’m offering is often pretty substantial in terms of eye-balls on offer, to the right audience, for not very much money, and this get’s turned down by just about everyone in the business!
Add in the fact that, in triathlons main market we have been in a bit of a slump now for 3 - 5 years. The FIRST thing to get cut in slow/hard times are marketing budgets (I don’t agree with this, but it’s the default thing that nearly 100% of mid-sized and smaller businesses and brands do).
Where the money is, is in what we call the non-endemics - businesses away from the supply area for that sport, but who may have an interest in the participants. But here again, triathlon suffers from small numbers. Also their will be variation from country to country based on culture and market. Jan Frodeno has Mercedes as a sponsor, but I’m guessing that here in North America, Lionel Sanders (or his agent), can’t even get a meeting with a car company!!
It’s all very challenging and complicated at the same time!
I’m not even joking when I say that I’ll bet with fair certainty that a ‘normal’ AGer like Triathlon Taren who has a strong online media presence and is targeted at AGers, will both be a lot more well known as well as a lot more of an effective product pitcher than nearly all the top pro winners at Kona save the #1 guy/gal there.
Agreed.
The Professional model of the way the Professional Sports Model is supposed to work, really only applies to a handful of triathletes in the whole of the sport. There are, as you note, others working the space, such as Taren, some coaches and other influencers who are more capable in moving the needle for sales, or at the very least brand awareness than many very good and top ranked professional triathletes.
I think this is being looked at backwards and a bit old school. Media equivalency is a dated metric; astute marketers want to see reach and engagement for quantitative measurements. IMO qualitative is equally or more important; reach might get a brand seen but if content isn’t compelling there’s little value created.
Instead of telling brands what athlete X can do I’d ask brands what problem they need to solve, then work toward that. An athlete posting on Insta is a given, not a stand-out selling point (unless they have massive reach and great engagement, but that doesn’t seem to be discussion point here). Does someone have a great eye for photos? Crafty at doing video snips? An exceptional writer or storyteller? Able to transcend sport in a relatable way? Highly personable? Those are assets that can have real value to a brand’s comm program.