The way I see it is that if I bought a product, and that product didn’t work, I would expect to be able to return that product for a full refund. It doesn’t matter if that hurts the profits of that shop owner - a refund is the expected outcome. And I’m saying this as a business owner - the end consumer comes first, because without them, my business doesn’t exist, and without Joe triathletes, Ironman doesn’t exist.
I do want to reiterate again though that in my opinion Ironman absolutely did do the right thing. The communication was excellent, a solution was found fast, and it was 100% the right solution. This is why they always get my custom. But I do not agree that giving a refund is doing us some kind of favour.
I appreciate it’s a two way street but for me, I take the side of the race director more than the athlete because the athlete is not doing anything for me, but the race director is. Of course I will call out race directors when they are unreasonable. I am also generally pro business, and generally want companies to make money so we get products and services. consumers to a degree are replaceable . At the same time I am not for total concentration and market monopoly positions in any cetageory so happy to call out Ironman when they are leaning towards the consumer exploitation range of the spectrum . I think generally Ironman has struck a decent balance between consumer service and satisfaction and leveraging the consumer for the business. That’s just how business works or it ends up being a charity bleeding cash and running dry and closing shop
It doesn’t matter which side you take, both parties need each other. So if one behaves in a way to piss off the other that affects either’s, both lose. There is no right side to this equation.
Except you are not buying a product. You are buying a service that happens in the live world and by definition can be affected by what nature offers on the day that may or may not be inside the norms.
I agree they did well here given the scenario in a lose lose circumstance. Even the Tour de France has to shorten stages or cancel them. In another sport I Nordic ski race so perhaps my gauge of what I expect is more influenced by what organizers can do or not when nature puts on the big squeeze
I agree with your overall sentiment on the importance for all of us for IM to be healthy as an organization. However, Messick was CEO well before COVID and there were many things he did at Ironman that went beyond “crisis management” and “ensuring the health of the organization”.
IM was downright predatory in their practices and the triathlon landscape for AG’ers has suffered as a result. They also consistently watered down the product during Messick’s tenure.
IM still puts on a great product and I give Messick credit for guiding IM through turbulent times. But I think that back in the day we used to get a lot more bang for our buck at Ironman events and these events just felt like a much higher quality experience. Most recently the banquets are crappy or non-existent, the SWAG is cheaper and disappearing, the medals are (for the most part) uninspiring, the prices at the expo are beyond ridiculous, the expos themselves are shells of what they once were. I could go on and on.
I do feel like Scott DeRue is moving in the direction of improving the value proposition for participants that pay a pretty penny for what should be a premium experience. So, yes, I applaud Messick for helping Ironman still be here for us but he also (purposefully) degraded the product and diluted the experience for most of us. And a lot of that was choice, not necessity.
I agree with you that the quality of the user experience declined from the days of Graham Fraser doing Ironman. North America and Messick doing what I would call global expansion.
I had a unique insight this weekend hanging out with Mitch and Janet Fraser. Mitch is Graham’s brother and took over the entire Ontario series that the two had started as Graham branched out doing IM North America. But they were the right hand people assisting Graham all over North America while running the Ontario series , 70.3 Muskoka , Ironman Muskoka etc.
They brought up something interesting. When there were only a few IM races they were week long festivals with banquets , massive expos etc etc. over time as you mentioned that festival atmosphere died. Mitch mentioned it’s not worth doing all that anymore as athletes are in and out in a couple of days.
So after Ironman North America days Messick comes in to do global expansion. How do they put down cookie cutter standardized events that give sufficient consumer satisfaction but can easily be dropped into locations all around the world. I think all the catering and overhead of banquets is a nice to have but a big load for organizers. I would rather they save their energy and resources for the core product. My wife came to two or three and after that it was more like ‘you can go yourself or you can come to dinner with us at a proper restaurant’s. I am sure my family is not a minority.
But what I am saying if you are doing cookie cutter global expansion that is productized what you get is different from that bygone tri festival experience that I believe they still have at Roth.
In any event, I did Ironman events in South Africa, UAE, Morocco , all over US, all over Europe, All over Canada during Messick times. I appreciate the standardized experience whether it was in Morocco , Oceanside, Dubai etc.
I do think that global expansion meant the festival experience from IM North America days had to be scaled down.
But now we have events around every corner of the world that are pretty standardized
I understand that they needed to standardize to grow. However, the thing that drives me insane is that when a company goes up that curve (volume up, features down) of standardization, price comes down, but not with Ironman. I understand that this is driven by supply and demand, which is driven by the ridiculous brand power that Ironman commands. I imagine at some point brand alone won’t be enough but I don’t see that happening any time soon. In the meantime, for some of us that remember what we lost, it sucks to feel absolutely fleeced every time we have to fork out $850+ for a race.
I see Doha Qatar 70.3 went live for $450USD haha . Now we can get fleeced in Qatar and hopeni Iranian drones pick on the race !!! I think I will wait till 2028 . March 2027 feels a bit close to all the current conflict
Hand of God and natural hazards cancelling races is part of sport, and especially nordic skiing like you say. A few years ago I had the privilege of deciding whether to become a pro triathlete for a Nordic nation or a pro nordic skier for a non-nordic nation (obvs neither is that competitive!). Climate change swung the vote for me. Already, Sapporo is the only world series location that reliably has snow through winter. If the sport is nonexistent when my grandkids are around, what’s the point in pouring your life into it.
