I don’t want to spoil the podcast by summarizing it and hope everyone gives it a listen, it’s interesting (“It’s not a popularity contest, it’s about what’s best overall for Ironman.” - Messick from the interview).
Andrew Messick comes off extremely aggressive and disrespectful to Jack (he is eating in the middle of the podcast lol). I really don’t understand why he went on the podcast as he comes off awful. Seemed completely unwilling to listen to what Jack was trying to say/ask.
I have NOT listened to the pod cast (most aren’t very good). I do know Andrew personally and I can say for a fact that the tone of your statement above is completely false. I “like the guy” a lot. He is really pretty amazing in all he does. Of course his job is to a run a profitable company (so is mine). Yes, he cares deeply for the sport. Yes he cares about pros. Of course he wants to maximize the number of age groupers. He/they deliver an exceptional product. Now, that certainly doesn’t mean I agree with everything, and we can chat about that if you like.
Ironman is a business. But if they actually wanted to maximize the business, they would have started growing the sport, not the business, in 2007. (2007 is when they started setting up the current situation we’re in)
Growing the sport brings more profit in the next decade. It’s hard enough to get people to see past the next quarter, let alone the next year.
There’s probably also a risk analysis. Growing the sport brings the risk of others eating some of the pie. Trademarking and copyrighting everything allows you to charge $900 for an event because there’s no competition to drive prices, only what “60 year old ladies” are willing to pay.
I have NOT listened to the pod cast (most aren’t very good). I do know Andrew personally and I can say for a fact that the tone of your statement above is completely false. I “like the guy” a lot. He is really pretty amazing in all he does. Of course his job is to a run a profitable company (so is mine). Yes, he cares deeply for the sport. Yes he cares about pros. Of course he wants to maximize the number of age groupers. He/they deliver an exceptional product. Now, that certainly doesn’t mean I agree with everything, and we can chat about that if you like.
I’d be curious to hear if you still like the guy after listening to this conversation. He does not seem to care deeply about the sport nor does he seem to care at all about the pros. I get his job is to maximize profits and he seems to do that well so I guess that makes him a good CEO of IronMan.
Yes, he is a friend. I promise I will still like him.
I have NOT listened to the pod cast (most aren’t very good). I do know Andrew personally and I can say for a fact that the tone of your statement above is completely false. I “like the guy” a lot. He is really pretty amazing in all he does. Of course his job is to a run a profitable company (so is mine). Yes, he cares deeply for the sport. Yes he cares about pros. Of course he wants to maximize the number of age groupers. He/they deliver an exceptional product. Now, that certainly doesn’t mean I agree with everything, and we can chat about that if you like.
You should listen to the podcast.
Messick is in a no win situation. He simply has to take the “hate” from all of us. They have ~50 events that has a pro prize purse, and still get shitted on. They could totally pull a PTO and make 6-8 “pro” events combining all the money they spend and cut out any race with less than an $100k prize list (IE- kill any "pro development). Would we want that? IM has already culled pro prizes at “AG only” events, so if things get spicy between all these organizations, I could totally see that happening. IM imo treats the pros like a needed cog in the wheel to make their events pop and that’s about it.
no, we’re not going to tell you how much we makepro long course triathletes only exist because of the ironman brandthe pros can fuck off. we’re not paying them more money60+ ladies are hugely important and will always have a place at world championships. we’re not shrinking the field.women and men will never race on the same day in different locations for world championships
do you think his stance on any of the above bullet points is wrong as it relates to his position in the triathlon world?
I am conflict-averse to the point where I find listening to heated debate quite stressful, I’m not sure I can listen to this! Could someone summarize the main points?
no, we’re not going to tell you how much we makepro long course triathletes only exist because of the ironman brandthe pros can fuck off. we’re not paying them more money60+ ladies are hugely important and will always have a place at world championships. we’re not shrinking the field.women and men will never race on the same day in different locations for world championships
I knew nothing about Messick going into this, but I can’t understand why anyone here would like the guy at all. He’s very much the CEO of a private company interested in maximizing profits and couldn’t care less about the sport. He doesn’t give a shit about pros or even the most competitive people around here and he’d rather maximize the number of age groupers he can get to each and every race.
Sounds juicy.
Long course pros do pretty much only exist because of Ironman. The inverse is not true, although obviously, the pros give Ironman some media credibility. Whether it’s good “for the sport” to have pros milking companies for money to support a lifestyle that consists of doing nothing but train and recover all day every day is another question. It might be better for the sport to have more joe-schmoes. I can tell you my wife signed up for a race after getting inspired with tears in her eyes watching a mom push a stroller across the finish line in the World Champs broadcast, not after watching me train, and certainly not after watching Sanders, Iden, or Sodaro clips or PTO races. So growing the sport might involve more spotlight on tear jerker stories. Keeping that growth engaged – that’s where I can see and agree a valid argument can be made to include the pros.
The other points I don’t see as really controversial. They want a large field of women, and of course they can’t split themselves logistically for two high profile races in two locations on the same day. That seems a huge strategic mistake to give up multiple weeks of people talking about your race and cram it all into a single day that you are inefficiently throwing resources at trying to be in two places at once.
I don’t see a principled reason why it shouldn’t be a goal for Ironman to turn 20-30% women into 40-50% representation. Watering down the field? That’s elitist borderline nonsense.
Now, Messick might actually be a smarmy jerk that is milking his position for all its worth. I’ve never had the impression that he’s a cool one of us guys, whatever that means. And maybe this interview didn’t help out but I think the points you highlighted all seem pretty accurate. Ironman makes a lot of fanfare about the pros and certainly uses the visuals of the pro race to sell the sport and gain access/prestige in various venues. But if the pros of today didn’t exist and were replaced with office types who train on their personal time and race “pro” Ironman, I’m not sure the sport would be worse off. But the market dynamics mean that there will always be some “pro” willing to live in their parents basement and grind out 30hrs a week training to “break even” if they win, especially if it means there might be some endorsement contracts. Why should Ironman and race entry fees subsidize more pros spending more time training? Local mom or high school gym coach that gets inspired to go do an Ironman doesn’t want to pay an extra 50 bucks on their fee to pay for a pro to live comfortably and train all day.
To argue with myself.
Let’s assume there are 100,000 Ironman and 70.3 entrance fees in the USA every year. Let’s have each fee collect an extra $50 for pro development. That’s $5million. Let’s have 80% of the pro development fee go to the host nation. 15% goes to international development, and 5% goes to Ironman owners dividend (gotta get them excited somehow).
So the USA pro scene would have $4milllion to work with. Let’s say Ironman divides up that $4 million with $2 million going to pro development salaries for the top 100 US pro racers, 50 male, 50 female and the remaining $2million being allocated to event prizes over the 42 (if I googled right) Ironman/70.3 races in the USA.
Bottom 50th US pro gets 20k salary and it scales up from there to the top pro who gets $80k.
France has 6 Ironman/70.3 races. That would leave 600k to be divided up for French athlete support (or it would get lumped into an EU fund).
Is this a good way to use the money? Pros from individual nations may be disproportionately affected, but why should USA race fees subsidize pro development in foreign nations. And those foreigners can still earn revenue share from races in their nations as well as prizes from races wherever they attend.
Will ya’ll vote for me when I attempt a hostile takeover at the annual Ironman board luncheon?
Messick did himself zero favors.
In fact he proved what most of us thought about Ironman.
But wow.
Can you please give us a summary of the interview? Key points here? Otherwise, this feels like click-bate
It’s not Clickbait.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CoHMS8qMyFx/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
So the USA pro scene would have $4milllion to work with. Let’s say Ironman divides up that $4 million with $2 million going to pro development salaries for the top 100 US pro racers, 50 male, 50 female and the remaining $2million being allocated to event prizes over the 42 (if I googled right) Ironman/70.3 races in the USA.
Bottom 50th US pro gets 20k salary and it scales up from there to the top pro who gets $80k.
France has 6 Ironman/70.3 races. That would leave 600k to be divided up for French athlete support (or it would get lumped into an EU fund).
Is this a good way to use the money? Pros from individual nations may be disproportionately affected, but why should USA race fees subsidize pro development in foreign nations. And those foreigners can still earn revenue share from races in their nations as well as
Just beeing provocative 
Yes, he is a friend. I promise I will still like him.
This is very sad.
The way he acted and bullied is not someone I’d want to be friends with.
Anyway. Have a listen maybe in the car with your wife and see what she thinks of Andrew’s behavior after the interview
Didn’t listen yet so I cannot comment on the podcast.
but people keep talking about the growth of the sport???
Do you tell concert promotion and entertainment companies on their world tours they aren’t growing the music???
Of course they aren’t they just fill stadiums with what the customer wants. And not everyone wants the same thing.
Ironman is only providing us a safe view in tourism location to do these events. That is there business!! Not triathlon or sport development.
Those are other organizations and companies, talk to them.
He’s probably not used to a triathlon outlet actually asking hard questions.
First time for everything I guess.
Are we supposed to guess what podcast this is?
Are we supposed to guess what podcast this is?
it’s in the title The “how they train” podcast.
Are we supposed to guess what podcast this is?
It’s “Rich CEO takes advantage of workers and customers and we are all supposed to bow to them and think they are superhard geniuses working 700 hours per week running 16 companies” podcast. lol. Been a lot of them lately.
He’s probably not used to a triathlon outlet actually asking hard questions.
First time for everything I guess.
You’re 100% correct and sadly true.
IM never, ever wants pro athletes as employees with a salary.