Pro side of TRI and how to evolve/improve it's marketability/media exposure

Triathlon Forum
1

The purpose of this thread is after weeks of reading about the pro purse issues and how to make pro triathlon better, I’m curious how do we actually make it better. Halvard always references the northern euro ski programs that have made tv sport programs etc, and I’m trying to understand how to relate it to LC triathlon. Is the best way for IM triathlon, to go the ITU circuit style of racing (15 mile bike loops racing in front of crowds every 45 mins, etc)? Can LC triathlon actually be marketed for more TV/media exposure? And I actually like what WTC is doing with their pro purse, in terms of making it a “pro series” (of course the losers in this will be the “developing” pros side of the sport). Paying pros shouldn’t be WTC/Rev3’s deal alone, they need big time sponsors (Pepsi, Nike, Johnson & Johnson) to actually cough up the money. WTC just paying pros out of basically the AG pot, is always going to be limiting. But of course big time sponsors come in when the exposure for said sponsor is there. Every time I watch a broadcast on triathlon, it’s always the same 6 tri industry sponsors it seems (some gu sponsor, some endurolyte sponsor, and some random one). So is there anything the sport can do to further enhance it’s marketability? Am I “reaching” in thinking it can improve substantially?

Are we just “hoping” and not being realistic, that LC triathlon (and triathlon in general) is just stuck in this cute niche environment that will forever be pro prize purse limited. I’m certainly not trying to elevate it to NFL levels, just trying to see if we are missing something. Is the sport so AG focused because that pays the bills, and the pros are just as Slowman puts it, “a check list” part of the race.

Take for instance today at Hy-Vee, apparently they had what 15 paid deep, and what coverage was there? According to those on twitter, the updates were coming from guy tweeting from his phone? Hy-Vee and ITU World’s (the best Olympic athletes in the world) taking place on the same day. I get that one is DL and the other is non-draft, but I sorta face palm when I see races of that magnitude racing on the same day. And I’m not saying 1 is better/worse than the other, just seems like a fail for the sport overall when this happens.

So am I ultimately reaching here? Have I missed something, not being from the “old school” part of the sport. Monty and others can chime in and tell us how good/bad it was back in the day, and even locally here I speak to guys who said 15 years ago, the local races here in NC had some good prize money worth chasing. So is there anything that the sport can do OR is it going to take something drastic to actually get some serious marketing considerations (IE, changes like going from non-draft to DL)? Obviously with the way IM/70.3 races play out, they never race on their own, so if you went to a 15 mile loop, the safety of athletes becomes an bigger issue. I cant see them going to 5 20 mile loops, etc because of the congestion that can occur, so is there anyting innovative that I’m missing? I kinda feel like it’s a wall there stopping the development of the sport, and more or less we are what we are.

-GPS tracking seems to be worth the investment for good interactive online viewing.

**And yes I know there is a segment of triathletes that don’t give a flip about the pros.

2

WTC just paying pros out of basically the AG pot, is always going to be limiting. /quote]

Brett Sutton disagrees, this is from his FB:
The WTC Translator.

People just don’t understand my position.

So here it is. Very clear.

I have done nothing but praise Andrew Messick’s leadership of his business.

I applaud his maneuvers for his owners in using legal techniques to pay over the top dividends to his shareholders.

I disagree that within his business, pros don’t effect his bottom line.

I believe proper use of the pros will see the sport grow 4 fold in revenues. We disagree here.

That is his CEO opinion against mine. We agree to disagree, and we did so very cordially in a face to face meeting. Yes we have met, and yes I did like him.

My argument is simple and it’s not for the pros, just good business. With a world class pro circuit they will attract the blue chip sponsors.

Here is my view.

Any business worth supporting spends at least 10% of gross revenues on marketing.
That same business spends between 10 and 15% on research and development.
WTC spend a pittance on advertising.
WTC spend none on r & d. Zero.
Development can and does mean business development. They don’t need to research much, I give you that.

Lets once again play low ball, and say that general turnover from all areas is $500 million - although people it has to be much more to secure a 1/4 billion loan as there is no real infrastructure. So the deal has been granted on the back of existing cash flows.

So lets say it’s not a sport. Lets say it’s another business.

10% of the $500 million is $50 million to be spent on business development to increase the revenue and value of the business. This is normal practice.

This 10% spent in the pro race series ($50 million) would put it, if well thought out, on the same level of most individual sports, except for the majors in golf or tennis.

Most don’t realise the massive money in these sports purses are in the majors, and oil fueled promotions. The rank and file tournaments are not huge, and their satellite tours are suffering the same problem as triathlon. Playing a tournament with a 132 in it with total prizemoney of 10,000. I kid you not. The difference though is the depth.

So I see no reason why the business doesn’t invest in development. I don’t see why the equity company doesn’t insist it does.

If Mr Messick continues to carry his misguided thought, that a strong pro series would not help his business grow, then and only then would I question his judgment of how he is running this business.

I would suggest, he at present is standing too close to the cool aid fountain, where all the ex old athletes are hanging out, and listening to their small minded thoughts on the sport.

The sport would be better off completely if the CEO really did run it 100% as a business. With a $50 million pro circuit, he would have a one billion dollar business.

How would I do it if asked?

Well as one athlete put it, ‘your ideas are too shallow’. Of course the genius doesn’t know any of my ideas, but lets keep this simple and shallow for everyone.

A world ranking top 100 men and top 100 women would receive a minimum wage, say $50k. For that they must race 10 times in the year. That is $10 million allocated.

Then a minimum $30 million goes into prize money, at minimum. I’d break this prize money down as follows:

  • 4 races.

  • Each with $5 million purse.

  • One race each in the USA, Europe, Asia Pacific region, Americas.

  • Then have $5 million for the normal world circuit with 10 great paying races.

  • Then have $5 million for a satellite circuit. This being a pure development race circuit. Either 25 races with $200k per race, or 50 races with $100k per race. This circuit would be for the development of those that are not yet good enough to do the first 2 circuits.

Yes very shallow. Yes very simplistic.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is not rocket science. It is just good plain business logic.

It would make this a billion dollar sport.

That is my position.

Cheers
The doc

3

Is that $500mil correct for WTC’s numbers?

Seems he meet with WTC and his ideas got shut down. Now my next question is, how does he justify spending $50mil to make a billion? Or how does it become a billion dollar industry at that point? Is that when TV comes in?

4

the ITU sure seems to have a great product going for short course racing. Very exciting. The best talent in the world. Lots of races. I do not hear
the ITU racers complaining, or am I just missing it?

And boy is their live TV coverage flat out amazing!!!

.

5

Yes and it’s certainly easier when all you have to do is produce or broadcast for 2 hours vs 10 hours for an IM. So I’m asking, what from ITU can translate over to LC racing to improve their marketabliltiy?

6

I really think that for anything to work on the pro side of things that the RDs/Companies involved have to want to make it work. Judging by the ‘coverage’ provided by any number of the non-ITU events out there, they don’t. I don’t know if it is an expense that they don’t want to spend or if it just really doesn’t matter to them in the long run. And, I’m talking about the companies that put up prize purses. At Lifetime CapTex there was a guy with a phone on the corner (me) tweeting updates. At Hy-Vee there was a guy on the corner with a phone (Helle’s S.O.) tweeting updates.

Rev was the only company that seems to have tried to do any real time media for the professional race. And, we don’t know the whole story there, but we know the ending.

A live broadcast, more than a few still cameras, would be oh so boring. I still think that you could do a highlight reel that could be well done. Ironman.tv or something. They get the finisher/race video done, a pro one could be done and posted as well. Obviously, it will not be as exciting as ITU live, etc. but it could be something. And, it doesn’t have to be ‘major’ TV as has been pointed out before.

7

So I see no reason why the business doesn’t invest in development. I don’t see why the equity company doesn’t insist it does. //

Because they are for sale right now and they have no interest in the future of triathlon in general? They spent a lot of time and energy to get some numbers, first to get this loan, and now to show prospective buyers. For them to maximize this sale, they need to show bottom line numbers along with gross sales. Investing any of that bottom line right now defeats that agenda. Unfortunately we will have to wait for the next owners to even attempt to implement many of the great ideas you had in your post.