While I do not have any huge disagreements with Rappstars thoughts, I do have a few concerns. I am glad that Rappstar spoke up and made us think.
If Kona was not the World Championships and it went to another Ironman site, how many people would want to race Kona that year? Not me, it is a miserable place to race. I might as well go to Lanzarote.
Yes, the WTC is very powerful and should be good stewards of the sport, but how many other tri related companies try to be “good stewards” ahead of their profit margin. It is much easier to question their “stewardship” from the outside. Obviously part of the problem lies in that the WTC is not a “governing body” the way ITU and USAT are. Or are they? Guess they are both.
If I were a pro athlete, I would welcome the chance to race the best athletes on their best day and on my best day. Personally, I would take on the Dave Scott attitude that that one race, Kona, will make you or break you. Molina knew that he could win everywhere else, but if he did not win Kona, his recognition would be much less. How long did it nag Mark Allen?
Just a few thoughts.
Different time… Different era. Profit and Stewardship RARELY go together… With Venture Capital and Hedge Fund firms like Providence, “Pump and Dump” is the lingo and the game plan.
Kona already has the recognition… The race would sell out for decades just on the name and “history” alone.
Like the Tour de France: we may not like they build the stages; we may not like the way they pick the teams; we may not like the way they conduct their tests…but that race will never be second. Because there’s something magical about it.
Kona is the same: there’s something unreal about that race…Frankfurt and the other venues just do not have it.
The one thing I meant to mention, but did not (though I brought it up in a later comment in reply to someone) is why I think stewardship is relevant, particularly in this case.
Ironman is not just a corporate entity. Someone said, for example, that they don’t care what Coke/Apple/WalMart do as long as the product is quality. While I don’t believe that is entirely true, I think it’s mostly true. But we still do care if companies are big polluters, or abuse their workers, etc. I.e., there are some things where “stewardship” of the world at large matters.
But that’s not really what I was talking about here. I.e., they shouldn’t be stewards because it’s a “nice” thing to do. I respect that Rev3 and Challenge both feel they are stewards, but I actually think they do it for fairly simple reasons - they think it’s good for the sport and that being good for the sport is good for business. I agree. Just like some companies find being green to be more (or at least no less) profitable. Less packaging = less waste AND less expenses.
But WTC has something different. “Ironman” is, for all intents and purposes, the birth of triathlon. Ironman isn’t just a property. As I wrote in my comment, if Steve Jobs wanted to ruin Apple, it was his own creation. If Sam Walton wanted to ruin WalMart, it was his own creation. Of course, it would impact people, but not on a deep emotional level (well, maybe with crazy Apple fanboys…).
Ironman is NOT WTC’s creation. And it’s also something with an ENORMOUS emotional significance to people. No one dreams of going to WalMart (except in nightmares). People dream of Ironman (both Ironman in Hawaii and also Ironman in general).
I do recognize that this is one reason that the Ironman World Champs should stay in Kona for ever, but (as with the Masters) I think that if you acknowledge that you can’t move the race from Kona, you probably need to start developing other properties or avenues of growth. It’s also why I focused my article specifically on the PRO race. With age groupers, the emotional component is extremely high. With pros, it should not be. Of course, it’s also interesting because, originally Ironman ONLY meant Ironman Hawaii. But the came other races, etc. So some sense, Ironman is already a separate “idea” from Hawaii. There are 26 Ironmans and 50+ Ironman 70.3. But I think that’s another discussion, though one that is probably past having in any practical sense. Does Ironman mean Kona or does it mean 140.6? I’d say it means both, and both need to be respected/stewarded.
But what I’m really getting at is that WTC currently possess an “entity” not of their own creation that means an overwhelming amount on a visceral, emotional level to other people. It’s like being a major league team owner. There was an excellent piece on Grantland on how owning a major league team is NOT a business proposition. It is not profit/loss, because there is psychological “value” associated with things. I.e., how much is “worth” to win the super bowl / world series? It’s not really quantifiable. And in the piece (written by Malcolm Gladwell), he argues that if you think owning a major league team is a business, it’s the wrong venture for you to be in.
And I think the same is true of Ironman. If ALL you think Ironman represents is a way to make money, then you it’s not the right property for you. There’s some added “baggage” that comes along.
The closest analog I could think of was Disney. NASCAR is similar. I think people care about individual NFL/MLB/NBA teams, but I don’t know that they care about the leagues themselves. But I think the point is, generally, obvious. When you buy something that you didn’t create, and when you buy something that comes loaded with enormous history and emotional meaning, THAT is what requires stewardship.
Off the top of my head, probably the best analogies to owning Kona are being an owner of the following
Manchester United in English Premier LeagueNew York Yankees in BaseballMontreal Canadiens in NHLIf you own these teams, there is much more than making a profit that comes into play and there is a worldwide legion of fans who care that you managing the entity the “right way”. There are a ton of guys in Hong Kong who might care what is going on in Manchester, likewise a bunch of guys in Cuba or Japan caring about the Yankees…OK, Montreal is limited to a bunch of dudes in Quebec and english speaking quebecers that left Quebec 20 years ago, but you get the picture. Most of these guys don’t pay a penny to the owner of these clubs, but the ownership of these clubs cares about the worldwide fan base who live and breath every step of the teams. Likewise for Kona…there is a worldwide “fan base” who have an incredible emotional link to this event. Vegas 70.3 world’s is a creation of WTC…they can do with it what they want and we can’t complain…Kona is a different story, both for the pro race and age group race!
i think there are two relevant questions here:
-
how does WTC bring its franchise to the next level by mainstreaming its WC process, yet maintain Kona’s prestige? it’s clear that precedent would be on its side. the boston marathon is still pretty hard to get into. it’s as much a desirable brand now as it ever has been. it’s not and never will be a WC. the classic marathons never have trouble filling, and never lose their prestige. i may have a blind spot, but i think it’s low risk high return for WTC. it’s just a case of doing it.
-
as i have pointed out before, there’s nothing wrong with private equity, but it’s usually a bad match when private equity owns a cultural institution. certain things, like sports franchises and newspapers, should be run by those for whom profit is important, but never at the expense of performance.
accordingly, sam zell should not own the chicago trib and the l.a. times. in 2008 the altantic monthly’s harold meyerson chronicled the process of the dismantling of a cultural institution in the l.a. time’s human wrecking ball.
what we have in sports franchises are groups of investors owning cultural institutions, and the group itself keeps its individual members in line. so, while you might never want a marge schott, or a donald stirling, running a league, it’s less problematic having them as owners in a league where peer pressure, which is enforceable pressure (note MLB’s posture toward on dodgers’ owner frank mccourt), acts as a check on improprieties that would endanger the prestige of any single franchise.
i’m hoping that triathlon america might act in some way as that bulwark. WTC sits on the board, and there are about 2 dozen board members. WTC does not dominate the board. not with active.com, lifetime fitness, IMG, and others also on that board. i’m in those board meetings, and it’s notable how the presence of all the heavyweights keeps individual members focused on the proper business of what’s best for triathlon’s industry as a whole. everybody, WTC included, freely participates, which i think shows that WTC is committed to industry best practices. you can find plenty of instances where WTC has best practices at top-of-mind: attention to drug testing, fair rules, officiating, and the mechanics of race production.
to the question at hand: we’re asking WTC to consider messing with the jewel in its crown. i can see why WTC would want to think hard about that, before it acts. but i see something else in your opinion piece, that cultural institutions should not simply take their own counsel, but should consider their stakeholders. it’s clear that you don’t feel WTC listens to them. and that’s notable, because i think you, along with perhaps chrissie, mike lovato and chris lieto, may be the four pros that WTC listens to more than any other.
unfortunately, WTC has an easy answer to pros like you. who do you speak for, besides yourselves? until more than a handful of pro athletes are able to speak through one person, with one voice, on issues, WTC can fob off your individual criticisms as just disparate whinings.
it’s also clear in your opinion piece that you recognize and are frustrated that the pro athletes do not have the wherewithal to speak as a group. welcome to each of the last 30 years in the history of professional triathlon.
the irony is that WTC really ought to consider moving its WC around. the u.s. auto industry’s power to fight changes was stronger than its stakeholders’ attempts to bring changes. in the end, that power to maintain the status quo largely led to its demise. while other structural problems existed inside the industry, detroit’s biggest problem was building cars its customers did not want. in a way, WTC’s biggest threat is that its sheer size and strength mean it only has to take its own counsel. WTC needs to recognize, without being forced, that taking the counsel of its stakeholders is in its best interest, even if those stakeholders are not in a position to force changes on it.
Just a caution on jumping to conclusion about what Providence’s motivations are. I’m heavily involved in the PE world and I’ve talked with the Providence folks directly involved with the WTC. I believe your pump and dump satatement is flat out worong (at best).
This is not to take issue with the stewardship/profit issue–that is a nuanced/complex issue. There are quite a few businesses that have it–some do it well and some do not…time will tell.
I have made the decision to retire early and chase my dream of one day qualifying and then racing at Kona, not because it is the world championship, not because of corporate branding to sell me on the idea, but because in 1988 on this side of the pond trying to find out more I got a copy of Mark Allens ‘Total Triathlete’ and read about the ‘players’ the likes of Dave Scott, Scott Tinley, Julie Moss and Mark Allen himself. In a couple of hours a dream was begining to form of what it might someday be like to follow in the footsteps of these legends of the sport at its birthplace some place on the other side of the planet.
Culture is not something which can be created and owned rather it is a unique phenomonon which is the result of a symbiotoc relationship between people and place. Culture develops its own language and aesthetic forms of expresion far beyond anything that could be imagined by the marketing departments of a major corporation. In fact culture often represents the exact opposite of corporate entity.
Kona is cultural, it is the spiritual birthplace of our sport, as such it has deep meaning, and that is why people like me are drawn by its power. Rappster is bang on when he raises concerns regarding the future of this event. When comercial concern try to align their self interests with culturalal phenomenons be it through music, fashion, art, etc… they invariably undermine what they touch and devalue its worth. Kona can never be owned it is too special for that to happen, but it could easily be destroyed by an attempt to. Responsible stewardship is the only way forwards for this event if it is to remain as a world championship. If I had my own way I feel I would want the world championship to be somewhere else, as this may be the best way for the culture of the event to remain somewhere close to its origins. The problem with this approach is that the event may then simply become a homage to a historical past time. For culture to live and grow it requires new energy, and a sense of place, and time is not enough to sustain a cultural entity, it needs the ‘players’ to bring a new dialouge to the table. For my part no matter how hard I train I will never be a player in anything other than my own lifetime amongst my family and friends, I am not Chrissie Wellington!
The WTC needs to understand that it has in its hands a very rare entity and one which requires an ongoing healthy relationship with the very best athletes on the planet if it is to survive let alone grow. Kona is not something to be relegated to a corporate badge to be worn as a status symbol, it is something far deeper than that and as such deserves respect. I have no choice but to trust the WTC until I reach the point where I may one day qualify and earn the right to experience this great event. If that time arrives I only hope I can do the occasion justice in following in the steps of my heroes. My faith is that no matter how far the corporate world wants to spread out into the race, I know there will be a point out on the lava fields where their hand can not reach, and it is at this place where I will align my emotional self with the people who have travelled this path before, and touch the spirit of the event.
Dev/Rappstar: other potential analogies to WTC/Kona:
-sports: Red Sox, Celtics, Dodgers, Red Wings, Packers, FC Barcelona, Real Madrid, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal…
-biz/other: New York Times (maybe), Certain Natural Resources (Nepal and Everest), Metropolitan Opera, for profit museums, orchestras, etc., DaVita, Inc…
It is possible in my view to achieve very attractive returns from a business investment AND be good stewards. A number of my friends at Bain Capital have owned the Celtics since the early 2000s and have seen the value of their investment grow and the team’s performance improve. These guys are passionate Celtic fans.
in the 1990s I worked with a group of folks from Texas Pacific Group and we owned the Beringer Wine Company. We all were “into” wine and admired the Beringer brand. We were aggressive about improving the company and it’s products. We were ultimately sad to sell the company (but we did so at a healthy profit).
I’ve talked to Jesse Du Bey at Providence and he certainly views himself as a steward of the brand…
Time will tell how the Providence/WTC marraige works out but I for one am optimistic…
Some thoughts:
-
I agree with you that there is an over-emphasis on Ironman Hawaii at many different levels in the sport
-
While there is likley huge disagreement with this, I also believe that in the long run for the betterment of the sport of triathlon and the IM brand, moving their “World Championship” around would be a great idea. This is potentially a win/win situation as the WTC could rotate it back to Kona every few years, and then in those years that the “World Championships” was elsewhere there could still be an IM race in Kona each year, and this could now be wide open for, say lottery winners only, or something along those lines.
-
I think there should be more engagement and consultation with the Pro triathletes - but this is a two way street. With all due respect, many Pro triathletes don’t seem to really care. They have had ample opportunity to get themselves organized as a group into some form of formal or informal organization, but it’s like herding cats - many don’t seem to care, are too “busy”, or have a whats-in-it-for-me attitude.
-
The days of stewardship and responsibility for propping up the sport are over, clearly the size of the business of the WTC and the Ironman brand has gone beyond that. We should be grateful for the stewardship responsibility and care that was exhibited years ago back in the mid 90’s, pre-Olympics, pre- IM race expansion when the sport of triathlon was in a bit of a slump, and it was the WTC of the day that kept the lights on and the fires burning. However, it’s gone beyond that now - it’s a big business, and it has competition, so the WTC is going to behave more in line with a capitalistic business that operates in a competitive space! Hence it’s going to make some decesions, that may wrankle some people. It can’t be all warm & fuzzy 100% of the time. The bottom line is the bottom line!
-
I keep wondering when we will reach the plateau - we might be close, but I don’t think we are there yet. The additions of IMTremblant and IMNYC, and their rapid fill-ups, are clear indicators that the slope is still heading up. For anyone involved in the sport of triathlon from a business side, and even athletes to, a growing sport that is continuing to add more and more participants is a good thing. The plateau whenever it is reached will present some challenges!
I will not comment on Providence Equity, but given some of the rotten/dirty things I have heard about the WTC and their conduct, they are a great fit. I do not see them leaving the sport/product better than when they found it, nor do I see that as a concern of theirs.
The part that many miss in the whole argument is Stewardship versus Profit/Competition and the fact that the two CANNOT exist in harmony. The growing of the sport in the WTC eyes is all about pure numbers of entrants, races, and profits in the short term, regardless of whether it is sustainable, or in the end leaves someone else holding the bag.
The treatment of the Pros is demonstrative of this, with a great number of prize purses being cut in half. The Entry fees for these races did not drop and in fact went up.
In almost every other sport a win is a win. If Boston beats they Yankees they get one in the win column. Not with the WTC where an IM win at CDA is less than an IM win at Texas. I can understand a small extent having maybe some higher paying purses, but an Ironman win should be an Ironman win, and having tiered races with some being the bastard child, to me sends the wrong message.
Stewardship belongs in an organization that fosters growth, not one that pushes for monopoly. If the WTC wants to show me that they are the premiere entity, then they need to do that by the quality of their races, the purses they pay out, and the care and respect that they treat athletes as a whole.
The fact that an Olympic distance race today pays out MORE than the WTC 70.3 and 140.6 World Championships COMBINED, says it all. It has long been noted how the Kona purses have not really grown in 20 years. While Hy-vee may be a bit of an annomally, it does show more of the level that events like Kona should have reached. While one may say that they cannot be faulted since they are relatively new to the game, what I have seen from them is not a “growing” of purses, but merely more of a shifting of money, where in the last year, many have been cut in half.
WTC = We Take the CASH
I believe that the PGA and the tennis circuits pay different amounts for different events…does your thrashing of the WTC doing same extend to these two as well?
BTW–a win is not always the same in baseball. Surely winning game 7 of the world series is more important than beating the Yankees in pre-season? (and in both cases, neither counts in the win column).
Nascar pays many drivers more for finishing behind the drivers in front of them…
Your assertion that Stewardship vs. Profit CANNOT exist in harmony is a “fact” stretches the definition of a fact (last time I checked, your opionions are not facts). Not really sure what the word harmony means in this case (do you mean two objectives that are both important or is there some type of musical attribute that you are stressing?)
Late breaking news–my guess is that the WTC has no interest in showing you anything so don’t wait up nights…
you post is error filled and deficient in basic logic
I read something from James Cunnama recently and it was about why he was not racing Kona this year. The vibe was that it’s a really long and expensive trip for him and if he did not place in the top 10 he might earn $600 or something like that for a lower placing. But this dude is a great athlete = he won IMFL and IMSA!! I might be stone cold trippin’ but my impression was that he’s not racing because he is not ready but moreso over the trip being a false economy = financial liability. It totally sucks that the prize purse at Kona is so pathetically weak. But what about James sponsors? Can’t they help him out and pick up the tab for the trip? Again, I might be trippin’ but it felt like he’s ready to go but it is not worth it for him due to cost.
The easiest thing the WTC could do is make a dramatic increase in the Kona prize purse and roll it down really deep so that even the guy or girl who comes in 25th can walk away with at least a couple thousand dollars.
RE: how easy it is to ruin institutions…try being a hockey fan in Toronto and being the age of 40-55 years old. These two era’s has effectively ruined an institution.
- Harold Ballard
- MLSE (Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment)
The NFL has banned the Green Bay Packer model where it is owned by the community. Funny that, given they win, sellout and are followed by millions.
Steve: I’m not going to say that I agree with everything the WTC does (nor do I think that’s a relevant criteria to judge that organization) but I keep coming back to a couple of simple questions:
Is the sport better today than it was when the WTC got involved? (My opinion is that it is substantially so)
Is the Ironman as a race more respected now than it was when the WTC got involved? (Hard to say, but if you measure this in terms of how many people do one, how quickly races sell out, how hard it is to get into many races then one could argue affirmatively on this)
Is Kona bigger or smaller since WTC got involved? (Pretty obviously bigger)
Maybe these are the wrong questions to ask. But at a personal level, as I think about the sport of triathlon, it’s a WTC Ironman race each year that I focus my efforts around. The one race above all that I’d like to do is Kona. this is more true today than it was in the past.
I think some of your and Rapp’s ideas are great (in fact, I think generally speaking they always are). I’m only taking issue with slamming the WTC for lack of stewardship (not that you really were, but one could surmise from your comments that you don’t think of them as stewards).
I believe they have been excellent stewards so far. Yes they have raised prices, lowered payouts, made it harder to qualify for Kona, extended the brand to shorter races, etc. which I don’t necessarily agree with, but those are different things, or at the very least just components. Overall, I’m very happy with how the WTC has been stewarding Ironman (so far) and I hope they keep it up.
I’ve talked to Jesse Du Bey at Providence and he certainly views himself as a steward of the brand…
What do you think he’s going to say? All people in his position think they’re good stewards for their industry. Unfortunately, 9x out of 10 they’re blinded by their greed and/or arrogance.
Not that it matters at all, I mostly disagree with Jordan’s view but I do firmly believe that the WTC is not executing in the best interests of their customers. A primary business principle of mine: Focus on addressing your customers needs first and the revenue will come.
Btw, yes, I think you are asking the wrong questions. This sport had plenty of momentum to go in the exact direction it’s gone with or without the WTC. That’s exactly why they did what they did.
Thanks, Chris
Is the Sport better? Maybe, but the big question is how much of that is WTC versus how much of that is Rev 3, Challenge and other groups. Similarly, most of the growth is ancillary, and a fair amount of it comes from vendor and manufacturers. There is also a trailing factor. Much of the growth of the sport was Pre-Providence buying WTC not because of what WTC has done post Providence.
How many people do races is not necessarily a factor of a particular org as it is of grass roots and locals.
By that extent, despite almost 30 Ironman Races and 50+ 70.3s, the majority of the world if you say Ironman or Triathlon, they say the race in Hawaii, and that recognition DOES NOT come from Providence, but Wide World of Sports from 20 years ago. In fact given the expansion that Providence has done, what is more disappointing is the lack of coverage. Can you watch the Tour De France live on TV (Yup…) How about the Master? World Series? Super Bowl? Tennis? Yet Kona is still relegated to a two month, cut-down tape delay in one of the least desirable TV spots in the TV Calendar, saturday, mid-afternoon two weeks before Christmas.
***Is Kona bigger or smaller since WTC got involved? (Pretty obviously bigger) ***
How many competitors? It is pretty much the same? Number of pros? That has been contracted. Payout? The same if not smaller. TV Coverage? Newspaper Coverage? How many people who were NOT involved in the sport KNEW the Tour De France was going on? The Masters? How many know Kona has/is?
Kona was built on the WTC PRE Providence and those before it. Under Providence, it has been stagnant at best.
When I think of Stewardship, I think more of an organization like USAT who promotes the sport, greats and organized body to try and regulate and even helps other organizers INCLUDING the WTC to insure the events. When I look at the WTC and some of their nature which is Predatory, does the WTC want organizations like Rev 3 or Challenge to grow and compete with them. If that answer is NO, then they cannot be true stewards of the sport, where as someone like the USAT would love to see as many well run races and organizations out there.
How has Providence grown Kona? The allure and status of the race existed long before Providence.
So I have one more thought on the stewardship front.
Pro triathlon is kind of treated like a joke in the media because our prize purses are barely enough to cover groceries.
If you recall back in 1988 or so, Kona and Nice were on par, actually if you asked many Nice was the show and had the most stacked pro field. Kona was this amateur race that a bunch of pros went and did for “Charity and bragging rights”, but Nice is where they went to earn a living. I still have VHS tapes of Mark Allen winning in Nice straight off US NETWORK TV. No age grouper “life changing stories, no special entry stuff, NOTHING”…JUST THE PRO RACE.
At the time, Nice had a big prize purse, TV productions and a ton of media interest.
It was not until Hawaii smartened up and awarded prize money that it started getting a deeper pro field. Realistically Nice had the deep field.
Fast forward 25 years or so.
The prize money in Kona is literally a joke. Most of the engineers sitting across from my office will make more in 4 weeks just for showing up and going to work than pretty well everyone outside the top 5 in Kona…that’s just ridiculous.
I’d guess that there are more people worldwide now playing triathlon vs tennis, yet Tennis seems to be able to pull in way more sponsorship dollars. In my city (Ottawa) this weekend, we had 1400 people at the local tri…I can’t imagine 1400 showing up to any tennis event in my city, yet Tennis tournaments in Canada offer pros a prize purse that is 36x larger than our biggest prize money tri events.
WTC can do more to raise the profile of the Kona prize purse, by just jacking it up to 2-5 milllion or so. It’s a chicken and egg thing. If they invest in a larger prize purse, the media profile goes up and sponsors start treating this thing more seriously like a main stream event vs some freak show populated by age groupers who are mothers of 4, or people coming back from disease or battling some other major obstacle to get to Kona. I appreciate that age groupers do a lot to get to Kona, but if WTC keeps up with a sob story yearly production of the age grouper story vs really show casing the professional event, the sport will remain something that is trapped in an extension of the Julie Moss freak show.
Julie Moss was almost 30 years ago…we need to move on as a sport and show case the amazing pro story and the COMPETITION if the sport is to grow from a professionalism perspective. I think also to some degree the pros are to blame and should be selling THEIR STORY as the main event in the TV coverage. Showcasing the age grouper “personal stories” is great if you want your fuel for your sport to be age groupers who get inspired and use the 40,000 participantsx$600 as your primary revenue driver…heck, that’s barely $24 milllion…OK, fine call it $50 million. Growth through participant fees is quite limited, whereas where the sport can grow throw media and sponsorship is much more substantial.
I feel growing the Kona prize purse and really featuring the Kona pro race as a marquis event and de emphasizing the age grouper story is the only way it will be treated seriously in the media…and seriously enough to grow.
It was great to grow the sport through increasing age group participation, but this will eventually hit a ceiling. From a stewardship perpective, WTC needs to jack up the profile of the Kona pro race to really take it to the next level, tour de France style.
Dev
I have very lite interest in racing in a IM world champ anywhere except Kona. Reasons have been said in this thread. Kona is “it” and has been since the early 80’s. Any other venue and it would lose that magic. If it was just an iron distance race in Kona that would also have no appeal. I could travel there and do a solo IM whenever I want and I do not want to. Me and most want to experience Kona as it has been for years. I have not dreamed of doing the WTC world IM championship. I have dreamed about racing in the IM World Camps in Kona. Anything less and I do not give a rats ass. If there are no pros in the field the race would not be the same and lose some appeal. When you te people you are doing Ironman they ask “in Hawaii?”. If the WC was in Europe they would not get it and it frankly would suck.
Your post brings up an interesting issue.
On the one hand some pros say that Kona is a sacred institution and that it should be handled as such, not strictly as a business
On the other hand some pros say I wont do Kona it doesn’t pay enough.
Styrrell