With the current economic hardships that exist and are predicted to continue for at least another year with most bike manufacturers will we see a massive shrinking in Pro bike sponsorships? It started last year with Specialized reducing their roster significantly, hearing Trek is doing the same this year and let’s be honest Canyon can’t sponsor everyone. Where does that leave Pro’s seeking bike sponsorship? Seems we have major manufacturers exiting Tri all together (only producing time trial bikes, UCI legal) or reducing their sponsored athletes to just a select few. What options does that leave Pro’s with regards to their largest expense required to compete?
It makes absolutely no sense that a manufacturer like trek, specialized or Scott have to make both a tt bike for the pro teams at the world tour. Which probably sell in the low hundreds. And then a tri bike that sells in the low thousands at best. This due to different rules. Unify the rules and it would make it a lot easier for the big manufacturers.
Agree 100%, maybe we will see the shift to more TT style bikes rather than the long course specific pack mules of the last 5-10 years.
Salthouse and Trek are done…
Word on the street is Sam Long as well.
I kind of thought we were had already been at the correction?
Most triathletes aren’t buying bikes because a specific athlete is sponsored. Who is buying a Trek because Sam Long is riding one? Who is riding a cervelo because Anne Haug rides a P5? If you were to buy trek because Sam is on one, how many are buying a Pro-level triathlon setup which can be upwards of $15-20K depending on the build specifications? Not many. It’s just too expensive to ride what the pros ride. So using pros to market bikes that are out of reach expensive and impractical for most folks doesn’t seem to make a ton of sense anymore. In general, I think bikes are just too darn expensive these days. Perhaps back in the US postal glory days you had people lining up to buy treks because you could get a decent rig that was close to what LA was riding at the TDF.
Is there any real value in sponsoring a pro for most brands? I would argue very little unless you are getting some quality marketing return such as usable high end photos for ads or YouTube views but even those have limit. Agree that bikes in general have gotten out of control price wise so something has to give and just find it interesting where this trend ends up.
Another thing to consider is that Pro triathletes just aren’t “famous” enough outside the niche endurance-sport world. I mean, who is the MOST famous triathlete of all-time? Mark Allan, Dave Scott, Jan Frodeno, Brownlee? Even with social media Is a well-known triathlete’s reach today even 1/100th of Lance and Trek at his peak in sport? I agree with you that it’d be hard to calculate the cash value a bike manufacturer could get from sponsoring an athlete that 99% of the general population doesn’t recognize. In the end, I think you’re right that the future of pro triathlete bike sponsorships looks bleak.
Where’d you hear that? Curious how a brand just cuts for whatever reason…do they typically sign pros to 2-3 year contracts or year to year?
Where’d you hear that? Curious how a brand just cuts for whatever reason…do they typically sign pros to 2-3 year contracts or year to year?
sponsorship is a wide spectrum
At one extreme, the athlete gets a 25% discount on a frameset and claims to be sponsored
At the other, the athlete gets 5 full bikes a year, 2 “other bikes” like gravel for he and his spouse, a base salary and bonuses for podiums, the sum worth many 10s of thousands of dollars. They may also pay for things like wind tunnels, other aero testing…
I have heard rumors of very big numbers for guys like the Norwegians.
And there is everything in between. Of course duration is variable. i have seen several 2 year deals.
A brand can decide to not offer a new contract or reduce their offer to the point the athlete refuses it.
Allocation of budget is peanuts when you look at what the big boys spend on World Tour.
Just making up numbers here, Specialized probably divvies up their 10million sponsorship budget with 5 to Remco’s team, 3 to bora, 1 to Total and divvies up the last million to all the other activities…gravel, mountain…and tri gets a small portion which then gets divvied up between ITU and LC.
Salthouse and Trek are done…
Word on the street is Sam Long as well.
Surely not another bloody canyon in the works
.
Most triathletes aren’t buying bikes because a specific athlete is sponsored. Who is buying a Trek because Sam Long is riding one? Who is riding a cervelo because Anne Haug rides a P5? If you were to buy trek because Sam is on one, how many are buying a Pro-level triathlon setup which can be upwards of $15-20K depending on the build specifications? Not many. It’s just too expensive to ride what the pros ride. So using pros to market bikes that are out of reach expensive and impractical for most folks doesn’t seem to make a ton of sense anymore. In general, I think bikes are just too darn expensive these days. Perhaps back in the US postal glory days you had people lining up to buy treks because you could get a decent rig that was close to what LA was riding at the TDF.
I don’t own a Trek, but if I was in the market I’d consider it because of Sam Long. Sam goes for Cervelo or Canyon.
Incidentally, I my QR purchase has nothing to do with any athlete but a recommendation from a coach I know who praised it for being a fast bike with a lot of features found on more expensive bikes.
If I could buy again, I’d likely get Trek, Canyon or Cervelo, and I can’t explain why, so sponsorship must influence my feeling.
Where’d you hear that? Curious how a brand just cuts for whatever reason…do they typically sign pros to 2-3 year contracts or year to year?
She shared that on IG.
With the costs of many tri bikes going up and less options available in that low to mid ($2-5k), I think we are seeing people hold on to their tri bikes longer than ever before. Also with all of the advances we have made in the last 10 years with aerodynamics, disc brakes, etc., there just aren’t compelling reasons for the masses to buy a new bike (unless you like shiny new things but that’s the minority). I think companies are starting to realize this and trying to figure out where their money is best spent. Even if that means, they take sponsorship money out of tri.
Honestly, companies are better off sponsoring a team of AG’ers with a good discount 30-40% off than pro’s IMO.
Most triathletes aren’t buying bikes because a specific athlete is sponsored. Who is buying a Trek because Sam Long is riding one? Who is riding a cervelo because Anne Haug rides a P5? If you were to buy trek because Sam is on one, how many are buying a Pro-level triathlon setup which can be upwards of $15-20K depending on the build specifications? Not many. It’s just too expensive to ride what the pros ride. So using pros to market bikes that are out of reach expensive and impractical for most folks doesn’t seem to make a ton of sense anymore. In general, I think bikes are just too darn expensive these days. Perhaps back in the US postal glory days you had people lining up to buy treks because you could get a decent rig that was close to what LA was riding at the TDF.
I don’t own a Trek, but if I was in the market I’d consider it because of Sam Long. Sam goes for Cervelo or Canyon.
Incidentally, I my QR purchase has nothing to do with any athlete but a recommendation from a coach I know who praised it for being a fast bike with a lot of features found on more expensive bikes.
If I could buy again, I’d likely get Trek, Canyon or Cervelo, and I can’t explain why, so sponsorship must influence my feeling.
There are cases where sponsorship can add a lot of value for a brand. There is the Trek/Lance example of course, but there is also the issue of market entry. By sponsoring lots of pros, Canyon is able to convince people that its mail order bikes are world class. Similar story for Speedplay, who sponsored a bunch of pro cycling teams to overcome the perception that their pedals were just for triathletes.
Most triathletes aren’t buying bikes because a specific athlete is sponsored. Who is buying a Trek because Sam Long is riding one? Who is riding a cervelo because Anne Haug rides a P5? If you were to buy trek because Sam is on one, how many are buying a Pro-level triathlon setup which can be upwards of $15-20K depending on the build specifications? Not many. It’s just too expensive to ride what the pros ride. So using pros to market bikes that are out of reach expensive and impractical for most folks doesn’t seem to make a ton of sense anymore. In general, I think bikes are just too darn expensive these days. Perhaps back in the US postal glory days you had people lining up to buy treks because you could get a decent rig that was close to what LA was riding at the TDF.
Agreed for me at least
I am subscribed and watch probably all of the top triathletes YouTube videos
I couldn’t tell you what bike any of them rode
I just bought a new Tri bike and it had zero to do with what any, if any pros rode that brand
Bikes do definitely sell because of pro influence. Do all bikes sell because of pros? No. Do some? Yes.
Pros are a billboard. Do you sponsor 30 top pros (current Canyon/2008 Specialized strategy)? Do you 100% cut production of tri bikes (Specialized 2022)? Or do you find a happy medium (Aristotle’s Golden Mean)?
I’ve done robust econometric analyses with real company data using 5+ years of companies’ data and can say that pros definitely move the needle. But like a billboard, it depends how you use them: do you put the billboard in an alley, one in Times Square (Nike/Jordan 1984), or a dozen around town that catch the eye of the rush hour crowd? it depends, right?
I think the IM Pro series lends some institutional legitimacy to the value of pros and it will have an autoregressive effect: the series itself will increase the future value pros add to IM and to the industry, and the pros will increase the value of the series and the industry, and so on in an autoregressive cross-lagged manner.
As for the economy: past performance predicts future performance. How great was the bike industry’s past performance of predicting bike sales at the beginning of COVID? How great were they when they over produced because of a belief the COVID boom would last into 2024? The bike industry underpays the kids building these financial models and the quality of these predictions demonstrates you get what you pay for. So, looking at the past performance of the bike industries’ predictions, why should we think their predictions for 2024 are going to be hit the dartboard, let alone the bullseye? And what should make us think they’re even remotely capable of measuring the value pros bring to their brands? From what I’ve seen, they look a whole lot more like the scouts at the beginning of the movie, Moneyball, than they look like the Jonah Hill character.
Re: Sam and Trek. I think the previously stated rumor is incorrect. And, I’d seriously think a Yo Yo Yo paint job offering as part of Trek’s Project One program would do OK, and they could cut Sam a slice of those direct sales, imo. Zoot and Powerbar have such programs. I think Trek could do that for other athletes and other bike manufacturers could do that for their pros, successfully.
I referenced 1984 Nike and Jordan - Nike had advertisements up the wazoo for Jordan. Are these companies leveraging their pros effectively? or are they erecting billboards in alleys? What are these companies’ role in getting and sponsoring live race coverage? in providing Instagram and Youtube content for their pros? Do they understand the psychology and behavior of pros and work with rather than against those tendencies - e.g. ask pros to post for sponsors because that’s the pro’s job, or the sponsor spoon feed the pro authentic/non-gimmicky content? Do they take responsibility for leveraging their pros, or is it a ‘toss money into the wind and hope it blows back 5-fold’ strategy?
I’ve been in the bike and tri industry in some capacity since the late 90’s and I’ve seen the effect pros have on sales, and I’ve measured the impact rigorously outside of my own anecdotal observations. I can say with my little start up that’s been shipping product for a mere year, I have people write me weekly, “Damn you! There was no way in hell I was going to pay that much for a damn saddle, but now that I’ve seen this and that pro on it, I’m pulling the trigger.”
I’ve been in the tri game for over 20 years. Pre-Covid I stopped following the pro scene. Now I couldn’t name 10 current pros, male or female - much less what they ride. I have a short list of new bikes I’d buy if I had the money and none of my choices have anything to do with what a pro rides.
RP
I’ve been in the tri game for over 20 years. Pre-Covid I stopped following the pro scene. Now I couldn’t name 10 current pros, male or female - much less what they ride. I have a short list of new bikes I’d buy if I had the money and none of my choices have anything to do with what a pro rides.
RP
My follow up question to that is, if there wasn’t a single pro on a bike you were considering, would it affect your decision? I’ve long been of the mind that pros, at the very least, lend legitimacy to products. Sure, there always a dollar amount that will get someone to sacrifice performance, but for the most part pros aren’t going to knowingly tank their speed/comfort/whatever. If no one trusts or uses your product at the highest level, then certainly that’s a red flag, no?
Salthouse and Trek are done…
Word on the street is Sam Long as well.
Surely not another bloody canyon in the works
Really? Sam Long too??? Elliot Bach just signed up with Trek. He used to ride BMC. He didn’t race much this year due to injury so I was wondering why. I think it’s not the Trek ended the relationship. Canyon offered a lot of money so they switched???