Redlands & Sea Otter prize money sucks



M

MagillaGorilla

Guest
How come Sea Otter and Redlands are these coveted races but have such
suck-ass prize money? Why would a pro care about winning a race where
there's no money involved?

I would like to hear Mike Schatzman's opinion since everyone else seems
to think that 11th place and no money is a goood result for a pro
cyclist even though it's really not.


Thanks,

Magilla
 
MagillaGorilla <[email protected]> wrote:
> How come Sea Otter and Redlands are these coveted races but have such
> suck-ass prize money? Why would a pro care about winning a race where
> there's no money involved?


> I would like to hear Mike Schatzman's opinion since everyone else seems
> to think that 11th place and no money is a goood result for a pro
> cyclist even though it's really not.


Aren't you going to add VOS as well?

They offer suck ass prize money because they can and people still show
up. The reason people still show up is the press coverage. Sponsors
(remember them) like it when their name shows up in the press. The
early season races get more press than mid-season stuff because there
is nothing else going on then.

Which wouldn't explain why the 12K dreamer teams show since they get
neither money nor press. But I have to point out that the turnout
for Sea Otter this year really sucked, at least for the road events.

Bob Schwartz
[email protected]
 
In article <[email protected]>, Bob Schwartz
<[email protected]> wrote:

> MagillaGorilla <[email protected]> wrote:
> > How come Sea Otter and Redlands are these coveted races but have such
> > suck-ass prize money? Why would a pro care about winning a race where
> > there's no money involved?

>
> > I would like to hear Mike Schatzman's opinion since everyone else seems
> > to think that 11th place and no money is a goood result for a pro
> > cyclist even though it's really not.

>
> Aren't you going to add VOS as well?
>
> They offer suck ass prize money because they can and people still show
> up. The reason people still show up is the press coverage. Sponsors
> (remember them) like it when their name shows up in the press. The
> early season races get more press than mid-season stuff because there
> is nothing else going on then.


It's a chance for everyone to get in some racing, AND some training in
the decent weather found around here during February through April.

> Which wouldn't explain why the 12K dreamer teams show since they get
> neither money nor press. But I have to point out that the turnout
> for Sea Otter this year really sucked, at least for the road events.


Sea Otter keeps screwing around with their races and courses and
offered almost no prize money at all in 2004. If it wasn't for OLN I
think they'd have lost the race by now. We'll see what happens in 2005.

-WG
 
Bob Schwartz wrote:

> MagillaGorilla <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>How come Sea Otter and Redlands are these coveted races but have such
>>suck-ass prize money? Why would a pro care about winning a race where
>>there's no money involved?

>
>
>>I would like to hear Mike Schatzman's opinion since everyone else seems
>>to think that 11th place and no money is a goood result for a pro
>>cyclist even though it's really not.

>
>
> Aren't you going to add VOS as well?
>
> They offer suck ass prize money because they can and people still show
> up. The reason people still show up is the press coverage. Sponsors
> (remember them) like it when their name shows up in the press. The
> early season races get more press than mid-season stuff because there
> is nothing else going on then.
>
> Which wouldn't explain why the 12K dreamer teams show since they get
> neither money nor press. But I have to point out that the turnout
> for Sea Otter this year really sucked, at least for the road events.
>
> Bob Schwartz
> [email protected]



What press are you talking about? Every race gets local coverage and
velonews, cyclingnews, etc..

My question is why do D2 and D3 teams fly their entire team and
entourages out to a race that offers $8 for 10th place in some stages?

Sea Otter is being gutted by Tour de Georgia. The conditions are ripe
for Team Subway-Express to take their first stage win in an NRC race.

Magilla
 
warren wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, Bob Schwartz
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>MagillaGorilla <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>How come Sea Otter and Redlands are these coveted races but have such
>>>suck-ass prize money? Why would a pro care about winning a race where
>>>there's no money involved?

>>
>>>I would like to hear Mike Schatzman's opinion since everyone else seems
>>>to think that 11th place and no money is a goood result for a pro
>>>cyclist even though it's really not.

>>
>>Aren't you going to add VOS as well?
>>
>>They offer suck ass prize money because they can and people still show
>>up. The reason people still show up is the press coverage. Sponsors
>>(remember them) like it when their name shows up in the press. The
>>early season races get more press than mid-season stuff because there
>>is nothing else going on then.

>
>
> It's a chance for everyone to get in some racing, AND some training in
> the decent weather found around here during February through April.
>
>



So why does Chris Horner make it out to be like the Tour de France every
year? The guy like peaks for Redlands and parades this fact around to
the press. No wonder why he's never won the USPRO Philadelphia road title.


Thanks,


Magilla
 
sea otter is a silly race...

so are most all of the races in theUS...

velonews and cyclingnews and whatever else news you wanna read are not media
coverage that is useful to sponsors who pay a lot of money to teams...

there is a MASSIVE FAILURE in the media promotions of cycling teams and of
races... i can say at least that my team gets it and we do a ton of stuff for
TV and whatever magaizines and papers we can in whatever areas we will race
in... i dont think any other teams do this... we actively pursue all
opportunities to get OFOTO in front of more people.. thats why our program is
successful and thats why we keep getting the money.. its not about winning
stupid bike races that nobody cares about anyway...its about using cycling and
its notariety to get in the mainstream media...

the one thing that the cycling press is good for is your parts and bike
sponsors beacause these outlets are laser targeted to people who most want to
buy your products... so for that it is good to be in velonews or whatever.. but
its distibution is so small as to be worthless to a big sponsor.. they want you
to get on TV and in newspapers and **** like that... and if your sponsor is
smart they will use their PR people to help you do that.. but i dont think that
a lot of them do...
 
"MagillaGorilla" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> warren wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>, Bob Schwartz
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>MagillaGorilla <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>How come Sea Otter and Redlands are these coveted races but have such
> >>>suck-ass prize money? Why would a pro care about winning a race where
> >>>there's no money involved?
> >>
> >>>I would like to hear Mike Schatzman's opinion since everyone else seems
> >>>to think that 11th place and no money is a goood result for a pro
> >>>cyclist even though it's really not.
> >>
> >>Aren't you going to add VOS as well?
> >>
> >>They offer suck ass prize money because they can and people still show
> >>up. The reason people still show up is the press coverage. Sponsors
> >>(remember them) like it when their name shows up in the press. The
> >>early season races get more press than mid-season stuff because there
> >>is nothing else going on then.

> >
> >
> > It's a chance for everyone to get in some racing, AND some training in
> > the decent weather found around here during February through April.
> >
> >

>
>
> So why does Chris Horner make it out to be like the Tour de France every
> year? The guy like peaks for Redlands and parades this fact around to
> the press. No wonder why he's never won the USPRO Philadelphia road

title.

Because there's no testing in the winter?

And he is able to train all winter with friends, while much of his
competition has to travel or deal with bad weather.

-WG
 
erik saunders wrote:
>
> sea otter is a silly race...
>
> so are most all of the races in theUS...
>
> velonews and cyclingnews and whatever else news you wanna read are not media
> coverage that is useful to sponsors who pay a lot of money to teams...
>
> there is a MASSIVE FAILURE in the media promotions of cycling teams and of
> races... i can say at least that my team gets it and we do a ton of stuff for
> TV and whatever magaizines and papers we can in whatever areas we will race
> in... i dont think any other teams do this... we actively pursue all
> opportunities to get OFOTO in front of more people.. thats why our program is
> successful and thats why we keep getting the money.. its not about winning
> stupid bike races that nobody cares about anyway...its about using cycling and
> its notariety to get in the mainstream media...


Exactly.

> the one thing that the cycling press is good for is your parts and bike
> sponsors beacause these outlets are laser targeted to people who most want to
> buy your products... so for that it is good to be in velonews or whatever.. but
> its distibution is so small as to be worthless to a big sponsor.. they want you
> to get on TV and in newspapers and **** like that... and if your sponsor is
> smart they will use their PR people to help you do that.. but i dont think that
> a lot of them do...


I think you are likely correct.

"Pro cycling" in the US needs to do more if it wants to grow in fans and
dollars. Pro's might want to look past their own teams and figure out what it
takes as an _association_ of pro's (and the event sponsors) to make the sport
more entertaining and accessible as a whole. And as you say, to penetrate the
mainstream media both directly and indirectly. It would be a long term view. I
wonder if the short term demands of riders simply getting results is to some
measure in conflict with long term aims.

I realize that is a tough one, especially when some of the pro's struggle
financially and the sport is so physically demanding. It is all about
marketing. Pro's putting on "a show" people want to see, or nailing some other
touchy-feely connection with the public, is #1, albeit it within the sport
competition paradigm.
 
>"Pro cycling" in the US needs to do more if it wants to grow in fans and
>dollars. Pro's might want to look past their own teams and figure out what
>it
>takes as an _association_ of pro's (and the event sponsors) to make the sport
>more entertaining and accessible as a whole. And as you say, to penetrate
>the
>mainstream media both directly and indirectly. It would be a long term view.
>I
>wonder if the short term demands of riders simply getting results is to some
>measure in conflict with long term aims.
>
>I realize that is a tough one, especially when some of the pro's struggle
>financially and the sport is so physically demanding. It is all about
>marketing. Pro's putting on "a show" people want to see, or nailing some
>other
>touchy-feely connection with the public, is #1, albeit it within the sport
>competition paradigm.
>


you are right.. i have said this so many times... leiswyn tried to start a
riders union that would have handled some of this.. i couldnt support it
becuase his focus was off and it seemed more like a power grab and means to
extort than an effort to help the sport...

but yeah... its time to have some of these people ban together to help
themselves collectively... a big problem is that the majority of people who are
in this scene are volunteer and dont have the time or the expertise to get more
out of their events and teams through correct marketing and media programs...
its even hard to get the sponsors to be more involved!... its crazy to see it
but i think that a lot of sponsors just throw the money at cycling and then
turn around and go back to what they were doing...

if any of you have a good sponsor you should sit with them and brainstorm ways
to get the most out of your sponsorship... especially when it comes to them
spending their own time and money to promote the relationship that they have
already with you... with a little colateral expendatures and good pragmatic
brainstorming you can really get a ton out of a relationship...

the other side to this is having guys who "get it" and who are motivated to
service your sponsor... its hard to get a lot of bike racers to realize that
racing and training doesnt mean as much as they think to the successful
execution of a marketing plan... in cycling...
 
erik saunders said:
>"Pro cycling" in the US needs to do more if it wants to grow in fans and
>dollars. Pro's might want to look past their own teams and figure out what
>it
>takes as an _association_ of pro's (and the event sponsors) to make the sport
>more entertaining and accessible as a whole. And as you say, to penetrate
>the
>mainstream media both directly and indirectly. It would be a long term view.
>I
>wonder if the short term demands of riders simply getting results is to some
>measure in conflict with long term aims.
>
>I realize that is a tough one, especially when some of the pro's struggle
>financially and the sport is so physically demanding. It is all about
>marketing. Pro's putting on "a show" people want to see, or nailing some
>other
>touchy-feely connection with the public, is #1, albeit it within the sport
>competition paradigm.
>


you are right.. i have said this so many times... leiswyn tried to start a
riders union that would have handled some of this.. i couldnt support it
becuase his focus was off and it seemed more like a power grab and means to
extort than an effort to help the sport...

but yeah... its time to have some of these people ban together to help
themselves collectively... a big problem is that the majority of people who are
in this scene are volunteer and dont have the time or the expertise to get more
out of their events and teams through correct marketing and media programs...
its even hard to get the sponsors to be more involved!... its crazy to see it
but i think that a lot of sponsors just throw the money at cycling and then
turn around and go back to what they were doing...

if any of you have a good sponsor you should sit with them and brainstorm ways
to get the most out of your sponsorship... especially when it comes to them
spending their own time and money to promote the relationship that they have
already with you... with a little colateral expendatures and good pragmatic
brainstorming you can really get a ton out of a relationship...

the other side to this is having guys who "get it" and who are motivated to
service your sponsor... its hard to get a lot of bike racers to realize that
racing and training doesnt mean as much as they think to the successful
execution of a marketing plan... in cycling...

Thanks for posting all that, Erik, it makes good sense. That's why you were on that CapTech video and not some other guys, right? Very cool.
 
erik saunders wrote:
>
> >"Pro cycling" in the US needs to do more if it wants to grow in fans and
> >dollars. Pro's might want to look past their own teams and figure out what
> >it
> >takes as an _association_ of pro's (and the event sponsors) to make the sport
> >more entertaining and accessible as a whole. And as you say, to penetrate
> >the
> >mainstream media both directly and indirectly. It would be a long term view.
> >I
> >wonder if the short term demands of riders simply getting results is to some
> >measure in conflict with long term aims.
> >
> >I realize that is a tough one, especially when some of the pro's struggle
> >financially and the sport is so physically demanding. It is all about
> >marketing. Pro's putting on "a show" people want to see, or nailing some
> >other
> >touchy-feely connection with the public, is #1, albeit it within the sport
> >competition paradigm.
> >

>
> you are right.. i have said this so many times... leiswyn tried to start a
> riders union that would have handled some of this.. i couldnt support it
> becuase his focus was off and it seemed more like a power grab and means to
> extort than an effort to help the sport...
>
> but yeah... its time to have some of these people ban together to help
> themselves collectively...


I really wonder if the idea of "helping the sport" is a diversion, and forming a
special interest group to ultimately serve your own financial interests and
prospects *as pro's* (albeit through the vehicle of cycling) is more important.
I have to wonder if a special interest group may actually help the sport in the
long run by being successful in and of itself. It is really up to the pro's
themselves. "Some unfairness somewhere" with a SIG is pretty much a given, and
you folks will need to decide if the glass is half full or half empty. All I
can say is that the special interests of baseball, football, and basketball,
(for example) are handily outdoing US pro cycling with Lance being the only
aberation to that rule.

The amateurs and small time promoters might be able to help a little, but to
depend on them to penetrate the larger public's conciousness is unlikely to
produce any meaningful results. I think the record shows that approach can
produce riders, but not money or mass popularization. Because the premise of
"professional" is all about money/commercialization, it is up to the
professionals themselves to create their own business.

> a big problem is that the majority of people who are
> in this scene are volunteer and dont have the time or the expertise to get more
> out of their events and teams through correct marketing and media programs...
> its even hard to get the sponsors to be more involved!... its crazy to see it
> but i think that a lot of sponsors just throw the money at cycling and then
> turn around and go back to what they were doing...


Everyone is short-handed, someone needs to figure out how to get over the hump.
I think you're really on to the right idea with brainstorming and figuring out
how to get the most (and "right") bang for the least effort.

Just think if cycling ever had the status of getting a CP-Pedalchick type soap
opera into the National Enquirer. Sorta like J-Lo/Ben stuff. (I'm kidding ....
sort of. LOL "There is no such thing as bad publicity.")

> if any of you have a good sponsor you should sit with them and brainstorm ways
> to get the most out of your sponsorship... especially when it comes to them
> spending their own time and money to promote the relationship that they have
> already with you... with a little colateral expendatures and good pragmatic
> brainstorming you can really get a ton out of a relationship...
>
> the other side to this is having guys who "get it" and who are motivated to
> service your sponsor... its hard to get a lot of bike racers to realize that
> racing and training doesnt mean as much as they think to the successful
> execution of a marketing plan... in cycling...


Yep, the customer is everything -- it is their dough. Nice thinking Eric.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"...every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the
society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the
public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the
support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own
security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be
of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in
many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part
of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part
of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society
more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known
much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good." -- A. Smith
 

Similar threads

E
Replies
1
Views
843
A