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