No more IM-NYC (Page 2)

Beyond the course logistics of adding the swim and bike, look at the number of registrants/fees:

IM NYC:

2500(?) cap: Registration $1200 (2013)

2500 athletes *$1200/athlete = $3,000,000

NYC Marathon:

~47,000 starters in 2012, registration $255 (2013)

47000 runners * $255/runner = $11,985,000

So for NYC marathon vs. NYC IM, you have less road closures, for a shorter time, but 4x the registration money coming in.

And insurance that DOESN'T include open water swimming would probably be a lot less.

I amazed they pulled it off at all.

I suppose with the urban events they've got to try them to see if they work.  The one in Melbourne was a resounding success but it's hardly New York!!!

At least they learnt from it and took the decision to cancel rather than try again and p*ss a lot of people off with poor logistics etc.

I'm sure they will find another urban one to replace it!

X2:  "bravado or hubris" (JoePetto)

X2:  "ineptitude and greed" (southwestmba)

Thinking about bravado, hubris, greed, and ineptitude, some combination of those four faults has to be behind the awful track record WTC is establishing for having races go badly off-the-tracks, and flat-out "losing" races.  Miami 70.3 a couple of years ago was a travesty, the 5i50 series has been a debacle, and the loss of races such as Mooseman and Rhode Island speaks poorly to.....something or other.  And by that I mean that I don't know all the story behind the elimination of those races -- but do know that most established independent races don't just "die" so swiftly.

It just astounds me that the supposed "premier" (and don't their entry rates suggest that?) race organization continues to make so many blunders.  If I had to choose one of the four from the above, I would go with "greed" first and foremost.  That would cover the amount of races WTC tries to manage, the entry cost for each event, and the amount of bodies they try to cram onto any given course.  I am almost certain that their success rate would be much higher if they just focused on a handful of "key" races, doing them as well as is humanly possibly.  That's what the very best independent race organizations do, and WTC would be well-served by getting down off their own self-constructed podium and make an honest attempt at providing quality events that aren't all about turning enormous profits for themselves.

jobaxas -

Heaven forbid!  There's a limit to what most urban areas (and probably rural ones, too) can tolerate, and I would hate to see terrific urban races such as Chicago Tri, Nations (and DC Tri), and NYC Tri "bumped" to make way for an iron or even half-iron in those cities.  There's probably a really good reason why those events have nothing larger than an olympic-distance race, and my own experience tells me that in untenable for major roadways in major cities to be shut down for more than a few hours.

Cities, especially, effectively have a "carrying capacity" for what they can handle for a race, and it might be that Chicago, say, can handle the triathlon weekend and also the marathon.......but if a half-iron or iron moved in there, something would have to give.  How many major kerfuffles are Chicagoans expected to suffer so that so many people can race there?  Probably not too many more, and if WTC going into Chicago to do an iron or half-iron would jeopardize either of the established events, then that is just patently wrong.  But WTC has shown no qualms about practicing "engulf and devour", so I continue to worry about where they might go next!

I really had no thoughts on this thread, other than the fact that this would have been the closest Mdot 140.6 to me, had it survived, so I may have considered it in a couple years.

BUT THEN! Someone sent up the claaaw version of the  bat signal and mentioned the 5150 series, and I am legally required to post now and say um, well.... OK I am out of things to say about that mess. Just - YEAH! What he said! 

southwestmba - 2012-09-17 9:16 PM As for have I every been to a 140.6 mile triathlon? Try 6 times, including the World Championship and I am part of an organization that has put one on. So yes I understand the business model pretty well too and I know what good looks like. You don't build goodwill by taking advantage of your customer's loyalty. Long term that bites you especialy when your customers have other options. Thanks for the conversation. WTC is living on its past reputation and expanding too fast, and it shows.

Ouch!  Guess he does have a little experience @ that distance :-)

I agree wholeheartedly with a couple of phrases here..."you don't build goodwill by taking advantage of your customer's loyalty" and "WTC is living on its past reputation and expanding too fast, and it shows"

There's no denying that for lots of folks there's a certain panache about doing a WTC event.  I've done a ton of them - but won't again.  I don't support their business model, which basically renders us triathletes as nothing more that widgets in a process.  I'd much rather be appreciated, thanked, and valued by a race organization. 

you called us "Widgets"...... i prefer "Spacely Sprockets" or "Cogswell Cogs"

I support races that recognize the source of their revenue and are greatful for that source to exist and work hard to make THE CUSTOMER happy.  I shop at local bike shops because of the relationship i have with them.  I eat at Diners because the owner is the waitress.  I race at races where the one that is shelling out and shelling in the $$$ is ON SITE and working his/her tail off to make it happen.

I'm a Blue collar man, I don't like the suits behind a desk or on a sailboat somewhere that don't even know "they" are putting on an event that so many hold near and dear to their hearts to continue to have a source of laughter as they head to the bank.

for that reason, a few years ago, i began voting with my $$$.  I'm not knocking WTC and their events, they put out a show.  No doubt, i've raced a crap load of them.  It's a big deal.  At some point though one has to make their own choices.   I respect the choices made by others.

See you guys at the next race.....which ever that may be.

Tim

JPS0135 -

I couldn't agree with you more!  Just from this past weekend........

1. Doing an inaugural sprint in Cortland,  NY, I was thanked multiple times for having made the drive down from Canada and supporting their efforts for the United Way.  People recognized me by face, and took the time to thank me, and while it was really no big deal to get there, it made it all the more human that I was recognized. 
2. The following day I raced in Lebanon, NJ, and signed up that morning.  Post-race, the woman who took my registration came over to me and asked how it went -- did I have a good race, and did I enjoy myself?   And during the awards I was thanked foer coming all the way down from Canada to do their race.  Again, this was no big deal for me in terms of effort, but the bigger deal comes from people recognizing me and taking the time to thank me or otherwise show interest.

Great vibes at both races -- the first being Cortland Tri for the United Way, the second being Buckman Triathlon.  Cortland had 159 solo finishers, Buckman had 225; both races had many relay teams.  Both races had excellent bike courses, both had unique run courses; I would do both races in a heartbeat. 

I just don't see the need for overpriced and overcrowded races, and I will continue to speak with my wallet by not supporting events that care only about me only as a another revenue-producer for them.  And I am definietly interested in supporting well-run races that give most if not all proceeds to charity --- the United Way for the Cortland race, the ITP Foundation for an upcoming race in CT.  It just amazes me that some RDs care enough about triathlon and Larger Causes to (a) provide memorable race experiences, and with (b) no profit-motive for themselves.   These are the ones that are win-win for me to support.

What the heck is going on with WTC?

Ironman St. George - gone.  Ironman Canada - gone.  Ironman NYC - gone.  Ironman Rhode Island 70.3 - gone.  Ironman Mooseman 70.3 gone.  Lance factor - gone.  And rumor has it Eagleman may be next.  WTF? WTC is in trouble.   

Ironman St. George was "too hard", according to WTC.  Really?  Ironman Canada was just a blatant drop of the football in the endzone.  Ironman NYC was a logistical nightmare and NYC never wanted the event, and it was just too expensive to produce.  I did the inagural Rhode Island event, then did it the next year, then they changed the course, and now it's gone.  Mooseman posted a measley 700 finishers this year.  Yikes!!   My guess is, since Quassy is the same weekend - Quassy killed Mooseman; as Quassy is executed just as well (if not better) and the course is sublimely beautiful.   And Quassy was sold out this year.  Lance is now the Rev3 poster boy. 

So it seems there is not an endless supply of triathletes who participate in 70.3 and the pond is very small afterall.  And I think the same sentiment pretty much goes for 140.6 as well as Rev3 and other triathlon event companies slowly eat away at the Empire...   

Tri Columbia is solid. My guess is the rumor is circulating because Eagleman is around 45 days past when registration normally opens up.

My "guess" is that WTC doesn't want to give them their Kona spots. As per the Tri Columbia website:

That statement, if you read between the lines says: there is a kink in the contract negotiation pipeline, and something Eagleman always received from Ironman without issue (slots likely) is now an issue.  WTC better do the right, smart thing.  Eagleman is an iconic 70.3.  

Agreed - the reason Melbourne worked is because it started 45km from the city at the beach.  Then the ride is on a Freeway - they closed one side of it (it's hardly used coz you have to pay a toll!)  Freeway is 45km long so out and back twice.  Back to the beach suburb then run point to point along the beach road (not a major road) to an inner suburb.  Logistical problems were more about trying to get bikes back to their owners.

Let's face it Australian cities are no London or New York in terms of population!