Make no mistake, although I am incredibly critical and cynical. I do want them to succeed. And succeeding isn't where Ironman cuts back on pro prize purses either. Want more money and more pros able to live on triathlon.

It's been said and I'll said it again. The best appear to have chosen T100. Nice will be underwhelming and that's a shame.

A lot of women have already stated on this board that if they qualify they are deferring to Kona 2025 if that option exists.

I've just watched "not a World Championship" in cyclo-cross. WvA and Pidcock did not start. Since two of the best three chose other race series it meets the @timr definition quite neatly I think. In Nice I reckon 2/3rds of the top 9 will be there.

I totally understand the pull of Kona… but if I were to be completely honest with myself, Nice looks like a more fun/challenging/beautiful course worthy of a championship. I hope to do both before I croak.

But these people gotta earn a living. If I was a young pro, I’d choose PTO everyday of the week.

It's been said and I'll said it again. The best appear to have chosen T100. Nice will be underwhelming and that's a shame.

If the likely bet is its only a matter of time before PTO fades away, how could anyone be so confident that that won't happen in the next 7 months?

------

I think it's in for a good 2-3 year run of 6-10 races a year and putting that product to market. Which as I've said, at that point if it fails, so be it. It will fail because no one gives a shit about triathlon not because we didn't give it the best "college try" possible.

Someone is definitely getting crowned, but all due respect it is a B level race.
Hopefully Ironman learns their lesson with this ridiculous move to France BS.

"It's been said [but] I'll say it again."
The best have chosen T100 because it offers assured money, great competition (playing with the big girls) and keeps open that option for 2025. But the flaw in this hypothesis is that because the best are racing T100 they will then not race Nice. I guarantee you that this is not the case: the vast majority of the top ten long distance (>70.3) capable athletes will race Nice.
If your definition of "the best" is: "only if every top 10 athlete starts", then (apart from the fantastic aberration in Kona last year) there has never been a World Championship, ever. There's always someone missing, through choice or injury.
If your definition of "the best" is: "must include the winner from last year" then very many IMWCs over the years fail that criterion: did that make them 'underwhelming' or 'B level'? (Of course it didn't)

The women's IMWC in Nice in September will be excellent and talk of "underwhelming" or "it'll be a B level race" is naysaying of the highest order. And @thatzone you are not affording the women "due respect": have a word with yourself!

@timr and @thatzone - name the lowly ranked athletes in this 'B level' race who you think will be challenging for top 5.
I have suggested that the following will race in Nice: Haug (light and suits), Ryf (GOAT), Philipp (been out recceing/training in Nice), Matthews (racing Texas so IM Series in sights), Sodaro (one more 70.3 to validate), Moench (NQ), Langridge (NQ), Norden (NQ).
And @thatzone's Kona fixation is an irrelevance to this thread.

Someone being key word here. Not the current WC, or Ryf, Haug, Phillips etc etc.

The Women's IMWC in France is like comparing the UFC to a local fighting circuit. I am sure whoever wins will have the confidence, but KONA is where the 'big dogs' throw down. Will make *KONA* 2015 more interesting.

Lurker4 wrote:

Actually I disagree with this. Strongbro-ly.
The PTO, if it fails it will be the result of missing away it's seed money to pros who can never have enough. And I like them, don't get me wrong. But I've got a sovereign wealth fund in Saudi Arabia to sell you, if you think that just buying a bunch of pros makes the groundwork for a success. They've spent much much more.

If what PTO wants is ownership of the broadcast to sell advertising, again they should buy what they want. The rights to market ITU, or Super League or even 70.3 races.

The things they want to broadcast already exist, the racers are already racing. You don't need to throw money at them.

If PTO said they were going to buy major primetime TV for these five IM70.3 races or those 5 ITU races and then tripled the prize pot for those five races, you mean to tell me no one would have showed up?

The PTO has wasted millions of investor dollars with ZERO return other than a promise to waste millions more and hope someone takes notice.

Seriously, how terrible must their income statements look? I imagine many local races directors do a better job generating revenue!

It's understandable that it can take years to become profitable. But it's not like the PTO is "buying" a large number of cash spending customers who they will eventually make profitable. It's not like they are building up this massive base of content that will be relevant for decades to tens of thousands of subscribers. The vast majority of their footage will never get looked at again in and significant numbers. No, what the PTO is doing is likely paying its staff well. And buying the rights to 40 athletes that only secures them the option to keep paying those athletes.

There's nothing coming in! So I think when someone starts with a large pile of money for the good of the sport and only manages to make it small pile of money without bringing anything sustainable in, I see a negligent waste of investor resources that likely salts the earth for future investment.

That doesn't mean I don't enjoy the Pto or look forward to their races. I do. I want them to succeed. Whatever they are doing, it's bizarre. If they stuck with the original line and simply said we are going to make an alternative to Ironman racing for pros and age groupers they'd actually look like they'd be trying to build something.

They'd have been better off buying out local races and growing them from the start and paying the race directors a salary to run the events for them. Instead they pass away money on the pros without building anything sustainable. Bizarre at best. Financially negligent at worst.

Actually I disagree with this. Strongbro-ly.
The PTO, if it fails it will be the result of missing away it's seed money to pros who can never have enough. And I like them, don't get me wrong. But I've got a sovereign wealth fund in Saudi Arabia to sell you, if you think that just buying a bunch of pros makes the groundwork for a success. They've spent much much more.

If what PTO wants is ownership of the broadcast to sell advertising, again they should buy what they want. The rights to market ITU, or Super League or even 70.3 races.

The things they want to broadcast already exist, the racers are already racing. You don't need to throw money at them.

If PTO said they were going to buy major primetime TV for these five IM70.3 races or those 5 ITU races and then tripled the prize pot for those five races, you mean to tell me no one would have showed up?

The PTO has wasted millions of investor dollars with ZERO return other than a promise to waste millions more and hope someone takes notice.

Seriously, how terrible must their income statements look? I imagine many local races directors do a better job generating revenue!

It's understandable that it can take years to become profitable. But it's not like the PTO is "buying" a large number of cash spending customers who they will eventually make profitable. It's not like they are building up this massive base of content that will be relevant for decades to tens of thousands of subscribers. The vast majority of their footage will never get looked at again in and significant numbers. No, what the PTO is doing is likely paying its staff well. And buying the rights to 40 athletes that only secures them the option to keep paying those athletes.

There's nothing coming in! So I think when someone starts with a large pile of money for the good of the sport and only manages to make it small pile of money without bringing anything sustainable in, I see a negligent waste of investor resources that likely salts the earth for future investment.

That doesn't mean I don't enjoy the Pto or look forward to their races. I do. I want them to succeed. Whatever they are doing, it's bizarre. If they stuck with the original line and simply said we are going to make an alternative to Ironman racing for pros and age groupers they'd actually look like they'd be trying to build something.

They'd have been better off buying out local races and growing them from the start and paying the race directors a salary to run the events for them. Instead they pass away money on the pros without building anything sustainable. Bizarre at best. Financially negligent at worst.

Is your IPL example though supporting the opportunity the PTO is doing here by going against the "tradational" sport of what cricket was or using as what PTO should'nt do? I'm not really sure what your IPL example is actually showing what can happen with startup companies.

I don't think anyone on here has said the PTO is going to last. I think Lurker said 7 months, which I thought it was going to be about 2-3 years and then the big decisions will have to be made (enough time for the general public to basically accept it or not accept it). I take some issue with poster like Lurker calling this neglience though. That's a big accusatory type of verbiage imo. I don't think anyone in this adventure is behaving anywhere close to that type of accusatory language. You may not agree with how they are doing it, but I certainly don't think they are acting neglectly. If they get 2-3 years of 6-10 races a year in front of the general public that's not even close to neglience, that's exactly the goal they want to accomplish. It may fail, but I don't think it fails for the reasons you guys think it will. I think it fails because people won't tune in (so no advertising / no one wanting to buy rights to it) and thus no need to continue to fund it . That's a completely different outcome that what you guys are suggesting imo.

My only push back is in the idea that PTO is running a bad business model, when in fact they are accomplishing exactly what they have sought out to do- create a professional series and take it to market.

So it may not be successful, and I agree with that. But this idea that they've mismanaged things, I don't think is very fair or very accurate. That "mismanagement" isn't what is going to led this to not being successful; the lack of buy in from the general public will be the reason why investors don't stay in this long term imo. So that failure is far different than the narrative you guys are suggesting is going on imo.