WTC SOLD!

http://www.xtri.com/features_display.aspx?riIDReport=4920&CAT=25&xref=xx

This is huge. Just huge.

Can't imagine what the WTC races, much less the brand, will do in the hands of bona-fide businesspeople. Left only to the imagination.

I actually wouldn't be terribly surprised if they followed up this purchase with additional purchases....such as a website, NAS, or affiliate races. I know that as of this second forward, NAS and WTC are competitors. It'll also be interesting to see how they align with the ITU.  

This one should give every player in the industry a little time to take stock of where they are, and what they want to be.  

They do.

I can imagine them milking what profit they can from it, then casting it aside.

Why more races? If we add more IM distance races thats going to cut Kona slots down to what? 1-2 per age group??

They cant keep adding IM distance races w/o taking one or two off the circuit.

My 2 cents.

a new website...WTF and give up that useless gem they have?

I love that they took 8 min to throw together an extra half page and call it there IM Louisville Website

first item on the agenda: When you have events that are so popular that they sell out in mere hours a year in advance: you have the ability to raise the price!

Control Data being acquired by Seagate to make a better disk drive

Visio being acquired by Micrososft to make a better drawings software program

now I realize that these don't roll off the tongue as prime examples, but...

as to the original "acquisition," no doubt the investment company includes one or more individuals tuned into the Triathlon scene, which means that yes the events may be more run like a business, but they know they reap the best returns by improving the brand, not stripping it clean.  (no offense, but aside from the goodwill associated with the logo, what "assets" would this company really have)

My guess is that you will see more push in 70.3 to broaden the spectrum of the IM logo then the pushing of the IM brand more into the marketplace.  Only a fool would start messing with the full IM schedule (e.g. add a bunch more races) b/c that would kill the business.

I still don't get how adding a few races would hurt the brand. They sell out immediately. Sell more. That's like Apple not wanting to make more iPhones. People want your product, sell it to them.

From an (oversimplified) economic standpoint, if you have a product that consumers are demanding in greater quantity than you are producing, you either a) produce more or b) charge a higher price. Which would you, as a consumer, prefer?

Personally, i'm not their target market because Ii'm not doing an IM-branded race anytime soon, nor do I understand why I should pay 40-100% more for a 70.3-branded HIM.

look at it this way - WTC or whoever has absolutely NO RIGHT to the concept of a 140.6 mile event.  The only thing they have the right to is the Ironman Logo, which is synonimism (sp?) with Kona.  So under the IM brand you have the right to call your race an Ironman event AND you have the option to qualify for Kona.

If they add more 140.6 events, that starts to cannibalize the "eliteness" of the event, which then starts to detract from the value of Ironman brand.  In other words, if now there are 20 full 140.6 events, that means pretty much every other week or so in the U.S. is a new event.  The fact that they sell out right away only bolsters the value of the brand Ironman.

IMO, if you increase the number of events, you increase the market share but at the cost of the allure or exclusivity of the Ironman brand.  In other words, any extra $$ you make by having more events pales in comparison to the dilution of the value of your IM brand.

But, you offset that by making HIM the "publicly accessible event" by hosting those pretty much every weekend.  Everyone can be half an ironman, thus increasing your consumer base, but you retain the exclusivity of the full Ironman event.

I would predict that you see 3 things happen.  (1) The # of full IM events stays the same and the entry fees stay the same, but you have more charity or community slots that cost signifiantly more.  (2) You have many more HIM events all around the country.  (3) You see more branding and cross-branding with other companies using the IM logo.

The trick is protecting the 140.6 designation.  One could argue that as the number of "insert-strong-sounding-word-here"MAN events increase, the Ironman trademark is generic to merely refer to a racing event that covers 140.6 miles.  If that happens, the only remaining asset for this company (aside from the know-how on putting these events together) is Kona.  So I wonder if you will also see some enforcement in the marketplace to stop people from referring to 140.6 events as "Ironmans"

Ironman brand licensing, including races, amounted to $500 million in sales in 2007. How much of that went to WTC is not publicly known. I'd be willing to bet that it was this number that the good folks at Providence were paying close attention to, not race fees.

Anyone can put on a race, but there's only one "Ironman" and M-Dot. The money's in the brand, in selling the lifestyle that it represents. The races are, while incredibly well produced, essentially just marketing support vehicles for selling watches, strollers, bikes etc.

I predict MORE corporate sponsorship, not less.

And higher race fees.

First off, I want to preface my comments with this.  I am not pursuing Kona nor have any aspirations to.  But I am pursuing Ironman distance races that are supported to the standards that come with having the IM logo attached to them.

The long and short of this is the IM Logo is more valuable then the race.  I would venture to guess that the IM logo will be interdispursed with the other company holdings.  CDW, MGM to list a couple of potetial smaller sponsors i bet you will see in future Ironmans.  We would be remiss to think that the focus from the new company will be more on the brand and less on the race.  If more emphasis is put on any race then look towards the 70.3 for increased expansion.  From a business sense it makes more sense.  More people can acheive this distance, thus making it a larger market then a full Ironman.  So as a company gets larger they will pursue ventures that will have a potential of netting a better return.  I hate to say this but the more i think of it the more that makes sense. 

I would love for more full IM distance races be added.  I think that the market will bear at least two in the US alone,  based on how quickly these are selling out. (IM Canada, Wisconsin, Placid)  That all said why not add 1 or two races, maybe change the qualifications so it is more dificult to make it to Kona.   Again, let me put the business hat on again, for these races to be added, i can see "Providence WTC" franchising the IM to more race organizers to possibly increase the amount of races with the IM logo.

Sorry for the rambling, but Providence wants to make more money out of the investment, they will want to maximize their investment as quick as possible.