Creakyknees

Should this go in the 217?

Anyway, the whole Pat McQuaid / Giorgia Bronzini / Chloe Hosking fracas...

I dunno, ladies. From my view it's just economics.

At the amateur level it's about entry fees and field sizes. Get more ladies to show up to races, you'll have bigger prize lists, and promoters will be more likely to listen to your ideas about courses and categories. As long as the Women Open field has fewer racers than the Junior 14's, you're going to have comparable prize lists.

At the pro level, it's about demographics and eyeballs. In this case, what sells? Personalities. Stories. Controversy, and (sad reality) sex sells. Sure, results, too.

But I don't buy into the line of argument offered by some lady racers that goes "we are pros so therefore we should get paid the same". By that logic, the $15k dreamer guy racing US domestic NRC should get paid the same as Boonen. That's just silly. You get paid based on your value to the sponsors. Want more money? Attract more positive attention to your brand(s).

Flame on.

https://thewomenspeloton.com/2012/01/...-are-speaking/

gsteinb

there's exactly one woman who posts in this forum. it seems unnecessarily confrontational.

echappist

im sure there are men who'd disagree with the op

nope, and to borrow a quote from RacerEx, would you like some cheese with that red herring?

what the women (mind you, they are division 1, same level as uci pro tour) wants is a guaranteed minimum salary

Creakyknees

What, so only women are allowed to have an opinion about this?

Suppose for a moment that I might also know a few lady racers. Further suppose that I support women's racing, and perhaps I'm just looking for a dialog about how to make it better. Does that help you feel better?

Creakyknees

Again. Because I'm a man, that makes my opinion invalid?

Also again: I have no problem with pro women wanting a minimum salary. Heck, I would also like one. But nobody's going to offer me one because the ROI just is not there. Show me the money.

rkwaki

Two if you count hammy
Bwahahahahahahaha

gsteinb

now you're trolling. you addressed your inquiry to 'ladies.'

echappist

did you fail your logic class in college? all i said was that just because there's only one female member here doesn't mean that the OP would be preaching to choir.

there has been two logical fallacies in just three posts. Maybe you ought to work on debate and rhetorical skills before you post.

last time I checked, the Republic of Texas ceased to exist somewhere in the 1800's and is part of the union. As such, federal minimum wage laws are in effect, and employers are mandated to pay you at least that amount.

[sarcasm]Unless, of course, you are intimating that you are an illegal immigrant, in which case, gtfo and stop stealing our jobs [/sarcasm]

Creakyknees

If you say so. I really have no idea how many women read this forum.

rkwaki

Take a look at the Presbyterian Hospital Crit last year.
Women's purse: $25,000
Men's Purse: $50,000
Starters in ladies race: ~60
Starters in mens' race: ~120

Ladies distance: 25 miles
Mens distance: 50 miles

Just the facts. If you look at most of the NRC or higher class races they all look about the same.

Gateway Cup in St. Louis (great event) the payout is exactly the same for P/1 men and P/1 women with the same prime amounts.

Fat Boy

Women in sport get paid exactly what they're worth in terms of marketing dollars. This is no different than men. Men get paid more to ride bikes because they're seen by more eyes and they're more adept at helping the sponsors market their product.

Incidentally, who was the highest paid Indycar driver last year? Danica Patrick. Why? It wasn't because she was the fastest or best driver. It's because she was the best at product marketing. Indycar racing is primarily a male sport, but there were 3 women on last year's grid. One of them is faster than Danica and one is slower. It doesn't matter. Neither has the ability to sell like she does. Ultimately, that is where your bread is buttered.

It's nice to want a minimum salary, but it would probably backfire. It would probably mean less sponsorship in women's racing (by setting a relatively high minimum buy-in) and it would also probably reduce the field sizes. When you reduce the field sizes, you'll reduce the purse. So women right now that get products, travel and entry money would not necessarily get all this plus a stipend. They may very well get nothing.

echappist

Agree with most of what you said regarding sponsorship, except for the point re: minimum salary. I don't think it'll back fire any more so than with pro-continental team. I mean, other than Skils (now 1t4l or whatever they are called), EuropeCar, and Cofidis, how many can you name? i can actually think of quite a few more, but they are obscure. Actually here's a challenge: someone (without looking up anything) name more pro-conti teams than what I have below (see below).

Back on point: if female pro racers want a minimum salary, it should apply to only certain tiers (note to op, i've not previously mentioned my opinion of minimum salary in cycling, only what was said and the fallacy in your statement). Pro Conti teams have guaranteed salary, but the Conti teams don't. The minimum salary is probably also going to be less than what's mandated for Pro Conti teams just as female basketball players are paid less than male basketball players. The Giro Donne is a very poorly attended event, even in the mountain stages. If you look up videos of Emma Pooley's win, you'll see there were spectators only in the last 500m.





PS, for s*** and giggles, list of Pro-Conti teams.

Italy: Acqua & Sapone, Miche-Guercotti (mostly in a bad light as they signed three dopers), Danquivani Androni Giacotolli (or whatever they are called), Neri-ISD, Colnago-CSF
France: EuropeCar, Cofidis, can't think of anything else, but I think there are more
Belgium: Topsport-Vlaanderen, Virendas-Willem
Netherlands: 1t4l
U.S.: Type 1 - Sanofi, United Health Care,
Canada: Spidertech p/b C10
Germany: NetApps
Poland: some team, don't know what
China: Champion System

valygrl

FYI - I'm female & I read this forum (and have learned a lot here). I'll be posting here more after my first race (3/3) as I don't really feel like I belong yet, until I pin a number on.

That said - I don't know enough about the issue to have a well-formed opinion. It would be nice if top level female athletes could at least make a living, so a minimum pro salary seems to make some sense.

I do wish there was more televised women's racing, I would watch it if it was available to watch.

hammy56

dont make me come up there.

hammy56

dont worry, that doesnt stop anyone else from posting...

echappist

fyi. The ones who are actually on the top level teams do indeed make a passable living, and the ones on the U.S. based teams receive better compensation than racers on the European teams do. It also happens that the purse is usually larger Stateside, too.

AzTallRider

And, like many other professions where the rewards don't always match the effort, incomes can be supplemented by other activities within the overall profession. I know a great female racer, and she also coaches and gives Met tests. Many symphony musicians give lessons, etc.

Fat Boy

Whether it's a good investment for the sponsor is a completely different kettle of fish. The trick is convincing the sponsor it's a good investment.

The vast majority of race car drivers are either not paid, paid with purse money only or actually bringing money (personal or through sponsors) for the privilege of driving. If they all of the sudden demanded a minimum salary from the teams they simply would not drive and the fields would shrink. Very few are worth justifiably paying a salary. If they are and they're young, then they'll get better rides until they do get paid. If they are already at a high level, and worth paying, then they'll get the money. Ultimately, market forces win.

I worked for one guy that was reasonably good, but not a true professional. He was paying to be the driver (Billionaire father). He would whinge about "We need to find sponsorship. I don't know how long I can do this. I can't afford to keep doing this." I always thought to myself, "I can't afford it either, but the difference between us is that I don't expect to be racing every other weekend."

rkwaki

No excuse, look at me...

I know this isn't directed at anyone in particular...

hammy56

Im included...Im only a part-time bike racer. Probably a cat4, masters fodder for life. And I dont know ****. However Im not one of the '33 sycophants' who pretends to know ****...Theres a few guys here who know bike racing, youre probably one of them.

valygrl

You'll all be sick of me soon enough. ;>

In a 2-degrees-of-separation moment, and speaking of being a pro and making a living some other way, my women's-team's coach is a team mate of the author of that article.

rkwaki

Allegedly. Though we don't correspond outside of the forum as I do with some others one difference that I may bring is that I speak very honestly (sometimes too honestly) about what it takes to get there, the stuff that goes above and beyond the regular training aspects of racing and talk about the other sacrifices that one must make to get there and stay there. My inability to recognize how this hurt others in my life ended my racelife and as I have said before I apologized to some fellow racers as well as USAC for some of my actions. A big difference when I race is I cannot imagine losing. I made it clear that had I raced in 2011 there were certain targets I had and come hell or highwater I was not to disappoint myself. I am a really nice guy off the bike and while training, come raceday I am a complete d-bag and will defend my lines at all costs. Until you get to that mindset it is difficult to understand and some here do I believe.

gsteinb

some of the most prolific posters might not even ride a bike.

hammy56

rtc?

wanders

pcad.