dploy

Just curious why Triathlon magazines are consistently much thicker with ads that cycling mags...would seem to me that there are far more bikers than triathletes...? Or is it they just have a lot more equipment to buy? Maybe its because there are three conditions they have to endure and we have one? Maybe I just answered my own question?

brianbeech

I think all magazines have waaaaayyyyyy too many ads anyway; so, in my opinion you just said, 'triathlon mags are worse than cycling mags'.

rufvelo

The ads are everything. The knowledge must come from internet forums...

coasting 

3 activities vs 1 activity

i think that's a pretty big clue.

gsteinb

many more bikers than triathletes

datlas 

Sad but true.

With most mags it's hard to tell the ads from the reviews. At least online you can get relatively unbiased reviews.

coasting 

self medicating again?

StanSeven

Triathletes tend to buy a whole lot of equipment and are into the latest products much more than cyclists.

datlas 

I said RELATIVELY, relative to stupid magazines where the reviews look like adverts.

dr_max

Why's that?

They have more money?

datlas 

IMO yes. One of my club-mates is a tri guy and he spent like 10K for an "endless pool" so he can swim at home.

brianbeech

Nah. Cycling CAN be a lifestyle, hence more spending, but to all the tri-guys/gals I know, their training IS/MUST BE a lifestyle.

carleton

1) Triathletes probably spend more on gear per person than road cyclists.

Ads pay the bills and keeps subscription/purchase fees low. I once had a subscription to a professional tech journal that refused ad revenue in order to claim that they have no bias. The subscription was like $100+/year. And that only got me about 6 issues annually. The competing mag was monthly and cost maybe $5 each, like $15 for a subscription.

carleton

I frequent a shop that specializes in Triathlons. It would blow your mind what those guys can spend on a bike without blinking. For every guy that does Tris at the local level with some clip on bars on his hybrid, there is another just as local on a $20K rig.

I ain't mad at them. They are pumping money into the sport.




...but I do think they only ride bikes because they have to

miwoodar

Are you looking at the most recent Lava mag? It was hefty enough that even my wife, who generally ignores such publications, felt compelled to investigate.

From my limited experience in tri, I can vouch for seeing a lot of expensive toys. On the bike there is a ton of pressure to look fast. I saw plenty of BOP racers on Cervelos with carbon wheels and aero helmets. For swimming you have wet suits, expensive tri-specific goggles, and all sorts of gimmicky training aids for those who never swam competitively. For running you have shoes and again lots of other training appurtenances. Most people also buy a training plan.

truckstop

Yes. In most cases, if you don't have advertisers, you don't have a magazine. Ad free/high price mags are rare, of course because nobody wants to pay for it. Paper is expensive.

Lava mag also seems big and heavy because it's printed on high quality, heavy paper.
I think they can afford it since they're owned by WTC and can spend a little extra on it with the money they extort out of all the suckers that sign up for Ironman events.

That, and there are three pools of potential advertisers to pull from, instead of just one.

brianbeech

I get the concept of ads and magazines, but often they go waaaay too far. Hence, I don't buy magazines anymore, of any kind. Therefore, I have no buyer's remorse.

carleton

...and therefore magazines and newspapers cease to exist.

Problem solved!

gregf83 

Ironman Canada has 3 or 4 thousand triathletes paying $600 entry fees (plus accomodation, travel etc). There is nothing remotely close in bike racing so I would say there are way more triathletes entering organized events than bike racers. Charity centuries may have a lot of riders but they don't need much equipment other than a bike. Triathletes need multiple bikes, wheelsets, skinsuits, swimsuits etc. Median income of Ironman racers is between 100-200k. Higher entry bar than bike racing.

brianbeech

This sounds crazy. Almost like a free market is adjusting to waning demand; maybe they just need a bailout.

carleton

The demand for information is still there, it's just that no one is willing to pay for it anymore, be it print or online subscriptions. Everyone assumes that journalists like to work for free.

It used to be that an average household would have a handful of mag subscriptions, local newspaper, and maybe a national newspaper (NY times, Wash Post, LA Times, etc..). Now the average household has zero to one of those. Rhetorical Question: How many subscriptions do you have?

Those subscriptions paid a lot of salaries for a lot of journalists and photojournalists. That's changing and disappearing. Pretty soon our news will consist of untrained "regular guys" and iReports and a bunch of snips of news. In-depth and investigative journalism will be gone. (BTW, I'm not talking about what local news calls "in-depth". Generally speaking, local TV news is bottom of the barrel of journalism.)

miwoodar

This recently came up on ST. I call BS. I very seriously doubt it's six figures. But yes, it's an affluent and extremely zealous crowd - they spend a lot of money.

The Weak Link

I subscribe to the Courier-Journal, Bicycling Magazine (I know, I know), First Things, Real Simple, and Cat Fancy. I get the last for all the tasty recipes.

carleton

Thank you. Seriously.

brianbeech

I think I can believe that. All of the people I know that have competed in the Ironman are pretty affluent, with the exception of one, who's combined income is probably around 90K. I'm assuming at this point they mean the full Ironman and not the 70.3's.