In my opinion race organizers should intensively question which broadcasters and media contribute to a bigger value for the sports. Everybody was like „oh wow, GTWS is on Eurosport“. But when I watched GTWS on Eurosport Germany, I had to listen to the same 70-ish old commentator with his bavarian accent who has been the commentator for all athletics events Eurosport covered since… I don‘t know, WWII…?! He doesn‘t know the sports and the athletes of trail running. But deciders were like, „we have these trail running rights for free now, you did all olympics in the last 50 years, you can commentate trail running. It‘s more or less athletics…“. I switched the TV off and jumped over to YouTube…
In my opinion, thinking through the sports lens is short-sighted and will ultimately fail. They need to look at comps that match with the pace and complication of the sport. All of the major spectator sports are built around a controlled environment fit for spectating and broadcast. There are other sports who have forged paths (WRC, fishing, off-road racing, mountain biking) but they create highly abbreviated and/or produced content that is for a very niche consumer base. Disc golf is an interesting example of professional sports evolution trying to accommodate for this - having gone through a long history of small content creators eventually absorbed into a proprietary streaming service.
Love the analogies there. You raise a good point about creating alternative formats, however I can just imagine how the trail running community would react to a “controlled environment fit for spectating and broadcasting” xD Yet, i can actually see it working for much broader market…
It feels like an important question 20 years ago. The TV landscape isn't what it once was. There are stations running shows non-stop with information slates instead of commercials now. Hell, it's almost shocking the 16 hours of coverage available isn't being played on some sports stations 15th entry on the dial. Getting on TV isn't the end all, be all, and definitely shouldn't be the only goal. All of course my humble opinion ;)
I think I'd modify your last thought and guess that TV deals could be _part_ of trail running's future. I think "trail running" as an umbrella term already covers so much ground (ha), and the range of participants, organized competitions, and other activities under that umbrella is growing all the time. There's probably room for commercially viable spectator events (maybe even "made for TV" races), old-school events that only the participants themselves even know about, and everything in between. But I think each event will need to decide where it is (or wants to be) on that spectrum, and accept that you can't be all things to everyone.
I definitely do not know. I do think just the title of this post is thought-provoking and brilliant!
In my opinion race organizers should intensively question which broadcasters and media contribute to a bigger value for the sports. Everybody was like „oh wow, GTWS is on Eurosport“. But when I watched GTWS on Eurosport Germany, I had to listen to the same 70-ish old commentator with his bavarian accent who has been the commentator for all athletics events Eurosport covered since… I don‘t know, WWII…?! He doesn‘t know the sports and the athletes of trail running. But deciders were like, „we have these trail running rights for free now, you did all olympics in the last 50 years, you can commentate trail running. It‘s more or less athletics…“. I switched the TV off and jumped over to YouTube…
I hadn’t thought about the commentary team.. Great points on the value of a media placement beyond the ego boost of ‘being on X channel’
In my opinion, thinking through the sports lens is short-sighted and will ultimately fail. They need to look at comps that match with the pace and complication of the sport. All of the major spectator sports are built around a controlled environment fit for spectating and broadcast. There are other sports who have forged paths (WRC, fishing, off-road racing, mountain biking) but they create highly abbreviated and/or produced content that is for a very niche consumer base. Disc golf is an interesting example of professional sports evolution trying to accommodate for this - having gone through a long history of small content creators eventually absorbed into a proprietary streaming service.
Love the analogies there. You raise a good point about creating alternative formats, however I can just imagine how the trail running community would react to a “controlled environment fit for spectating and broadcasting” xD Yet, i can actually see it working for much broader market…
It feels like an important question 20 years ago. The TV landscape isn't what it once was. There are stations running shows non-stop with information slates instead of commercials now. Hell, it's almost shocking the 16 hours of coverage available isn't being played on some sports stations 15th entry on the dial. Getting on TV isn't the end all, be all, and definitely shouldn't be the only goal. All of course my humble opinion ;)
Oh completely agree, getting on TV isn’t difficult, it’s the being paid for it, thats the hard part :p Great to hear from you Adam!
I think I'd modify your last thought and guess that TV deals could be _part_ of trail running's future. I think "trail running" as an umbrella term already covers so much ground (ha), and the range of participants, organized competitions, and other activities under that umbrella is growing all the time. There's probably room for commercially viable spectator events (maybe even "made for TV" races), old-school events that only the participants themselves even know about, and everything in between. But I think each event will need to decide where it is (or wants to be) on that spectrum, and accept that you can't be all things to everyone.
"I think it can grow and become a more sustainable business for athletes and organisers through other means."
How would you catch cobras?