|how come pro cyclist earn so little??!||Maverick|
Dec 15, 2001 8:03 AM
|well ppl, 'was wondering how come we cyclist (pros especially) sweat like a dog and earn so little $$$ in races?? don't y'all feel we simply deserve more?? i mean look at those golfers, soccer players etc, they earn by the millions..this is not fair!!
anyone out there with answers??
|Because no one else cares!||I AM|
Dec 15, 2001 2:29 PM
|Sad but true. Based on pure athletisism(SP) cyclists should make way more than golfers but without a huge U.S. network TV
contract that isn't going to happen.
|Because no one else cares!||p1rana|
Dec 15, 2001 3:26 PM
|Hey! Im a golfer ;). But biking is really cool too (why would i be here), its just as others have said the amount of advertising dollar that you can get. The more the people interested the more you can make. But that is also something that can set cyclists apart, definitely not in a bad way.|
Dec 15, 2001 2:59 PM
|... for UCI riders, there is now a minimum wage with plans for a minimum "retirement" package... still nowhere near many professional sports (merely a living wage)... but that's our economic system... NASCAR turns a bigger ad dollar than Pro/Am cycling... the Armstrongs, Ullrichs and Zabels are the rare exceptions (how can A-Rod be worth 280 million???)
Course, this translates over all strata of our economy... and in odd ways... my bike is worth more than my truck...
Remain In Light.
|re: how come pro cyclist earn so little??!||TrekMan|
Dec 15, 2001 3:14 PM
|You have to buy a ticket to get in and watch golfers and soccer players play, but you don't get charged to stand on the side of a road and watch cyclists go by. And like the above poster said there aren't any big tv deals or pay per view for cycling like there is for soccer and golf. Everybody where I work is into soccer, golf, athletics (watching only!) etc. But when I say I'm into cycling they all look at me like I've got two heads!!! Sadly cycling just isn't main stream, yet.|
|re: how come pro cyclist earn so little??!||Maverick|
Dec 15, 2001 11:46 PM
|it's really sad to know that cyling is still categorised as a second grade sport. well, as far as i'm concern, we ppl ride for the love of the sport and not for anything else. but i really wish we could do something as to bring our sport to a better level. i want to see more Armstrongs, Ullrichs and Zabels emerge from our sport. something need to be done here!!|
|One observation: most cycling fans ride...||Bruno S|
Dec 15, 2001 9:07 PM
|That shows you how little exposure of cycling there is in the US. In most other sports there are fans that just watch the sport and select a prefered team because of where that team is based.|
|The real question,||TJeanloz|
Dec 16, 2001 8:38 AM
|The real question probably ought to be, why do some athletes make so much?
Seriously, why does A-Rod make ~$250million? I don't know for certain, but I find it hard to believe that his contribution to the team is that great.
Actually, Michael Jordan's return gives us some interesting things to look at. His return clearly boosted gate sales for the Wizards. And he is probably worth it, because I believe he's only nominally being paid (something like ~$1million a season). But it will be interesting to see how much higher the Wizards revenues are with a superstar than they were without.
The real thing to consider with cyclists, is that they don't really have salaries- because the teams don't have gate income. They really have only endorsement and prize money- like golfers. And where does Tiger Woods make most of his money? From American Express and Buick, not the PGA Tour. Similarly, Lance Armstrong makes most of his money from Bristol Myers Squib, not the USPS. When the sport is structured around endorsement dollars, the gap between rich and poor will be biggest.
|The real question,||djg|
Dec 17, 2001 8:25 AM
|is, rather, why somebody would get to be a pro cyclist first, and ask this question second. Look, the market does what the market does. Supply, demand, blah, blah, blah. How hard the individual athlete has to work is a pretty small part of the equation. A professional athlete is not like a professional doctor--he or she doesn't provide a service to an individual fan one-on-one. The athlete provides two services, entertainment and billboard space, that are valuable insofar as they can be simultaneously available to many people. How many people--and from which marketing demographic--care to watch matter more for the $ than how much you sweat. |
I don't mean to denigrate pro cycling. I like pro cycling. I think it's cool. I couldn't do it myself, but I have no doubts that it's damn hard. I buy magazines that cover it. Sometimes I attend races as a spectator (my strictly amateur cat 3 days are over). I tune in on TV (albeit sans OLN) and I've even bought a couple of pro cycling videos. Whatever. But I don't really see what fairness has to do with it. Heck, you're riding a bike, not curing cancer. If you want to get rich, try your hand at pro baseball. Or try providing a service which more people actually want or need. There may be no accounting for taste. Personally, I cannot stand watching golf on TV. But the fact that there are only dozens, rather than hundreds, of really lucrative pro cycling contracts out there strikes me as pretty low on the scale of relative social injustices.