Hello Vital MTB Visitor,
We’re conducting a survey and would appreciate your input. Your answers will help Vital and the MTB industry better understand what riders like you want. Survey results will be used to recognize top brands. Make your voice heard!
Five lucky people will be selected at random to win a Vital MTB t-shirt.
Thanks in advance,
The Vital MTB Crew
The DH privateers have been doing it for years and no one of you “solidarity” guys batted an eyelid… until Wyn started helping out. A few guys donated to help his fund, but the rest did even more and double tapped on instagram.
I understand that, and it is admirable. I am saying what the incentives of the other side are surrounding appearance fees.
Apparently doing something altruistically is an alien concept to you.
The top riders have the most to lose from this.The big sponsors are bound to be the most pissed off at them.
They almost certainly get a travel budget from their sponsors on top of their salary that is proportional to they cost they incur attending events.The appearance fee if implemented will just come out of their travel allowance.
Emil just lost 7.5k for standing with his friends.
The likes of Emil and Fedko have almost nothing to gain from this and without them there boycot would not have even worked.
I'm liking this less and less from the riders the more I think about it and the more that comes out.
Looks like Crankworx was willing to play ball and met them on most their issues, and for the money one, they even made some adjustments for that. If the riders boycotted simply for the fact the Crankworx isn't funding all their personal costs, I kinda agree with Crankworx. No one is forcing the riders to go and to travel to these events. If you can't afford to do it, then so be it, you can't go. Like they're essentially asking Crankworx to pay for them to be able to compete for a chance of Crankworx paying them for a contest. I really don't think it should come down to the event to pay these costs, the riders need to get this money from their sponsors imo. But I guess going after one entity in Crankworx is easier then each rider individually going after their sponsors.
At the end of the day, outside of Whistler Joyride, would anyone really bat an eye if Slopestyle contests went away?
Thinking about this whole situation dispassionately for a minute, and there's several key points seriously need exploring:
• Is slopestyle a competition or an exhibition show? If it's a competition, the host event shouldn't be liable for appearance fees, travel & food etc. If it's a show, the riders need to create a "product", pitch it out as a product, with a booking fee. Just like Martyn Ashton used to do with the Animal tour, or Danny Mac with Drop & Roll.
• Why are athlete/sponsor deals so bad? A frame or some wheels or whatever is not enough. An athlete in the upper echelons of their sporting discipline needs to be structuring better deals, to be actually viable. Why aren't they getting pockets of cash from their local builders merchant, construction Co, auto parts distributor etc, just like sportsmen and women in lower levels of other sports do?
• We need more transparency around deals etc, and arguably more agents to do those deals
• The sport SHOULD be looking at other sports like NBA for financial structure inspiration. Even if scaled back. Jesus, can you imagine if Rich Paul saw the state of this shitshow?!?!
• It's not the 90s, MTV/X-Games boomtime any more. To get in the kind of sponsors athletes and events need, the level of professionalism needs to go up by an order of magnitude.
Again (big fan of irony here), if riders want the general public to back them here, they'd publish $$$ numbers for what they're getting paid to show, compete and/or bonuses for positions.
They' publish the money that's being offered by the organizers.
They'd publish the money the excluded or financially shorted riders are NOT getting.
They'd publish the cost to compete, travel expenses, etc
You got a bubble gum company tossing you free product? Let us know.
We can't be for you and you can't have leverage/discussion/footholds in a dispute with a venue/organizer if you issue vague statements without giving us the financials.
Empathy & alignment with your cause can't happen without information.
Last piece of the puzzle is that someone will find out what the venue/event organizer is making off the comp & if they're being greedy, unreasonable...or are just too lazy to bother properly funding the promotion in advance with sponsors/grants/contract distribution agreements/etc.
In the end, if we find out the event promotor told riders in advance we have the name recognition, the course and the cameras...but we're on a shoestring budget and they show up THEN complain...it's a whole different story.
At the end of the day, all of us are working off assumptions.. Like I said previously, if I were one of the organizers, I'd open up the books for the riders to see.
As for the rider's expenses, it's a bit easier to estimate with a bit of homework.. But, even if done on the cheap, it's still expensive. Especially if traveling from the US or Europe to New Zealand.
As a former manager once told me, the perfect compromise is one that leaves nobody completely happy. The rider's could have had everything but the appearance fees.. I can't help but think that the non-negotiable stance may hurt them more than it helped them ..
I think one of the main talking points here is that is it worth it for their sponsors to shell out more money to the athletes. Are slopestyle athletes really providing that much of an ROI for mountain biking companies.
Very good point. And is there going to be a negative perception from sponsors towards them now, as high risk/low return?
How much content are slope guys producing outside of Crankworx? I get he automatically draws in more viewers because he's the goat, but is there anyone coming close to putting out as much content as Semenuk? Are the younger up and comers grinder to produce content and make themselves more attractive to sponsors? Maybe I'm out to lunch, but I feel like there just isn't as much content coming from these guys as dh, freeride and enduro guys.
It's clearly not worth the ROI to the sponsors or event organizers. If it were, they'd be paid big money already, and everyone would be bending over backwards to support the riders health and finances. They'd make even more money long term by supporting and building the future slopestyle competitors...if there was money to be made. Look at any other sport with big money, you'll see a huge fan base propping that all up. It's just not there in MTB. It's really that simple.
They don't own it they broadcast it.
Man I feel like people aren't reading the whole thread or can't stay on topic with the same points. We can't get away from this idea it's about guys getting paid tons of money (like its about top earners). Unless you're privy to information that's not yet been revealed. This ENTIRE thing is about the wild cards and lowest guys on the totem pole earning some peanuts so that they can either BREAK EVEN or make a single peanut off the event. Let's not forget the top riders just gave up winnings earnings and likely sponsor win bonus (if not more) to be in solidarity with this protest.
Also, I feel the need to say again, there was a lot more than outright pay, cash in hand, being discussed. From course safety, practice times, scheduling around weather, lodging, catering, and probably more tbh. If the event can't scrape together for an appearance fee, I'd be ok being on their side in terms of budget/how that money is being spent. If they can't scrape together lodging/catering for the riders (but can for some/other riders, apparently)... Then they just need to fix the budget.
Also, to be kinda fair to this kinda derogatory talk about slopestyle. Peopel are saying stuff like Crankworx doesn't need slopestyle but also to a certain extent a lot of these riders do NOT need Crankworx. (Rogatkin, Emil, Lemoine, etc) Do you know who does? LOWER TOTEM POLE RIDERS. AND LOCAL RIDERS. The ones who are, according to information given, getting shafted. So let's not play this game like the big riders are whining about how their lives are affected. Crankworx is good for MTBing. And riders standing up for each other is good for MTBing. Picking a side in this battle is, arguably, not good if you care about MTBing. Both sides are valid. And a compromise would be ideal to make sure we have MORE events and MORE riders. Which means MORE content for us
i dont like this narrative of let SS die we dont need it or care. I, for one, care.
one thing that really stuck out to me is that they (crankworx) already provide catering (meals) to event staff, yet they exclude the athletes from it. if feeding an extra 2 dozen or so people (athletes/competitors) is that cost prohibitive then why feed anyone in the first place?
it also sounds like these have been on-going discussions for at least a year, if not longer. this wasn't a bunch spoiled riders just showing up and having a tantrum like some people seem to assume, this was the end result of a long term effort to bring about change and improvement. at least someone didn't have to get paralyzed to bring the issue to a head.
I have also heard they need volunteer staff cause they cant afford to pay. Perhaps this is a pizza for helping move the situation. With that said, adding 20 plates cant be the end of the world.
Agreed. Transparency creates a proper dialogue.
That's what is surprising about the riders statement. I expected a bullet point for each grievance & a dollar amount for each compensation expectation...from both sides.
All of it reads like US "don't say anything to get sued" speak.
If you happen to be on LinkedIn, look up a post by Mark Taylor.. He was formerly with Crankworx and his it sounds like it wasn't Benzos and mansions during his time. I wanted to copy and post it here, but the app wouldn't let me.. I would transcribe it, but I haven't reached that point of boredom during my unemployment yet... Also, back Darren Kinnaird did a Pinkbike pod with some insight into running Crankworx.
haven't read it through so right this second i'm only posting to share, this isn't a statement of agreeance or disagreement
Rant Alert: I retired from the Crankworx World Tour at the end of the 2022 season after my 20th year of working on the project. As a co-founder of the tour and former co-owner, I am completely disheartened by the male slopestyle athlete's decision to not participate in the 2024 season's kick-off event in Rotorua. Holding last minute negotiations to get appearance fees and increased prize money after traveling to the event already knowing what the prize money status was (up 37% from last year's Slopestyle contest at Rotorua) is a hijack move. The current owners of the tour are not major corporations with the ability to throw money around at a whim. They have risked so much personally to maintain a global tour for a niche sport and to have the athletes show this level of disrespect is so disappointing. The world of sports marketing is an endless treadmill of chasing sponsors, building upon past success and working through major obstacles with local venues, governments, broadcasters - it truly is a thankless job and the riders are being completely irresponsible in not trying to find solutions to bring more money to the sport constructively. A walk-out like this is a stunt & while you may have made a statement, you now only throw into flux the ability for the tour to find sponsors to support your events. You should be collaborating and not undermining. After 30-years of acton sports event marketing, I have seen events that don't have the riders backs and know that with Crankworx, there is not another tour or event in the world that doesn't have the riders interests at this level of consideration as CEI does. Back in the day we had Bearclaw, McGazza, McRae, Semenuk, Rheeder, Zink & many more who all had a lot to say, both negative and positive, but would always work collaboratively to grow the events....and it has grown every year with that collaborative attitude - until now. A stunt like this by a generation of riders who have no understanding of where this sport has come from in a relatively very short time is going to leave a stain. The current ownership structure couldn't be more aligned for your success and continuation of building the sport. If you squeeze, their is nothing more to give and you'll risk the tour being sold and the only buyers would be people who would definitely be looking to take every penny of profit and be far less suited to grow the athletes interests. To pull this at an event that is named "in memory of McGazza" is a huge slap in the face to his legacy too. He was the BEST athlete I have ever worked with - would get up to travel to 6am morning shows, do every media request, work on the course building and always be so full of stoke and positivity. FMBA athletes now are acting like Gen Z stereotypes now and hope they will get some strong messages from the fans, industry, sponsors & local organizers community that are supporting them.
I think it's really common for event organizers to have food/drinks/snacks for volunteers and staff.
The thing I found interesting from the press conference is that in Nicolai's statement, he didn't got to much into the money part.. But, when Darren read the letter from the athletes, I didn't see any body language that would indicate that Darren didn't go word for word on the letter..
That also goes with my previous point... Any of these riders that has signed a contract in the last 2 years has almost definitely taken a pay cut. Some riders are good at finding outside money, but it always seems like the easy way is to try and get more from the event organizers. But, that money may not be as abundant as some think.. These events aren't cheap to put on..
That's the one... Thanks..
i definitely got some freebies like that for being a volunteer course marshall in the pass.
one takeaway from that linkedin post is that these kinds of "stunts" essentially threaten to make an already challenging business model unsustainable. my counterpoint to that is that if event host / organizers run the competition with the expectation that some/many of the riders will take a net financial loss in order to participate, then the business model is already unsustainable.
I was trying to hang on until he went with 'generation who dont understand where the sport comes from' and even worse the 'generation Z stereotypes'. Sadly, I can gauge a lot about his OWN narrative (if he wants to talk about stereotypes) within those statements.
Also bringing up times when the money was honestly pretty good. The ECONOMY was pretty good. Is sliiightly disingenuous. Not to take the nuance out of the statement. But Having worked in the action sports industry myself, I remember what 2005-2010 was like. Even for BMX which is usually lower on the totem pole. Money was FLOWING. So to say 'guys were better about negotiating' then is... Dubious. Sounds more like it was just plain easier to get the number where it needed to be. I do NOT envy the task of someone budgeting anything in 2024. Myself included. I'm still on the event's side in some aspects.
And, in general, shout out to Jonk for bringing a LOT more info and some nuanced takes to this discussion. Again, this is a bad scene to pick sides in. It's a great situation to moderate in. The event ABSOLUTELY has the right to say the budget is a struggle and the protest is a bad look. But I can't get past every single rider agreeing to sit out. That says a lot. Unless someone closer to that scene can imply riders were bullied/gaslit into sitting out. (Which I totally could see, but wouldn't assume. aka its unlikely)
If it is as they say, let the budget fix the lodging/catering and try to handle an appearance fee that either a) alleviates flight cost for non locals or b) supports local riders with a small cash bonus. If it comes out that this is all about percentage based increases for top earners... I'll eat crow as I should
Very interesting reading the comments and replies in that Linkedin post.
Here's another one from Mark:
"The riders are the stars & do deserve a safe environment for the level of risk they take. BUT I have worked a lot of other tours in action sports and know first hand that the organizers of Crankworx are by far the BEST in terms of caring for the athletes (within their abilities). One of the issues now is the nature of outdoor sports in the mountains where we have to deal with the weather. Not every comp can happen in perfect conditions. The organizers make every effort to adjust schedules to the forecast to find the best possible weather windows (which requires herculean efforts and costs - rescheduling of broadcast, overtime pay, re-adjusting all volunteer schedules, moving other major events around where other top athletes have to bend to the slopestyle athletes). The best window though may still not be perfect and may result in riders having to adjust their banger run for the conditions and/or in some cases a 1-run competition (like Whistler last year and several events over the years). If the riders want to not compete on a day, CEI has listened and canceled events in the past too. The riders are never forced to ride and there is a group consensus before the start of every comp. "
Interesting the the Slope guys already have a kind of preferential treatment anyway.
I feel this is the difference between a competition and a show.. If you sign up for a competition, you know you are spending money in hopes of making money, or at least not losing money.. But, you should also know you can have a bad day and lose money.. Kinda like going to a casino.. Maybe Crankworx can let the riders sell merchandise at the event as a way they can make money?
Now, if you are doing a show like Nitro Circus and spending your money to get there and you're not being paid, then yes, you're getting screwed.
I think it can be a generational thing, but not necessarily limited to one generation. Throughout the years the younger generation thinks the older generation doesn't know.. As they get older, gain life experience, sometimes views change.. I'm sure most riders that have put on a contest can tell you about lessons they learned along the way.
One other thought that just crossed my mind.. I'm willing to bet most of these event sponsors signed multi year deals a few years ago... They were committed to a certain amount of money every year. But, does that mean the expenses for the organizers remain fixed? Most likely not. Maybe some of them, but not all of them.
Finally, I'll go along with what you finished with.. If my opinion is shown to be wrong, I will happily eat crow.. Preferably deep fried...
I wouldn't say that's preferential, but more like not expecting the riders to compete in conditions that everyone can agree on being dangerous. Rain, wind, darkness are all factors that make it too risky for the riders..
If Crankworx providing appearance fees, travel expenses, accommodations, etc, I feel like there would then be a significantly higher expectation for athletes to perform, regardless of conditions, etc. (ie - we're paying for you to be here and to perform). At that point, I'm sure athletes would have to sign contracts (ie - we'll give you this, but here are the expectations if you do) and I think it would really run the risk of becoming more of a performative show rather than a true competition.
I think it's the event organizers role to ensure the athletes have a safe event to compete in, but completely disagree that it's their job to make sure athletes can get to the event, have a place to stay, have their expenses covered and ultimately make a living and I will die on this hill. Ha ha
Post a reply to: Slopestyle Riders Boycott Crankworx Rotorua Because of Low Prize Pay, Lack of Appearance Fee