- Posted on April 17, 2012
It’s not ability the industry lacks. It’s vision.
When we released our 2012 SCS National Championships video last week it sparked a storm of commentary and feedback, both positive and negative. We encourage and appreciate both—your perspective and comments never fall on deaf ears, and the constructive criticism we receive helps us to continue our progression at LT11.
Much of the discussion centered on the editing of our latest comp video. Some people didn’t like the video stylistically. Too many “quick cuts” and “not safe for epileptics.” That feedback is a fair critique (we apologize to the epileptics watching our videos) but for every person that comments, “I had a hard time watching the whole thing–” there’s another person spraying on Facebook, “Comps usually bore the sh*t outta me… but THIS IS DOPE!!!” That’s nothing unusual. You can’t please everybody. Some people just look for reasons to bitch and moan. As Mr. Andrew Bisharat commented on my FB post,
“People will complain about anything. It’s all shit or sunshine on the Internet. Nothing in between. There are two types of people: People who create something. And everyone else.”
Others chimed in on the discussion expressing that they would really appreciate seeing more of the climbing in the highlight reel. I can honestly say we will never put full-uncut-send-footage in our highlight reels. I think ClimbingNarc hit the nail on the head,
“when you watch a show like SportsCenter they don’t show the entire 4th quarter or all of the 9th inning when they are highlighting what happened in a sporting event. They show the exciting moments that defined the event. That’s why they’re called highlights.”
and
“showing entire attempts, especially in a lead comp, is pushing the envelope for what most people would sit through.”
I do agree, however, with commenters expressing sentiment we could afford to let the climbing footage breathe a bit more. People want to see more of the climbing. Let the climbing tell the story. We hear you. Under tight deadlines we often focus on trying not to challenge the audience’s attention span, or we simply get stuck in a rigid pattern of cutting to the music, which we’ve now noted can be quite jarring at times. We learned a lot this round. Thanks for the feedback. It helps us to make the next one even better. And we’re psyched to do so!
Ultimately, I think Narc brought up another fantastic point in his post that deserves to be discussed even further:
“The problem with there being no broadcast is that climbing fans—people who are really interested in seeing each and every move—are not being well served at all.”
I couldn’t agree more. The last 2 climbing comps LT11 covered were 2012 ABS Nationals (Men & Women) and just recently the 2012 SCS Nationals. These were major comps in the US with the purpose of crowning a National Champion respectively. They were organized by the official governing body of climbing in the States–USA Climbing . . . and yet there was no live feed available for either event. Why?
Because there was no budget for it. Not enough money to produce a broadcast. Now, I don’t know where all the dollars come from (ticket sales, memberships, etc.) but I’m certain (and it seems to be the general consensus) the biggest buckets of cash to fund these comps come from sponsors. In a post on the UBC Pro Tour Blog from the beginning of this year it says,
“there is still plenty of work to be done in convincing our industry of the value of professional competition climbing as a mechanism for growth of the sport. Look no further than the cancellation of the staple UBC comp at the Outdoor Retailer Summer Market trade show back in August for evidence of that. The need to cancel our first event ever was a blow to us and an indicator that much of our industry lacks either the ability or the vision required to support and sustain a climbing pro tour at the level necessary to produce professional-scale events.”
It is not the ability the industry lacks–rather it is the vision.
Based on my experience in the industry, it seems to me these companies have demonstrated little to no interest in supporting these professional-scale events. The desire to invest in the future of our sport is marginal at best. Potential sponsors for big events appear apathetic about climbing making it into the Olympics. It’s not possible to set up a demo table with their products at an Olympic event. They won’t see any direct sales increase on their quarterly returns if climbing becomes an Olympic Sport. That’s what I think it all comes down to. The industry would rather spend $1000 bucks to sponsor a local climbing comp than support a professional-scale event that will progress the sport. They want a direct return in increased sales.
A climbing shoe company, for example, can send a regional rep to your local gym with duffel bags of shoes for comp participants to try out. Everybody in the gym can climb in those shoes. Some of those people will buy a pair. Boom! Money well invested, right? Sure. Absolutely, I get that.
This basic level of outreach has proven effective, but I find it to be incredibly shortsighted when companies consider that enough. It’s disappointing, considering the large percentage of their consumer base that would love to see every athlete, route and move at a national level climbing comp broadcast or replayed. It may be relatively expensive to sponsor a broadcast compared to the cost of sponsoring a local gym comp or similar event . . . but therein exists a grandiose opportunity here for a company with vision for a bigger picture. Pro level competition climbing is a valuable mechanism for growth in our sport, one necessary for it to reach its true growth potential. Broadcasting these events assists in spreading it to the masses while simultaneously pleasing the die-hard climbing fan base.
I understand exceptions exist—some companies literally do not have the cash to spend. Is it that many climbing-specific companies do not generate a large enough profit margin (climbing holds, crash pads, climbing shoes, climbing gear, etc.) to generate revenue that could allow for promotional budgets to support pro-level events? I know in some cases it is. But that cannot be the situation in all; otherwise our industry would not continue to prove itself sustainable.
It is past time that we looked beyond our immediate pool of endemic sponsors for support of these events. Climbing is growing–like it or not–with or without the tangible nourishment of our industry. It’s worth repeating; there is amazing opportunity in climbing right now that is ripe for the taking. Who is going to seize it and take climbing to the next level?
It will happen. Someone will step up. It’s just a question of when and who. We all love climbing very much and want the best for our sport. We (and we are not alone) are going to keep the engine running in the mean time. We will keep pushing ourselves to make better videos– continue to innovate and listen to what our viewers have to say, and appreciate their taking the time to say it. I hope that one day soon we will have live broadcasts and full coverage replays of every major climbing comp. And when we do you will psyched. So psyched in fact, you will almost accidentally kick your mom in the face.
- 24 Comments
Proctor and Gamble sponsor the American women’s beach volleyball team. Beach volley ball. I joked with my friend who climbs pretty hard and has an infant that she should hit up P&G for sponsorship.
I think you raise a good question here Jordan, have any American climbers sought out sponsorship from non-climbing entities? I know that large corporations sponsor all kinds of athletes. Why not climbers?
Well put. If you look at big time sports like the NFL, for example, the majority of their revenue is coming from their broadcast deals. Not ticket sales, not sponsoring signage at the events, etc. they are focused on maximizing the broadcast. Everything else is second tier.
I have noticed over the years that the climbing industry had had this backwards, putting broadcast on the second tier.
Think big and it will happen. I appreciate your vision!
A well written post, and interesting points made. However, if there was no profit margin to be had sponsoring large scale events, or in seeing climbing make it to the Olympics, then why do sports gear manufacturers sponsor current Olympic athletes to the hilt already? Or in any major sporting event? They are positively dripping in sponsors. Sponsor saturated, if you will.
Exposure on this massive global stage is worth its weight in gold, that’s why. Imagine a climber on international television taking home a gold medal wearing a branded pair of climbing shoes. This is the sort of exposure that no advertisement will achieve. Associating products with success is a sales winner every time.
One climbing brand has already been swallowed up (or is in the process of being bought out) by a globally recognised sports company with significant financial clout. They will be looking for sponsorship opportunities, no doubt. And you can bet that if climbing does make it through to the Olympics, or continues to grow on the international stage that it is already inhabiting, more big names will start investing.
Providing climbing continues to grow, it’s only a matter of time before the money begins to flow.
I agree. Exposure on the Olympic level is priceless.
I think it may be instructive to accurately study how skateboarding, surfing, snowboarding, bmx and downhill biking made their transitions from being a cult activity to being sponsored by non-sports-related entities.
Pingback: Lacking Vision | Climbing Narcissist
I’d be curious to know how many climbers are really interested in watching feeds of contests. Most of the climbers I know are interested in climbing… the real kind. The outdoors kind. Some of them do compete in the local comps on rainy weekends.
I do admit that I am probably out of touch with the climbers who never leave the gym… do they care about high end gym comps and would like to see them? Do they wish to consume the brand of pro climbing that you are trying to sell?
Lack of vision. I love climbing videos. I’m not really that interested in guys climbing plastic at all, and only mildly interested in bouldering videos. Maybe mine is just different than yours. I see the stuff Sender puts out, and that is the stuff that speaks to me. Could it be that living in a town with 4 climbing gyms has given you a skewed perspective on what people want to see in climbing?
I don’t think so. There is a generation of climbers around the world who appreciate the culture that’s been formed in the climbing gym and comps as well as the cliffs and boulderfields.
Watching competitions speaks to us as a community. Does that mean that the big wall aid climber is going to feel slighted by not having access to a live stream or downloadable coverage of the SCS Championships? Of course not. But that’s obvious.
Similarly, someone who doesn’t identify with climbing comps or climbing plastic should probably realize that this isn’t really about them either.
For a lot of climbers, there’s rock and there’s plastic. The two aren’t the same thing, and we realize this, but we also understand that we love both. Maybe it’s because we don’t live close enough to a crag to climb more than once or twice a week and have no other way to fuel our obsession
You do touch on a valid point which is that holding climbing comps late on Saturday nights doesn’t make for the best broadcast. Most climbers are, hopefully, out climbing for the weekend. I think organizers need to look to have these events during the week when most people are more likely to be able to watch. There’s a reason that most major pro sports don’t hold events Friday/Saturday nights.
Living in Boulder and having 4 climbing gyms (another on the way) can definitely skew one’s perspective of the sport :) But I don’t think so in this case. If anything has skewed my opinion, it’s been my experience in the industry thus far and working at these comps, producing media, observing the responses, etc.
I don’t think the numbers are quite there, but they are getting close. USAC has 2408 competitors, 200 coaches, 563 college competitors, and 139 setters listed on their membership page. These are just the ones who shell out the money and could probably be used as a good base number of people that would be interested in live feeds of comps. Plus add in the viewers from across the pond where I assume they already have a hefty viewing audience on the ifsc.tv streams.
I’d be willing to bet that if you put out a well produced– even moderately so– and comprehensive coverage of high profile SCS and ABS competitions, people would pay a reasonable price for a download, or maybe even a compiled DVD at the season’s end.
I don’t know whether or not something like this is cost prohibitive, or whether or not pricing the coverage low enough for climbers and fans to purchase them would allow this to be a feasible venture, but i can say this:
The coverage as it is doesn’t give the context needed to really feel like we’re watching anything more than either video evidence of a headline we’ve already read, a trailer to a movie we’ll never get to see, or a flashy project for a videographer’s demo reel.
While it probably is true that this footage is “better than nothing,” it isn’t quite what today’s internet savvy community of pro climbing fans has seen in the past or knows is possible.
We as a sport are used to being marginalized compared to the “major” established sports (or even climbing in other countries), but we also have no problem mentioning that it sucks.
Especially on the internet.
I think we really need to discuss the makeup of the climbing population. We need to be able to group climbers into specific buckets and then quantify the best way to market to them. How do broadcasts, videos etc grow the brand, prompt people to buy directly? Why are there less videos about trad climbing? Who watches these videos? Who would watch the live feed? Do people with more disposable income still read reviews?
Given that many of the Nationals and other professional events are on weekends they will be skipped by a large percent of people who are busy CLIMBING on the weekends. Perhaps this population segment is mainly comprised of people who climb outside and should not be targeted…
I think a better question is how we get people who climb at the gym (with reguality) to be come engaged in this type of media. I climb at the gym and am fairly sure that a majority of gym goers do not climb outdoors on the weekends. This is good because it leaves them free to view a live broadcast. I also feel that many frequent gym goers have more discretionary income (at least in my area of California). However I also believe that a majority of these gym climbers have no idea about when nationals is, who the climbers are that are involved, and why they should care.
Many gym climbers, who might even be classified as serious climbers (2-3 days of climbing per week), just don’t have the exposure to all aspects of climbing media. They know who Chris Sharma is, they may have seen some great movies from Sender or Big Up but they don’t track the goings on of pro climbers. They surely don’t read climbing blogs and many don’t even subscribe to magazines. This is one place where I think that Deadpoint is doing a good job. Free magazines at the gym hits this large climbing population without requiring those climbers to invest any money.
Perhaps special gym nights should be arragged to watch live feeds and promote more climbing movies. Shouldn’t ABS and SCS nationals be like the Superbowl for climbers? Maybe we need to recruit Skandy for a half time show!
I think someone needs figure out how to bring more media to this segment. When you can get a “average joe” climber interested then funding will flow!
-Luke
Why do we want climbing grow into track and field, or figure skating? What your missing is that comp climbing misses the essence of climbing for most people. Only a very small segment of the climbing community cares if climbing is in the Olympics. Most care about being on the rock. As I watched the SCS live (I have never been to a sport climbing comp before), all i could think of was we are heading down the road of Tory Allen again, only no monkey, this time its an adidas jumpsuit.
We webcast the CWIF recently, it is the 3rd time we have done this. It cost us 1100 GBP for a one day event. The webcast was produced by Horizon the same people that do IFSC.tv
Webasting an IFSC event costs in the region of 6000 GBP for a 2 day event. Thats 3 people and all of the kit. Transport not included.
Jordan, interesting piece. Plan on responding to this piece and a post by Justin Roth but I think the problem has a lot to do with what I wrote here:
www.mountainsandwater.com/2009/02/five-reasons-that-climbing-competitions.html
Thanks Peter. I’ve never seen that post you linked to. I think the points you make in that post could be said of many sports. It’s all in the eye of the beholder.
It is in the eye of the beholder but only up to a point. LT11 has probably talked to more producers than I ever have but I wouldn’t be surprised if the factors I mention in my post are key in their not committing the many thousands of dollars required for even a bare-bones professional job. And there remains the fact that the actual numbers of real climbers in the country remains remarkably low relative to the numbers for even minor popular sports. The real potential viewing public for climbing events is unlikely to be too much bigger.
Another porblem is the public perception. They can understand what will happen if Alex Honnold falls during his 60 minutes debut. I have recently begun guiding and it amazes me how peoples perceptions of climbing change throughout the day. It starts off as, “Is it safe, are we going to die?” and then tey realize how pedestrian a day of climbing at a local crag can be.
As for the collegiate part that Peter commented on, CCS (the Collegiate Climbing Series) has been growing each year. I think that since there is no money involved for winning comps many of the pros dont want to get involved. This series is relatively young, just finished its 4th season i believe, but it is a step in the direction of bringing climbing more into the spotlight if that is what people are interested in.
I agree with certain things here, but I don’t think it’s fair to place so much blame on the climbing companies for their perceived general malaise toward competition climbing. Many of these companies are just trying to make ends meet, and yet they still have contributed a relatively significant share of their resources toward backing comps and athletes–all for an arguable return on their investment.
Comp climbing suffers from so many other reasons beside the so-called lack of industry support, and to not acknowledge those as well is also lacking vision, in my opinion.
Anyway, thanks for the videos. Keep em coming!
You’re right, lack of industry support is not the only reason comp climbing suffers. Those are topics for another discussion and I didn’t want to write a novel in this post. I don’t think I was unfair, though. A I said, “I understand exceptions exist—some companies literally do not have the cash to spend.”