$171 for a New York Marathon entry

You can see NYRR's 2006 tax return (pdf):

http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/132/132949483/132949483_200703_990.pdf

(See page 10.)

(from

http://lettersfromearth1.blogspot.com/2009/01/nyrr-removes-benefactor-status-and-nyrr.html

)

As to the race itself, if you're running, say, sub-3:00, who cares if there are 35,000 behind you? You get access to all of the support on the course built for the mases without being in a crowd during the race itself. Plus you're not going to find yourself running all alone as you might in a race where 2:50 will get you top 20 (if there are any such races.

As to whether it's too expensive, that's a different issue.

Yes, the NYRR has done more for running than the USATF. My dog has done more for running than USATF. And I don't even have a dog.

There aren't as many races as you think. I'm shooting for a sub 2:30 and that may not win many races, but it also doesn't offer a lot of competition. I will probably need a race of at least 5,000 to have a decent number of people to run with at that pace.

cheaper than u wrote:

If you're at altitude then there are a plethora of low altitude marathons between your locality and Chicago or NYC that would still cost you less and unless you're a trials aspirant you're probably in zero danger of there being zero competition at any of them.

Cheap Bastard wrote:

Local marathon = altitude and slower times

I may look for a smaller marathon at sea-level, but I will still have to fly.

I don't have a problem with them charging $171. To run a marathon is expensive.

Plus, I want the marathons to have even more money so they can amass quality elite fields. I've never understood why marathons limit their fields but since they do and their is a wait-list, increasing price is certainly fine by me.

Yes they could charge $50 and then they'd have the terrible elite fields they had a decade ago when Chicago had everyone and they had no one.

$171 isn't all that much when you consider the average Lakers ticket is $89. So to take a family of 4 to that, you are looking at $360. To take a family of four to watch dad run NYC, you are looking at $171. That's a bargain. And at the NBA game, you can't line up and shoot freethrows next to Kobe.

Yes $171 is a lot but it's a memory that last a life-time.

Roger has spoken.

So it's settled: the official LetsRun.com race is in fact the New York City Marathon. Everyone make sure to wear your LRC singlets!

No worries nsmb. I, in turn am merely trying to give you the counter perspective on what is really going on with the $171. You see, the price of doing business is not any fundamentally different between the New York, Boston, and Chicago marathons. It is merely the price that is being charged.

Sorry you take that for combativeness. Be a little less defensive (and passive-aggressive) next time and enjoy your local marathon.

Is not fundamentally different? Are you serious? Don't speak until you have your facts straight.I've never been to Chicago, but I live in Boston and my family is from NYC and there is a fundamental difference between shutting down Boston for a day versus New York. The cities are of a completely different scale and in Boston, the marathon monday, "Marathon Monday" is a holiday called patriots day. Much of the city shuts down on its own. Whereas in New York it's no a holiday (however it is a Sunday) but there impact of shutting down parts of new york for a morning and the cost of the police are definitely different. Here you have two fundamentally different cities with different costs. In fact most of the boston marathon is not even run in boston, only the last 5 or so miles. All of the NYC marathon is in New York City. Have you actually assessed the costs of doing business in new york vs. boston? Probably not, I imagine to you, that they are both big cities filled with city fold so they must be the same.

big spender wrote:

No worries nsmb. I, in turn am merely trying to give you the counter perspective on what is really going on with the $171. You see, the price of doing business is not any fundamentally different between the New York, Boston, and Chicago marathons. It is merely the price that is being charged.

Sorry you take that for combativeness. Be a little less defensive (and passive-aggressive) next time and enjoy your local marathon.

Most of the Boston marathon is not run in Boston. Exactly. The BAA has to pay not only the city of Boston, but Hopkinton, Ashland, Framingham, Natick, Wellesley and Newton as well. The Boston Marathon cuts every one of those towns in half. In fact, each one has to move half of their ambulances, fire trucks and police cars to each side of the route.

The BAA must pay every one of them for this. They don't do it for free. And they know they have the BAA by the short hairs so they don't come cheap. A few years ago the Boston Globe published a breakdown of the costs.

heyyo wrote:

Whereas in New York it's no a holiday (however it is a Sunday) but there impact of shutting down parts of new york for a morning and the cost of the police are definitely different.

I'm not positive but pretty sure that the police are provided to the marathon for free or a reduced rate. In return the marathon is expected to bring in a lot of out of town visitors. Thus, there are all the spots reserved for foreigners who spend like mad while in town.

NY Times article on fees going up.

Hey with the prices on everything else coming down, the marathon is the one bright spot in the NYC economy:)

great logic. I am a "loser" in complaining that NYRR charges an exorbitant fee for the marathon because NYRR sponsors some runners. Name a single elite runner who has developed because of them. What are we gaining by sending NYRR employees on trips around the world and paying large fees for foreign runners? They couldn't even manage to get the words 'NYC Marathon' on the shirt last year (oh, on the sleeve, that was great). They couldn't manage to keep access to the baggage drops in 2007.

You people who are so enthralled with the idea of spending a fortune and going through logistical hell in order to run one of the big marathons are just victims of corporate propaganda. You sound like you just fell off the back of a turnip truck. No wonder the country is in such a mess. Instead of t shirts, they should pass out dunce caps to all zombies who have been sucked into the marketing hysteria. "A fool and his money are soon parted."

Corporate propaganda? Turnip truck? Nah, we simply enjoy it.

Sorry if that disturbs you.

I was about to list the foods, music, and films I enjoy, but will put that on ice out of consideration for you.

Meantime I'll drop two quarters in the piggy bank each day to save up for the race.

For people who live in or around NY and are members of NYRRC. This race is cheap compared to travelling to Boston, Chicago, Houston, Sacramento, etc... So its not that big a deal for the locals... Yes it is a hassle to get to the start. But if you know what you are doing, I think its better than taking a 1.5 hour school bus ride out to Hopkinton for Boston.

For NY, Subway to South Ferry. Ferry to SI. Bus from SI Ferry to Start. That's it... Simple... Takes a while, but no big hassle. Bring some crap to sit on... Take a later ferry...

Also,know that NYRRC lumped the $20 they used to charge for the Bus option into the fee.

40,000 runners x $4/runner = $160,000 in prize money. I don't know exactly how much prize money there is but we have to face the fact that attracting elite runners is not the reason they are charging $171+$11. And that's not even factoring in sponsorship dollars, which are considerable.

jonesy. wrote:

40,000 runners x $4/runner = $160,000 in prize money. I don't know exactly how much prize money there is but we have to face the fact that attracting elite runners is not the reason they are charging $171+$11. And that's not even factoring in sponsorship dollars, which are considerable.

You're right. Do you know how much money a city like NYC or Chicago loses when it shuts down for half a day? Conveniently we can at least estimate that figure for Chicago. Obama is in hot water with the city of Chicago because his campaign hasn't paid the city for his inauguration celebration in Grant Park. The bill? $1.74 million. Hey that's the location of the Chicago marathon start/finish too! Oh, and the marathon spans a much, much larger portion of the city as well.

Aside from that, what you think and what is reality are very different things. These marathons are big business and the people running them are at least 1000x more knowledgeable about big events than internet conspiracy theorists. They aren't running some underground movement to 'turn running into a rich man's sport.' They are business men and women responding to demand. Go run a business and get back to us.

Better yet, nothing is stopping you from putting on a marathon or trying to become head of the NYRR. Stop the hippie talk and do it if there is such a huge problem. People will flock to your race if you are correct. Oh, and don't forget to not raise prices when the demand is lining up flush with cash at your door.

What really tickles me is the people complaining about the price despite the fact that the organizers are clearly undervaluing their product to keep entry available for the masses. If entry is $175 and the keepers could double the price and still fill the race without doing any additional work, THEY ARE DOING YOU A FAVOR. That is a horribly run business by any standard, so ask yourself what is their motivation for doing so.

And a Lexus costs more than a Chevy too...and yet - they're both cars. There are lots of cheaper marathons if cost is the deal breaker.

Nonsense:http://www.lincolnrun.org/lm-fm-08.txt

Cheap Bastard wrote:

There aren't as many races as you think. I'm shooting for a sub 2:30 and that may not win many races, but it also doesn't offer a lot of competition. I will probably need a race of at least 5,000 to have a decent number of people to run with at that pace.

cheaper than u wrote:

If you're at altitude then there are a plethora of low altitude marathons between your locality and Chicago or NYC that would still cost you less and unless you're a trials aspirant you're probably in zero danger of there being zero competition at any of them.

EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THIS DAMN THREAD NEEDS TO GO BACK AND READ WHAT THEY WROTE

Welcome to America's modern age. Do you have a problem with the profit motive? Why should runners expect the entitlement of race entry fees set artificially low relative to demand? Like it or not, NYC is the marquee marathon in the US, both domestically and abroad, and as such has the right to price their product/service accordingly. Running a PR at Chicago or hitting the (soft) qualifying standards for Boston has very limited appeal compared with the appeal of running through NYC's 5 boroughs. Boston and Chicago are allowed to make more money by increasing their fees, too. But maybe they know that the demand for their races isn't as elastic as it is for NYCM.

not expensive wrote:

The point of the thread is that the price tag is becoming more ridiculous, for no discernible reason beyond simple greed. A huge race like NYC that gets 40,000 runners and massive corporate sponsorship has no need to charge anywhere near that much. Chicago and Boston bear that out.