Marathon Appearance Fee Myth

Westside wrote:

They are significant. Some elites will make more money off of that first marathon than any race in their career.

It would be financially irresponsible for a guy like Chris Derrick to open up at the trials unless he is certain he'll make the team.

This is just wrong. Chris Derrick debuting in the marathon next fall isn't going to draw a large appearance fee. It would be much larger if has an Olympic marathoner.

Part of the money was for him to run the first half of the London marathon. It was absurd. It was because he was a huge name but he didn't want to run the marathon so he ran a freaking training run in London for cash.

asdfgh wrote:

Westside wrote:

They are significant. Some elites will make more money off of that first marathon than any race in their career.

It would be financially irresponsible for a guy like Chris Derrick to open up at the trials unless he is certain he'll make the team.

This is just wrong. Chris Derrick debuting in the marathon next fall isn't going to draw a large appearance fee. It would be much larger if has an Olympic marathoner.

Whatever the amount of the appearance fee, Chris Derrick would get something for a debut next fall in NY or Chicago, vs. getting zero appearance fee for the trials or Olympics if he makes the team.

Assuming he makes the team in the marathon, he would probably get a larger appearance fee in the fall than otherwise, but that would mean running a third marathon within a year on less than 2 months rest. That's possible, but unlikely and probably unwise. Realistically, the first major marathon appearance fee he could get paid would be a spring 2017 marathon.

So you have to average together the appearance fee and opportunity cost of 3 marathons, only one of which pays an appearance fee, vs. the appearance fee from a debut marathon.

Assuming he makes the team in the 10,000, he also probably gets the Olympian bump in debut appearance fee and probably still has time for a marathon buildup for NY at least.

It may be that bonuses from Nike for participation in the trials or making the Olympics adequately offset any question of appearance fees, but compensation in track is so opaque that it's impossible to say.

And, of course, not everything is a financial decision.

It should be. They should want to maximize their earning potential NOW. Most elites have 10 years or less to make running money. Most Sunday's are 2 hour runs. Why not get paid $$$ to run a harder 2 hour Sunday run????

road rashed wrote:

This is either a 5/10 troll job or this thread needs to be exported to Runner's World.

apparently this troll job needed to be promoted to the front page of LRC

what a surprise

br0ski wrote:

Part of the money was for him to run the first half of the London marathon. It was absurd. It was because he was a huge name but he didn't want to run the marathon so he ran a freaking training run in London for cash.

Marathon appearance fees are only going to go to people with a "huge name". (at least any serious amount of cash)

Sorry but runners aren't making millions.

I bet Webb wishes he cashed in for some 'thon coin $$$$ during his prime. He could show up on the starting line, hang with the leaders than HallNF.

I don't think that market transparency would help the race directors, they'd have less leverage to low-ball people.

I talked to a track agent over the weekend and the biggest one he has ever worked on was 350k.. The biggest one he has ever heard of it was in the 450-500k range for London. The two marathons that historically give out the biggest appearance fees are NYC and London.

Marathons will pay out big cash for a debut marathon. Molly Huddle will easily get 150-200k for her marathon that will probably be NYC.

I've seen a few other debut offers and it's not unheard of for an athlete to get a 30k-60k appearance fee. These types either have a well known name or made a world/olympic team, but not a overly famous yet. (Lauren Fleshman when she ran NYC for example)

Seb Coen wrote:

I've seen a few other debut offers and it's not unheard of for an athlete to get a 30k-60k appearance fee. These types either have a well known name or made a world/olympic team, but not a overly famous yet. (Lauren Fleshman when she ran NYC for example)

This seems exactly right to me. I know a runner who exactly fits this mold (less name recognition than Lauren, but made a WC Team) who was offered $25,000-$40,000 to make his/her marathon debut at a US World Marathon Major.

br0ski wrote:

Part of the money was for him to run the first half of the London marathon. It was absurd. It was because he was a huge name but he didn't want to run the marathon so he ran a freaking training run in London for cash.

Can you blame the guy? If someone offered you £250k for a half marathon training run at marathon pace what would you say?

Right here- you are right! People think runners make the small prize money amounts when they make much more in appearance fees.

Appearance Feel wrote:

How much money is an appearance fee? I can't see race directors spending thousands for a first timer.

This is just based on your feeling?

Even though appearance fees aren't published, it's easy to see the work that NYRR does to court debutants. They bring them out to NY and let them ride the lead van. The cost of that alone is thousands. Heck, NYRR sent a pacer for out to California to help Shalane run a 10k, and that was before she had ever done a marathon. Obviously they're putting up big money.

This 2010 NYT article says that top marathoners can get $400k, which is 15 to 20 times more than "lower tier runners" ($20k), and that 40-50 people at NY get some kind of appearance fee, even if it's "as little as $1000."

Another way of looking at it is this: Appearance fees and prize money serve a very similar purpose. They both help to ensure that you get a good field that runs fast. But appearance fees are far more important, because you don't need much incentive to run fast (because doing well helps athletes get more appearance fees down the road), and no incentive will make a mediocre talent truly fast. The article above supports this reasoning, as only about a third of NYRR's elite athlete budget goes toward prize money. So if you figure that $1k prizes are won by nobodies all the time, then you should figure that's a very lowball figure for NYRR appearance fees. (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/sports/04marathon.html?_r=0)

Also, your general skepticism of debutants doesn't make sense. You're suggesting that the marathon is such a different beast that it's impossible to know if someone will be able to do it. But any pro who runs a marathon has certainly done some longer road races first, and that gives you a very good idea of their potential.

Finally, being a debutant is actually a plus in some ways. If someone has any name recognition at shorter distances, there's an element of excitement and curiosity to see how well they'll do on what is increasingly becoming running's true premier stage.

The amount of appearance fee you get will be based on 2 main factors:

1. How much interest and positive publicity will you bring - are you an interesting story, have a big following, etc.

2. How substantially are you likely to contribute to the race itself. Are you a legit contender, will you likely be on TV in the lead pack and factor in the race. Largely this is based on past races.

You get some athletes who get paid appearance fees based largely on 1 of these 2 factors and very little on the other. The people who made major appearance fees are the people who score high in both areas (i.e. Meb).