Ashburton Investments boosts elite women's prize purse to equal men's

[News bot]

Ashburton Investments, the title sponsor of the South African National MTB Series, has announced it will equal the Elite women’s prize money.

Click here to view the article

[Sitting slip]

as per fritz comment on her salary with spur team. spur now has to step up and make it equal as it would also be a positive move to inspire young girls to ride more and compete.

[two hands]

as per fritz comment on her salary with spur team. spur now has to step up and make it equal as it would also be a positive move to inspire young girls to ride more and compete.

Ariane is the best-paid member of Team Spur. Always has been. Fritz was mistaken when he made that comment.

[PygaSchmyga]

Ariane is the best-paid member of Team Spur. Always has been. Fritz was mistaken when he made that comment.

Fritz seems to have had a lot to say, all of which seems to justify lesser treatment of women.  Fritz needs to enter the 21st century, and leave behind his sexist views.  #getwiththeprogram

[Bikejunkie]

Fritz had a lot to say and at the end of that was still not prepared to budge. I'm glad somebody at Advendurance/ Ashburton investments realized that impact and aimed to resolve it. That kind of publicity does nothing for you as a person, your brand, your company, your events or your sponsors. Wakey Wakey Fritz.... The world turns with or without you... get on the train or go home with your tail between your legs. Someone just saved you from a s#@$ storm...

[MarcW]

Fritz has a lot of egg on his face this afternoon

[Donovan Le Cok]

Who is Fritz....?

[Patchelicious]

Ariane is the best-paid member of Team Spur. Always has been. Fritz was mistaken when he made that comment.

Why not equal pay for the men in her team?

[NotSoBigBen]

Without making light of this achievement, I guess this is specific to their series. What about all the other events that do not have equal prize money or is it because in this series the prize money is quite high that it is targeted ....

[PygaSchmyga]

Without making light of this achievement, I guess this is specific to their series. What about all the other events that do not have equal prize money or is it because in this series the prize money is quite high that it is targeted ....

you need to start somewhere - the others will follow, I'm sure

[Eveza]

Amazing what a little pressure from the top (from Ashburton in this case) can do.

As title sponsor they obviously realized that they cannot afford to share the same view as the event organizer. It would have reflected badly on them as a company.  

[Shebeen]

Very similar debate been going on in pro tennis.

 

I think it's ridiculous that the women's and men's purse is equal. Not because I'm sexist, but because of the pure economics that drive the sport (for reference, the Aus open tickets were starting at $200 for the ladies, $403 for the men's - TV viewing gets about double the audience for the men's).

 

It is obvious to see that it is much harder to make the top 30 in the men's field than it is to make the top 10 in the ladies. It can be argued that more prize money will attract more ladies, but I think equal prize money does very little to promote the sport (beyond the window dressing, and paying the few elite ladies). Catch 22 situation really.

 

Fritz has been roasted for being a dinosaur here, I sympathise as his argument is sound. Dangerous game for a pro athlete to hold organisers publicly like this (in my opinon as a total outsider).

[PygaSchmyga]

Very similar debate been going on in pro tennis.

 

I think it's ridiculous that the women's and men's purse is equal. Not because I'm sexist, but because of the pure economics that drive the sport (for reference, the Aus open tickets were starting at $200 for the ladies, $403 for the men's - TV viewing gets about double the audience for the men's).

 

It is obvious to see that it is much harder to make the top 30 in the men's field than it is to make the top 10 in the ladies. It can be argued that more prize money will attract more ladies, but I think equal prize money does very little to promote the sport (beyond the window dressing, and paying the few elite ladies). Catch 22 situation really.

 

Fritz has been roasted for being a dinosaur here, I sympathise as his argument is sound. Dangerous game for a pro athlete to hold organisers publicly like this (in my opinon as a total outsider).

Both Fritz and your argument is founded in prejudice and ignorance, and yes, it IS archaic. 

 

Ariane asked for the same purse for the winner, and conceded not having the same top 10 - in fact, I think she offered to halve this to top 5 for women to address exactly what you and Fritz have tried to argue in justifying a blatantly sexist stance. 

 

You are both on the wrong side of this.  Rather just say well done to Ashburton who correctly and quickly understood the folly of unequal treatment, or do THEY not understand economics? 

[Patchelicious]

Both Fritz and your argument is founded in prejudice and ignorance, and yes, it IS archaic.

 

Ariane asked for the same purse for the winner, and conceded not having the same top 10 - in fact, I think she offered to halve this to top 5 for women to address exactly what you and Fritz have tried to argue in justifying a blatantly sexist stance.

 

You are both on the wrong side of this. Rather just say well done to Ashburton who correctly and quickly understood the folly of unequal treatment, or do THEY not understand economics?

Surely somebody can raise questions without being called archaic and ignorant.

 

It is a very valid point to discuss, because we all support equality, how ever sometime the pure economics of some cases make it a tough thing to get right.

[Skubarra]

 

I think it's ridiculous that the women's and men's purse is equal. Not because I'm sexist, but because of the pure economics that drive the sport (for reference, the Aus open tickets were starting at $200 for the ladies, $403 for the men's - TV viewing gets about double the audience for the men's).

 

 

Surely somebody can raise questions without being called archaic and ignorant.

 

It is a very valid point to discuss, because we all support equality, how ever sometime the pure economics of some cases make it a tough thing to get right.

 

I'll try

 

It's a case where economics aren't "self-correcting" and need some "intervention". To take an analogy in football, Barcelona and Real Madrid is dominating spanish football, therefore they have the most fans/viewers and in turn the biggest income which allow them to buy the best players/coaches/stadiums which perpetuate their dominance - a self-feeding circle (. Under normal circumstances it would be impossible for another team to permanently break into the top 2 unless some rich Arab/Russian with oil money show up...

 

It's the same with male-dominated sports, over years they have received the most investment which produces the better product which in turn attract the most investment.

 

One way to start breaking this cycle is equal prize money.

 

2013 and 2014 US open tennis woman finals drew more viewers than the mens finals, so the potential is there.

Edited January 30, 2017 by Skubarra

[Shebeen]

Both Fritz and your argument is founded in prejudice and ignorance, and yes, it IS archaic. 

 

Ariane asked for the same purse for the winner, and conceded not having the same top 10 - in fact, I think she offered to halve this to top 5 for women to address exactly what you and Fritz have tried to argue in justifying a blatantly sexist stance. 

 

You are both on the wrong side of this.  Rather just say well done to Ashburton who correctly and quickly understood the folly of unequal treatment, or do THEY not understand economics? 

okee dokee, It's a bit hard to see exactly the he said/she said currently as things have been misquoted. BUT if she only wanted it for the leader then it's quite a self motivated campaign

 

Well done to Ashburton because they prevented a PR media sh1tstorm with quick action by throwing money to put out the fire, or well done because they take women's rights seriously??