# Amanda Batty's ambassador program rant.



## Deep Thought (Sep 3, 2012)

Buckle up, it's a long one. Too long to C&P, in fact.

the drawing board: Your 'Sports Ambassador' Marketing Program Sucks

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on this. I'm still processing it, but the main problem I have is all of her inflammatory language (I know, I know, that's her "style"). It's off putting and reflects an inability or unwillingness to consider other views.

I think elite racing is important for both product development and brand exposure, but I also think that there are some ambassador programs that are just as worthwhile. There's more to mountain biking than racing, and most riders can better identify with an "ambassador" than a racer. Furthermore, it seems that most companies that have these ambassador programs also sponsor race programs. The way Ms. Batty talks, it's always one or the other. But there's room for both. For now.

Points where I agree:

1. "the current attitude towards unpaid interns/work for 'exposure' within the outdoor sports industry has long existed; it is only at mass capacity now thanks to social media and the human detritus populating the airwaves of the Internet"

2. "The 'brand ambassador' thing is heartily overused in an effort to give the 'hookup' to people who haven't really earned it.

A couple points where I vehemently disagree. In fact, I would call these statements a load of angry elitist rubbish:

1. That ambassador programs are a "full-fledged lawless gig for the stupid and the mediocre."

2. That the companies with these programs "don't actually want to support legitimate athletes and that the company in question is totally fine with supporting someone who doesn't really give a whole lot back to the sport, as long as the 'sponsorship' doesn't cost said company much."

What do you all think?


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

I'm sorta leaning your direction on this since I've read her rant and spent some time processing it.

I know several "Ambassadors" for different brands. All are women, FWIW. Not sure about the whole "hookup" angle of it, to be honest. I think that's a pretty small component. It may be relevant in some cases, but not most that I know.

I will also say that the women I know who are ambassadors (the ones I know are with Trek, Liv/Giant, and Bell) are awesome people who are doing great things to get people (especially women) motivated to ride mountain bikes. All four are certified skills coaches. One is a former pro 24hr/endurance racer who has finished RAAM, 24hr Worlds, 24hrs of Leadville, many other races, and has podium finishes to her name. One is a pretty beginner rider. One thing unites them all, and that is the fact that they are extremely positive people and they all are actively doing a great deal to get women and kids out on mountain bikes.


----------



## Deep Thought (Sep 3, 2012)

Harold said:


> I'm sorta leaning your direction on this since I've read her rant and spent some time processing it.
> 
> I know several "Ambassadors" for different brands. All are women, FWIW. Not sure about the whole "hookup" angle of it, to be honest. I think that's a pretty small component. It may be relevant in some cases, but not most that I know.
> 
> I will also say that the women I know who are ambassadors (the ones I know are with Trek, Liv/Giant, and Bell) are awesome people who are doing great things to get people (especially women) motivated to ride mountain bikes. All four are certified skills coaches. One is a former pro 24hr/endurance racer who has finished RAAM, 24hr Worlds, 24hrs of Leadville, many other races, and has podium finishes to her name. One is a pretty beginner rider. One thing unites them all, and that is the fact that they are extremely positive people and they all are actively doing a great deal to get women and kids out on mountain bikes.


All of the Ambassador programs with which I am familiar are women-oriented as well, so that's why I chose to start the discussion here instead of another sub-forum.

I agree with your last sentence too. In my experience, most ambassadors do give back to the sport, often times more than the elite athletes. I think that is what really got me about her whole rant. The way she paints these programs and these people with such a vitriolic brush is bothersome to me, but not surprising.


----------



## Velokid1 (May 3, 2005)

She's a funkin baby. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

I help run a ride with our local LIV ambassador, and occasionally attend Joy Ride events that occur in the next community over. I disagree with most of her piece. Normally I think she's spot on. Based on my experiences, I see nothing but really cool things happening. The growth of women on MTBs that I'veseen is astounding. The shop that is affiliate with the local LIV gal has thanked us for helping them to sell 30+ mountain bikes to women last year. What's not to love about that?


----------



## sooshee (Jun 16, 2012)

I'm not sure how to take her post. I have several "ambassador" sponsorships, but I also hold a pro license in XC MTB. So I get further down to her post, and she's suggesting there's a ton of "fake" pros that shouldn't be allowed to race, and I kinda get insulted. I'm ranked in the 80th's out of 90 or so XC licensed pro women in the US... so is Amanda suggesting I shouldn't be allowed to race pro?! I had to put in the work in cat 1 races to get the pro license so I'm unsure. 

I don't represent the handful of brands that I do just because I want free stuff. It was all products that I used as I progressed from a beginner to the pro ranks, and stuff that makes me super excited (and that's how I approached the companies when I asked to represent them in an official manner). I use the products I represent, I race my ass off, and don't worry about how many likes I get on instagram (I don't think I've ever exceeded 60 likes on a photo, haha). I agree that sometimes the best ambassadors are not the top elite athletes, but the "normal" every day women who are just excited about what they're doing and the brands they represent.


----------



## someoldfart (Mar 14, 2013)

What exactly is an "ambassador sponsorship"? I assume it is riders getting product and financial compensation for non racing activities like camps, tours and guiding?


----------



## ryetoast (Jan 24, 2016)

"Destroying the pro athlete economy?" Yeah, data plz. Also, brand ambassadors and pro athletes serve totally different purposes: Josh Carlson and Yoann Barelli are not paid by Giant to hawk bikes to the average schlubs who wander off the trail into the bike shop. They're there to prove the bike can perform on a world-class level, help with development and raise the prestige of the brand. Good luck getting them to talk up the bike and make it look good in every racing and riding scene the planet--they're kinda busy. THAT level of marketing is the job of brand ambassadors--people with local connections, who can hold local events, do well in local races and get people to buy bikes in local shops. 

I get that the proliferation of bro deals and insta-famous wannabes might be annoying, but I suspect it's good marketing and especially on the women's brand side, it's getting more people into the sport. Maybe it's just where I live and race, but I'm really not seeing the pro ranks artificially swelled with talentless social climbers, and I'd need some numbers to believe that this trend is causing a significant dip in the number of people who have full-time jobs as pro racers. Was there EVER a vast population of individuals racing mountain bikes for a living?! I might be wrong, of course--I'm just saying her rant didn't convince me.

...And yeah, the melodramatic tone totally left me disinclined to agree with her even if she IS right! That ain't how you win friends and influence people...


----------



## fleboz (Apr 22, 2015)

if you read her follow up post, she assumes that most people would take it as "tongue and cheek".... 
"As I wrote it, I had a very tongue-in-cheek sense of humor. I thought "nobody can possibly be offended by this because, clearly, my dry sense of irony and humor is coming through"."
she continues on surprised that anyone could view her as a negative person.


----------



## chuky (Apr 3, 2005)

I have managed huge ambassador programs and elite racing programs, and can clarify a few things: 

– in a well run marketing department, no ambassador program is replacing elite racing sponsorship. Make no mistake - sponsorship of elite athletes is not a charity – companies do it because it helps to communicate their product's strengths to every country in the world. No local/regional rider is going to replace a million hit video by an exceptional rider with global influence on the Redbull channel. 

– Elite athletes can't do what great ambassadors do - they don't have time and they move around too much during the year to be a steady influence in a specific region. Great ambassadors ride sweep at NICA races, they volunteer at trail work days, they carry first aid kits and extra food on rides just in case they meet a local rider in need. We love those people - they are our voice on the trail and a big part of supporting our local bike shops and their riders. Being a coach for kids or teaching people how to change a flat is just as important as an elite podium, in different ways.

Ambassadors grow the sport, pros show the world what is possible at the highest levels. These are two different programs with two different purposes.

Additionally, the implication that running an ambassador program is easy/lazy/cheap is incorrect. Done properly, every single ambassador takes almost as much time to get set up as does a pro athlete. The ambassador roster has to be bigger - as regional athletes, you have to have more of them to create an influential program and you have to interact with each person on a frequent basis to create anything of value.


----------



## matadorCE (Jun 26, 2013)

I guess I don't see anything wrong with what she posted. From reading her posting, I understood that she's calling out companies that use "ambassadors" for unpaid labor, and in the same breath she's calling out "ambassadors" that pretend they're pros or are at the same level as pros. Maybe it's not worded very well, but I could see how and why she's pissed off.


----------



## MTBR_Saris (Apr 26, 2016)

chuky said:


> I have managed huge ambassador programs and elite racing programs, and can clarify a few things:
> 
> - in a well-run marketing department, no ambassador program is replacing elite racing sponsorship. Make no mistake - sponsorship of elite athletes is not a charity - companies do it because it helps to communicate their product's strengths to every country in the world. No local/regional rider is going to replace a million hit video by an exceptional rider with global influence on the Redbull channel.
> 
> ...


Came here to say this. ^

Her whole rant on unpaid ambassadors is ridiculous. If you're a brand manager, you have a limited amount of budget for marketing. So what do you pick: do you host a demo day, sponsor a trail, produce a video, purchase ads on MTBR, or put on a dealer event?

If you can't afford a high-level athlete that is going to generate massive exposure, what's the point? Your money is better spent elsewhere. Somewhere that's trackable and quantifiable. For those brands that still want to support their local scene or regional riders, swagging people out with product or deals is their only option.

I'd also like to point out that the cycling industry as a whole is down. There have been massive layoffs at several international brands and many companies are experiencing financial problems due to over forecasting. The only category that's showing any signs of life is the e-bike market.


----------



## ryetoast (Jan 24, 2016)

I guess this was the original origin/context of the post, and I think I might have been less irked by it had I read it as a solicited critique, rather than someone's random diatribe: 3 Things I Hate About You (Bike Industry) Still, her piece is the only one in the series that strikes me more as hate mail to a group of (mostly harmless) individuals than a gripe about the industry itself. I get it, that's not how she meant it--but that's how it sounded. Which reminds me...



> fleboz:
> 
> if you read her follow up post, she assumes that most people would take it as "tongue and cheek"....
> "As I wrote it, I had a very tongue-in-cheek sense of humor. I thought "nobody can possibly be offended by this because, clearly, my dry sense of irony and humor is coming through"."
> she continues on surprised that anyone could view her as a negative person.


^^Yeah, did not get that vibe at ALL. Especially since the only context I had for who she is and where she's coming from was the "about" page on her website, which states that she's a professional bike rider and--I quote--"From a young age, changing the world was never an option or a 'maybe' for me -- it was simply an inevitable occurrence." That distant clicking sound you just heard was my eyes rolling so hard they got stuck that way. But wait, was that her dry sense of irony talking as well? Too late, someone send help.


----------



## JCWages (Jan 26, 2015)

Interesting article. 

As an ambassador I disagree with her and agree with most of you. There is a very distinct difference between me and Jeni's role vs. Chris Kovarik and Claire Butchar or Brian Lopes and Shaun Palmer in our program. It's definitely not so one sided (only athlete vs. non-althlete). 

We're nowhere near pro level yet we connect with a lot of people who wouldn't connect with a pro athlete because they don't identify with that level of performance. She just doesn't get how the programs work or doesn't get marketing. Or she just has an agenda? 

I don't race. I can't clear 40' doubles. But I do get get a lot of people excited about riding and then we hold clinics and group rides to show them how. Sounds like success to me.  

Maybe it was meant as tongue in cheek but it just comes across as an inaccurate rant?


----------



## verslowrdr (Mar 22, 2004)

There is a microscopic subset of humans with the right constellation of genes and opportunity at a young age that will go on to perform at the level she's talking about. Fine. Knock yer excellent self out. 

But in that context, this rant about "real pros" vs "faux pros" is like hearing a couple physics PhDs argue passionately about string theory when you're late for work and wondering how you're gonna make rent and eat too.

The rest of us are what MTB ACTUALLY is 99% of the time, and we're what ACTUALLY keeps this sport going. We're buying the stuff, we're making and maintaining the trails, we're showing up to the interminable meetings, we're organizing the rides, we're rounding up the newbs and buffing out their mistakes and handing off a beer back at the truck and encouraging them to keep it up. 

We're out there making a space for mere mortals to discover MTBing and enjoy themselves.

And we're living in that space.

And it's an amazing place to be.

And we're not getting paid for it.

Which, you know, also seems like the perfect space for something like an ambassador program if a vendor were so inclined... but what do I know.


----------



## ambatt (Jul 19, 2013)

For the record, I wasn't talking about grassroots ambassadorship. For what it's worth, I completely support that and have been more than encouraging towards getting more people out and riding... I never meant to offend anyone, nor was I taking particular aim at ambassadors in general. I was asked by NSMB to speak about something that makes me crazy inside of MTB, so I wrote down some thoughts about the craziness of 'influencer marketing'/pseudo ambassadors and the damage to the pro economy that's happening. I also listed specific examples of kickass pros who have been undercut by the unpaid labor of so-called 'ambassadors', and had multiple people inside of the industry thank me for choosing to write about such an avoided topic, including two separate owners of bike companies, multiple pros, and even out-of-industry folks who see similar issues in their own industries (such as the fitness and ski/snowboard industries). I know that I can be polarizing in my writing and am often viewed as a 
negative presence in the bike sphere, but this neither A: surprises or B: offends me.

What I do feel to be unfortunate is that most rational discussion of the points I made and information I linked to has been essentially non-existent, including conversation around the multitude of different angles I provided from those leeching off of the pro athlete industry.

I currently work as a marketing and branding consultant for companies both in and outside of the outdoor industry. The number of times that I've sat through a meeting where a marketing director/CMO wants to exploit low labor value and/or promote free content from non-legitimate sources are innumerable. This, coupled with my view as a writer, a pro athlete and someone who watches industry trends carefully, has given me a unique point of view from which I speak. Is my language a tad caustic? Sure. Does that negate the value of what I say? I don't tend to think so.

However, it seems a few of the posters here are a bit more interested in what this last bit says about me as a person than what it actually says about the industry or trends, so to you all, I'll offer up the following invitation: shoot me an email and let's chat on the phone about your specific concerns and/or criticisms of me/my career/my writing/my attitude/my performance in general, and you can personally get better acquainted with the 'tongue in cheek' sense of humor I write with and the person on the other end of the internet. Open book.

I look forward to conversing with you.

[email protected]


----------



## JCWages (Jan 26, 2015)

Well done, Amanda.  I may take you up on that. Your insights are of course valuable regardless of the delivery.


----------



## Geargals (Aug 30, 2010)

My $.02: I've been asked to be an "ambassador" before and have had a look at the contracts. I am definitely not a fan of this type of advertising (and make no mistake, that is what it is).

I think if a company wants someone to gad around and talk up the company and market it, they need to admit it, get the person on the payroll, and actually PAY the person to be a marketer. 

I would go so far as to ask people to please not participate in these programs as they are by nature dishonest (most contracts insist that participants not be allowed to say anything negative about the brand, and ambassadors don't disclose that fact ever) and just perpetuate the new-normal of getting free work out of creatives. 

The more people willing to work for free the less valuable everyone else's work becomes. You cannot pay your mortgage with discounts or even with free gear. There is no company on earth so good that you need to market it for free. 

I don't think a person has to be at the top of a sport (or even to compete at it) to be able to meaningfully contribute, but what's being "rewarded" right now is fakey "social media" instagram/facebook/whatever, not actual sport or legitimate outreach. Amanda is spot-on about that aspect of it.


----------



## Deep Thought (Sep 3, 2012)

ambatt said:


> For the record, I wasn't talking about grassroots ambassadorship. For what it's worth, I completely support that and have been more than encouraging towards getting more people out and riding... I never meant to offend anyone, nor was I taking particular aim at ambassadors in general.


What is the difference between "grassroots ambassadorship" and the "ambassadorship" you so vehemently decry in your original piece? Perhaps I missed it, but I didn't see this distinction in there anywhere. I'm genuinely curious to know the difference between "good" ambassador programs and "bad" ambassador programs.

And, you're right. I was wrong to comment on your tone. I stand by my original agreements/disagreements, however.

As far as the rest of it goes, there have been some great comments in this thread about what a well-run ambassador program can offer. Those are some excellent counterpoints to your piece.



Geargals said:


> I don't think a person has to be at the top of a sport (or even to compete at it) to be able to meaningfully contribute, but what's being "rewarded" right now is fakey "social media" instagram/facebook/whatever, not actual sport or legitimate outreach. Amanda is spot-on about that aspect of it.


I'm curious about this too. There are several women's ambassador programs currently in place that seem to be all about legitimate outreach - LIV/Giant, Bell Joyride, Specialized Women, Juliana, and so on and so forth.

In retail, we often hear about how women tend to buy differently than men do - with different motivations, intents, goals, methods, etc - I think this is accurate, for the most part.

So here we have what has traditionally been a male-dominated sport, and we have the stakeholders in this sport realizing that women spend a lot of money. How do we make our beloved sport more relatable so that these women will spend money on it, participate in it, and keep it healthy?

Do we sponsor/support more pro athletes? Is that what will make ordinary women riders plunk down their hard-earned coin for a fancy new bike or accessories?

Maybe.

Seems to me that some brands have figured out a more efficient way, though, and I don't think it's all "fakey social media." These programs are offering approachable spheres in which women can comfortably get acquainted with what is often a very intimidating sport.

Like I said originally, I do agree with some of Amanda's points, but I do also think that it's a bit one-sided and fails to consider what these programs can offer, when done well.

So, after spending a lot of time thinking about all this, and then finally attempting to write it down, I wonder .... is the difference between a "good" and "bad" ambassador program about gender? Are there unisex ambassador programs that do the same thing?

I really don't know. Something else to think about, I guess.


----------



## chuky (Apr 3, 2005)

There is something ugly about judging who deserves support and who doesn't. It reminds me of back in the day when there were actually guys who would get upset because sponsorship dollars were going to women, rather than to the "more legitimate athletes who went bigger and rode harder" (ugh). Good marketing saw past that and were able to continue to sponsor women because they had the data to prove their value to the company's bottom line. 

It is better to be happy for people who find a way to make a living doing something fun. If you aren't getting the support you need in a competitive field, it might be time to ask yourself some hard questions and up your game. Or maybe just ask your sponsor "how can I be more valuable to you?" It really isn't that hard to make yourself a valued part of a business. Being sponsored is a job, an agreement between a company and an individual that provides representation. It isn't something any athlete has a right to or that any company is obligated to provide.


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

Geargals said:


> but what's being "rewarded" right now is fakey "social media" instagram/facebook/whatever, not actual sport or legitimate outreach. Amanda is spot-on about that aspect of it.


Please define 
_fakey "social media" instagram/facebook/whatever,_

21K followers on an instagram account that awards monthly (brand) prizes plus the occasional huge prize, fake?

Also, define what you mean by 
_actual sport or legitimate outreach_

Maybe I only attend really good ambassador programs - I don't understand what might make them not actual sport, or illegitimate, or fakey social media if they get lots more gals/people on the trail, buying bikes and gear, riding more, spending $$ on bikes, getting miles on bikes.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

I'll tend to side with the rest who say they don't agree with the views A Batty expressed. Agree pros are for testing at top level and proving stuff holds up, that regular guy/gal that you know locally who rides really well, brings new riders into the sport, takes time to give pointers to said new riders, does trail work and is maybe a part time or full time mechanic and works on/rides loads of different products is much more useful and the person I'll take advice from,so they deserve "bro deals" IMHO. 

I don't give a crap what a paid rider uses, they're paid to use that stuff, I do however care what someone who's had to pay for their parts with maybe a deal or two says about the stuff they use or have experience with. Developing stuff pros "like" is all fine and dandy, but that's the .1% of the people who will use the product, getting feedback from the "avg joe" on products, helps make products the "avg joe" would like to use.


----------



## matadorCE (Jun 26, 2013)

A majority of people focused on the poster of the message rather than the message itself.


----------



## JCWages (Jan 26, 2015)

matadorCE said:


> A majority of people focused on the poster of the message rather than the message itself.


I didn't. I like Amanda and follow her on IG. I don't always agree with her but she provokes thought which is good.

Respectfully, I think some are trying to paint ambassador programs with a broad brushstroke and that cannot be done so simply. There are many different programs and strategies out there. There are also many different reasons why someone would want to become an ambassador for a product and money is only one potential reason. I say potential because not everyone is enticed to do "work" for a cash exchange.

*Common Reasons Someone May Become an Ambassador:*

Discounts and/or free gear
Being part of a team
Meeting new people in the sport
Getting more people into the sport or helping those already in it
Prestige
Fun
Assist customers by being an ear for the company in the field (or online)
Actually believing in a product and wanting to support the company

Ambassador programs help give people incentive to be more proactive in the sport. I already have a great paying day job that I love and the ambassador program makes me want to spend what little extra time
I have on my bike and helping others get out on theirs. The people I see that take the most issue with programs like that are the people who have something to lose because their livelihood depends on a paycheck from these companies be it athletes or product reviewers. I can understand their frustration but I think there is a balance that works for everyone and we need to be honest with each other.....


----------



## Geargals (Aug 30, 2010)

formica said:


> Please define
> _fakey "social media" instagram/facebook/whatever,_
> 
> 21K followers on an instagram account that awards monthly (brand) prizes plus the occasional huge prize, fake?
> ...


I think what is fake is engaging in a sport or activity for the purpose of getting IG/FB/Whatever photos/posts/likes/fodder. Promoting a brand just because it made one an "ambassador" is also fake.

I feel that a lot of people don't actually like the sport they are doing, they just like the attention that they get from doing it. And that is fake as hell and I lose respect for any brand who signs on to that style of marketing.

I'll give an example: as a person who runs a gear review site I work with a lot of brands to get ahold of gear samples. If I didn't, I'd never be able to review anything. I got an invitation from Outdoor Research to join their "ambassador" team and had a look at their contract. Ambassadors couldn't say anything negative about the brand (so they couldn't give it an honest review), they had to write x number of blog posts, x number of IG photos, x posts on Facebook promoting Outdoor Research. I told the company that I don't allow my writers to participate in those programs for those reasons, but we're happy to review whatever samples they wanted to send. They said they don't send out samples to anyone not on the ambassador roster anymore.

So you see how such a company is trying to control the message that gets out about their products using unpaid shills, oh sorry "ambassadors." They don't send samples to anyone they don't control with a contract. And make no mistake, all those contracts are like that. So that is why I think that entire scene is fake as hell, very shady, and unethical on both sides.

Re: the latter, a lot of sponsored athlete stuff is fake too, but I know we're on the topic of "ambassadors" so I'll keep on-topic.


----------

