Money in surfing vs climbing

What's up with the big $$$ in surfing?? I know almost nothing about surfing. Recently I read the stunning surfing memoir Barbarian Days by William Finnegan, and so that's gotten me poking around the surfing media. (By the way--Finnegan won the Pulitzer for biography for writing about his life as an average-Joe committed surfer. There's a niche to fill there in the climbing literature. All of our great books are by or about great climbers. We have yet to get that excellent book by the climber most people have never heard of. Actually, if Jeff Jackson were to just write his memoir, that would be it.)

Anyway, many pro surfers are millionaires. One of the current best, John John Florence, made $600,000 in one year on the pro surfing tour and the next year his main sponsor bought out his contract for $2 million (meaning, his actual contract was worth much more than that over several years). There is nobody in climbing making that kind of money, not even Alex Honnold. And Alex Honnold is a phenomenon, while John John Florence is just one of maybe twenty surfers vying for top-dog status. The greatest modern surfer of all time, the Adam Ondra of surfing, Kelly Slater, is a millionaire many times over (and now might become a billionaire because he invented the first artificial wave).

But here's the thing: surfing is NOT bigger than climbing. In fact, it seems that there are 8 million "climbers" in the US (people who climbed something in the last year and maybe bought some gear), while there are only 4 million surfers (again, any person who has managed to stand up on a board).

And a quick tour of the surfing YouTube is really surprising. John John Florence, who has a team making absolutely beautiful, mesmerizing videos that blow away pretty much anything in climbing media in terms of beauty and psyche and style, has 81.5k subscribers. Adam Ondra has 180k subscribers. A JJF episode from a month ago that's similar to a Road to Tokyo episode got 230k views. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mp80NUrzvCo Adam's R2Tkyo episode from around the same time has had 405k views.

From everything I've read, ONdra is not close to being a millionaire. And JJF is probably more like Jakob Schubert or Seb Bouin anyway--a top talent, but not a generational talent. And I guarantee you Jakob Schubert and Seb Bouin are not getting rich. Even if you were to dominate the IFSC Lead *and* bouldering Word Cup for a year, your winnings would barely cover your travel, coaching, etc. Whereas a good year on the surfing World Tour will net you in the high six figures.

So what's going on? Is surfing really more lucrative? Maybe because it sells apparel really broadly? Or is surfing weirdly outperforming its economic potential while climbing is underperforming? Would be interested to hear from people who are equally immersed in surfing and climbing. 

I had this same thought about skateboarding. I don’t know much about surf but my understanding is the best surfer is the best surfer. Where as climbing it’s so sub discipline specific and who is the best is unclear. The lack of clarity as to who the best climber is devalues their appeal to the broader population. The broader population also doesn’t understand climbing at a high level. If you show some random person a 5.15 vs a 5.13 they can’t distinguish it.

Quicksilver: Revenue US$1.81 billion (2013)
Hurley: Revenue US$655 million (2016)

Patagonia, Inc.: Revenue US$209.09M (2017)
Black Diamond Equipment: Revenue US$148.2 million (2016)

1: Surf and skate apparel sells to a very broad market. Everyone owns swim clothes and flip flops.

2: Surfing is way more fun to watch. Bigger media and advertisement opportunities. 

I don’t think climbers have the cash purse prizes that surfers get when they place in contests.
Also, I don’t know for sure, but you look at companies like Billabong, Quiksilver, Hurley... they seem like bigger companies than the majority of climbing companies, so I’d guess sponsorships might be more lucrative.

I haven’t done any googling though, just off the top of my head.

It’s the lifestyle they sell (clothing)
So much of the country wishes they could have that beach lifestyle. It inspires people to spend tons of money on the clothing of the lifestyle and even expensive beach vacations.
Coming from the wake sports industry, we saw a huge boom in sales when wakesurfing hit the scene. We started selling 10 wakesurf boards for every wakeboard. All because people dream of surfing. From young kids to grand parents surfing is just seen as cool.

Climbing also definitely sells a lifestyle (outdoorsy/adventure), but it’s not quite as big as the surf/beach lifestyle. I think part of it is that it hits a narrower age demographic compared to beach/surf

This is only based on observation, not hard facts. 

Some disjoined thoughts on the subject: 

• Revenue for The North Face:  US$13.8 billion (2019) - I'm certain their sponsored athletes are well taken care of.
• I wonder if the "higher purpose" and nobility bullshit that exists so deeply in climbing lore has put a huge economic damper on the sport as a whole. The dirtbags ruined everything.
• I think that climbing is economically under performing its potential because of the high barriers to entry (outside the gym) combined with the fact that companies like BD or Patagonia don't do much marketing outside the outdoor industry (gyms are a part of the outdoor industry). 
• I wonder if surfing is actually more fun and so more people can relate to it or envision themselves doing it, so they wear the clothes. Climbing has so many parts of it that are horribly intimidating, a complete pain in the ass, boring, painful, and just genuinely not fun that I think it tends to chase a lot of people away. Ultimately it's just not a very relatable sport so I think there are probably less outside people buying the fancy clothes for it. (Yes, I still love climbing its just a more complicated relationship than with other sports)
• Hurley and Quicksilver are essentially apparel companies that associate with surfing, whereas BD is basically a company centered around climbing and the culture of climbing. 
• Climbing is not as sexy as surfing and let's be real, sex sells. Alex Honnold and Adam Ondra aren't exactly exactly material for The Bachelorette are they? Climbing is like a 6, and surfing is like a 10.

The surf lifestyle category is incredibly broad and powerful (clothing, tacos, beer, vacation, retirement, point break, jimmy buffet, the good life)... which makes it possible to have a retail category ... which make sit possible to have substantial sponsorships.  Even with that though, I would say the athlete pay is a lagging indicator ... the vast majority of folks have not heard of Kai Lenny.  

Chess suffers from a similar problem - it's hard for amateurs to really even understand what's going on in a top level game  - which limits its audience.  There is no lifestyle to it.  It is (usually) slow. The cold war is over.  But Magnus Carlsen's $5-10M+ net worth has likely come just as much from his bad boy persona and interest in modernizing chess (reducing formality, flexing a bit, playing more blitz, playing online) - to make him appealing to a non-chess-materials sponsor (G-Star Raw, Unibet etc).

I guess more people are beach people.

Which would you rather watch?

Only a surfer knows the feeling.

but...

Surfing sucks, don't try it.

Revenue for The North Face:  US$13.8 billion (2019) - I'm certain their sponsored athletes are well taken care of.

See, this is another disconnect. TNF revenue nearly 10x that of Quicksilver (which recently emerged from bankruptcy) and I recently read that too TNF athletes make about $100k/yr. 
But yes, it makes sense that surfing is just sexier than climbing. 
But climbing is strangely still more popular! Check out Jamie O’Brien vs Magnus Midtbo on YouTube. JOB Projects of far cooler and pleasant lifestyle and has a magnetic personality but Magness still has 200,000 more subscribers.
I’m beginning to think climbing is way under performing economically. There’s a ton of potential for growth for the pros. They should be demanding a lot more of their sponsors.

I was shocked to learn how much pro skateboarders in the early late '90's/2000's would make monthly )~$50k/month), and those dudes are probably as far from a professsional athlete as possible. So many of them just over-partied and disappeared, made incredibly terrible life choices, or became too injured to do what amounts to an incredible destructive to-the-body hobby.

is it possible that the dirtbag lifestyle and mentality has allowed sponsors to take advantage of top-notch climbers?  For example, Alex Honnold was a dirtbag living in a van prior to TNF picking him up. It seems like he was happy in his position, and a sponsor could low-ball him/similar climbers without issue.  I’m not sure the same mentality exists among surfers.  Excellent thread regardless.

Revenue for The North Face:  US$13.8 billion (2019) - I'm certain their sponsored athletes are well taken care of.

This is for all of VFC, not just the North Face brand on its own.

The outdoor segment is only US$4.6B. This includes TNF, Timberland, Smartwool, Icebreaker, and Altra.

Trevor Taylor wrote: I had this same thought about skateboarding. I don’t know much about surf but my understanding is the best surfer is the best surfer. Where as climbing it’s so sub discipline specific and who is the best is unclear. The lack of clarity as to who the best climber is devalues their appeal to the broader population. The broader population also doesn’t understand climbing at a high level. If you show some random person a 5.15 vs a 5.13 they can’t distinguish it.

Best surfer is a vague term like climbing.

Comp surfing is subjective (judges/Heats/ waves/ etc)Big wave surfing is it’s own discipline 

Surfing lifestyle is a bigger and easier sell (everyone owns boardies and stuff).Surfboard markups is pathetic.
Also, comp climbing is bloody boring To watch. Watching Ondra climb 5.15 vs Slater charging a 50’ wave are different to the everyday person. There is a reason freesolo drew so many nonclimbers

I think others have pretty much covered it. I'd sum it up as:

Surfing is cool, climbing is for nerds. 

Derek DeBruin wrote: This is for all of VFC, not just the North Face brand on its own.

The outdoor segment is only US$4.6B. This includes TNF, Timberland, Smartwool, Icebreaker, and Altra.

Thanks Derek, I should have dug deeper into the source. Outdoor segement wise we now all know that Timberland is pulling all that money anyway.

TNF used to have a bit of a cultural grasp on fleece type stuff the way Patagucci does these days. One testament to the point is that biggie gives mention in Dead Wrong "… Hail Mary full of grace, smack the bitch in the face, Take her Gucci bag and the North Face". These brands are a representative part of culture way outside of the outdoor community, maybe TNF has lost traction in that world though.

Thanks for starting an awesome thread. How do y'all think climbing could be performing better economically?

Surfing became the cool thing to do in the 50's and 60's, decades before climbing.  So, it's had a tremendous head start and the money reflects that, but climbing will slowly catch up, I think.  It's interesting to note that climbing's popularity has really been fueled by the explosion of indoor gyms, where surfing is only starting to dabble in the area of artificial wave pools.  Once these become the norm, I expect surfing to see another huge boost in popularity, and it will probably leave climbing in the dust.

I started as a surfer and then eventually got into climbing..  I've often thought about this...  What is better, the perfect day of surf or climbing?  I am passionate about both.  For pure fun factor, it's definitely the surf.  For the experience and partnership, it's climbing.  The worst part of surfing is the crowds - they're just awful.  Think of the most crowded crag, filled with obnoxious assholes x 10, and that is what most surf breaks have become.  Sadly, this is what's coming in climbing, so get after it while you still can.

Long Ranger wrote: I was shocked to learn how much pro skateboarders in the early late '90's/2000's would make monthly )~$50k/month), and those dudes are probably as far from a professsional athlete as possible. So many of them just over-partied and disappeared, made incredibly terrible life choices, or became too injured to do what amounts to an incredible destructive to-the-body hobby.

What pro-skaters were making 50k a month?

Eli Buzzell wrote:

Thanks Derek, I should have dug deeper into the source. Outdoor segement wise we now all know that Timberland is pulling all that money anyway.

TNF used to have a bit of a cultural grasp on fleece type stuff the way Patagucci does these days. One testament to the point is that biggie gives mention in Dead Wrong "… Hail Mary full of grace, smack the bitch in the face, Take her Gucci bag and the North Face". These brands are a representative part of culture way outside of the outdoor community, maybe TNF has lost traction in that world though.

Thanks for starting an awesome thread. How do y'all think climbing could be performing better economically?

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but I did read a couple sentences in that section of their shareholder report, and Timberland was down a few points in recent years with TNF on the rise. I wouldn't be surprised with either of them being top dog, but I think it's presently TNF. I just wanted to be point out that it does put it in the same order of magnitude as some surf companies (as opposed to a step above). However, among outdoor brands more generally I bet it's an outlier (see the info on Patagonia and BD upthread). Though I do wonder about a brand like prana; I bet they do a decent number with their crossover in yoga lifestyle things, but I haven't looked into at all. I imagine a European brand like Adidas probably pulls in on par with TNF/VFC.

As for hip hop, KRS specifically references The North Face in "Hush" as well. I bet TNF Denali jackets still do well in certain markets.

As for better economic performance, greater mass appeal, cheaper products not attached to any kind of technical use and with less regard to material sourcing, supply chains, and labor that seems to be a cultural touchstone for many outdoor brands. "Selling out" as it were. Of course, that assumes a pretty narrow definition of economic performance.