Tiered Pricing Has Reached Its Limit, and What To Do Instead

At the Running USA 2026 Industry Conference this February, I shared a simple but uncomfortable observation. Much of endurance event pricing is doing work it was never meant to do. We ask pricing to create urgency, manufacture demand, and compensate for uncertainty. In the process, we quietly undermine trust, distort forecasting, and make it harder to understand what our events are actually worth. Tiered pricing persists not because it works, but because it compensates for uncertainty elsewhere in the system.

This post shares some of the thinking behind that talk. Not as a condemnation of past practices, but as an invitation to rethink how pricing can work better for athletes and organizers alike.

The Job Pricing Is Not Supposed To Do

Let’s start with a reset.

Pricing has three legitimate jobs. It communicates value. It filters demand by helping the right people decide to commit. And it enables forecasting and planning.

Pricing does not create desire. It does not create identity. It does not create need.

Athletes register for events because something else triggers demand. A personal goal. A bucket list race. A sense of identity. The reputation and experience of the event. Timing that aligns with life, training, or travel. Pricing enters the picture later. It answers one question only. “Is this worth it to me?”

When pricing is asked to do more than that, problems follow.

Price Does Not Drive Demand. It Selects Demand.

One of the most persistent myths in our industry is that price drives demand. The reality is more nuanced and more useful.

Price selects demand.

Athletes do not have a single price tolerance. They have category budgets. A yearly race budget. A mental list of how many events they can afford and which ones are worth prioritizing. When prices rise, most people do not exit the sport. They reprioritize their calendar.

This matters because it changes how we interpret price changes. Price increases do not primarily trigger loss aversion. They trigger comparison. Which races stay. Which races get cut. Which races feel like a splurge versus a default.

Price influences affordability, perceived value, and prioritization. It does not create desire to participate in the first place.

Why the Dominant Pricing Models Fail

Most endurance events rely on one of two models today. Date-based pricing or volume-based pricing.

Date-based pricing raises prices at fixed calendar moments, regardless of what is actually happening with awareness, demand, or experience. It creates artificial registration spikes, pulls revenue forward without increasing total demand, and produces severe registration cliffs. Forecasting becomes guesswork. Athletes who face uncertainty around injury, travel, or life are punished for being cautious.

Volume-based pricing is often seen as more sophisticated. Prices rise as capacity fills. It appears responsive to demand, but it still relies heavily on scarcity logic. It treats all athletes as identical. It still hides true willingness to pay. It still creates regret for people who feel they missed the “right” moment to register.

Both models share a core flaw. They use fear of loss as the primary motivator. That may move registrations in the short term, but it erodes trust and clarity over time.

What Actually Works Better

Pricing models don’t just affect registration curves. They ripple through every part of race operations. Artificial spikes and cliffs make it harder to forecast shirts, bibs, medals, and aid station loads. They delay volunteer recruitment and complicate corral planning. They pull cash flow forward without improving confidence in final turnout.

Most importantly, they increase cognitive load for small teams. Every new tier, deadline, and exception generates athlete confusion, support tickets, and manual intervention. The cost isn’t just financial, but rather time, attention, and trust.

There are alternatives that respect both athlete psychology and organizer reality. None are magic, but all require confidence in the experience being offered.

Pricing clarity looks different depending on where an event is in its lifecycle. New events may need flexibility while awareness is still forming. Growing events often use pricing to manage uncertainty as demand stabilizes. Established events with consistent sell-through are best positioned to simplify pricing and learn what their experience is truly worth.

The mistake is not choosing the “wrong” model. It is failing to evolve the model as the event matures. Here’s a few options to consider. 

Use Only One Price

A single, clear entry price that reflects the value of the experience. This model produces a clean demand signal, builds trust, and dramatically improves forecasting. It forces organizers to rely on experience quality, storytelling, and operational excellence rather than price anxiety. Established events with strong demand are often best positioned to do this. High demand is the ideal moment to stabilize price and learn what your experience is truly worth.

Hybrid or early access pricing.

Early access can work when it is intentional and limited. A small, clearly defined window that rewards early commitment without cascading tiers afterward. The key rule is simple. Early access should not be cheap. It should be special. Over-discounting recreates the same distortions as traditional tiering.

Perks instead of discounts.

This is one of the most underused tools in endurance pricing. Behavioral economics tells us that people value what they already own more than the things they might miss out on. Tiered pricing does not give athletes anything to own, but perks do. This could look like priority corrals, locals privileges, guaranteed amenities, exclusive merchandise, partner-supported value. These increase perceived value without eroding price integrity. They reward commitment rather than exploiting anxiety.

Flash sales.

Used sparingly, flash sales can create attention without permanent distortion. They work best when tied to specific moments or milestones and when results are measured honestly. Overuse destroys trust and trains athletes to wait.

The Real Takeaway

Pricing is not about squeezing more dollars out of registration fees. It is about clarity.

Clarity for athletes deciding where to spend their time, money, and energy. Clarity for organizers trying to forecast demand, allocate resources, and build sustainable events. When pricing reflects value rather than fear, everyone makes better decisions.

At haku, we believe systems should reinforce trust, not exploit uncertainty. The future of pricing in endurance and nonprofit events will belong to organizers who compete on experience, confidence, and connection. Not on who can create the most elaborate pricing maze.

That future is already starting to take shape.

‍