Log in:  

Register

Financial Fair Play

The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

Re:

03 Sep 2017 16:52

hrotha wrote:You can't imply charging for tickets could be a viable business model for cycling in one post and then say the Hammer series won't work because that's not the fans don't want that kind of change in the next.

Frankly, if you're not interested enough in anyone else's input to treat them with respect, don't start threads.
I don't believe the Hammer series will work for pretty much the same reason Six Day racing went into decline: it's actually kinda rubbish, unless you're smashed. Did I say that charging for tickets is a viable business model for cycling? I said it is part of the current model, despite what so many so often say about it not being an option.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,848
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

03 Sep 2017 16:52

With the actual number of WT teams could the reveneu of the 3 GT's, for example, be enough to make the sponsors a minor funder?
User avatar jfazendeiro
Junior Member
 
Posts: 89
Joined: 08 Aug 2017 17:33

Re: Re:

03 Sep 2017 16:53

fmk_RoI wrote:
ScienceIsCool wrote:The organizers also can't charge admission from the fans or sell t-shirts and beer. So what have they got? The occasional sponsor and TV rights. They take all the risk and put on the show. They are the ones who make and keep the meager revenues.
Do you think we could possibly park this nonsense at this stage? They can. In Flanders they even do. While I haven't checked, I presume it cost money to buy a ticket to get into the velodromes used by Tour and Vuelta this year. How much does a VIP ticket to the Champs-Élysées cost? On the t-shirts and merchandising, it's only a few years since one team manger was moaning how he can't sell replica kit from the team bus because ASO have already sold the licence for that. People seem to be blind to the many ways cycling directly raises revenue from fans.

You honestly believe that a finish line beer garden is capable of sustaining all of pro cycling? Wow. Just wow. Sorry, but I used to think you were kinda smart.

John Swanson
ScienceIsCool
Member
 
Posts: 1,733
Joined: 05 Jul 2009 15:34

Re: Re:

03 Sep 2017 16:56

ScienceIsCool wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:
ScienceIsCool wrote:The organizers also can't charge admission from the fans or sell t-shirts and beer. So what have they got? The occasional sponsor and TV rights. They take all the risk and put on the show. They are the ones who make and keep the meager revenues.
Do you think we could possibly park this nonsense at this stage? They can. In Flanders they even do. While I haven't checked, I presume it cost money to buy a ticket to get into the velodromes used by Tour and Vuelta this year. How much does a VIP ticket to the Champs-Élysées cost? On the t-shirts and merchandising, it's only a few years since one team manger was moaning how he can't sell replica kit from the team bus because ASO have already sold the licence for that. People seem to be blind to the many ways cycling directly raises revenue from fans.

You honestly believe that a finish line beer garden is capable of sustaining all of pro cycling? Wow. Just wow. Sorry, but I used to think you were kinda smart.

John Swanson
This is the problem: you try and point out that something is part of the current model - even though it is claimed it is not - and people moan and falsely claim you're saying it's the full financial model.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,848
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

03 Sep 2017 17:30

fmk_RoI wrote:
ScienceIsCool wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:
ScienceIsCool wrote:The organizers also can't charge admission from the fans or sell t-shirts and beer. So what have they got? The occasional sponsor and TV rights. They take all the risk and put on the show. They are the ones who make and keep the meager revenues.
Do you think we could possibly park this nonsense at this stage? They can. In Flanders they even do. While I haven't checked, I presume it cost money to buy a ticket to get into the velodromes used by Tour and Vuelta this year. How much does a VIP ticket to the Champs-Élysées cost? On the t-shirts and merchandising, it's only a few years since one team manger was moaning how he can't sell replica kit from the team bus because ASO have already sold the licence for that. People seem to be blind to the many ways cycling directly raises revenue from fans.

You honestly believe that a finish line beer garden is capable of sustaining all of pro cycling? Wow. Just wow. Sorry, but I used to think you were kinda smart.

John Swanson
This is the problem: you try and point out that something is part of the current model - even though it is claimed it is not - and people moan and falsely claim you're saying it's the full financial model.


It's NOT part of the current financial model except in the narrowest of sense. A finish line beer garden has nothing in relation to filling stadium of hungry, thirsty fans. You know, this is a lot like "debating" sniper. You bite around the edges, looking to score a point, but you never actually advance a theory or thesis that can be attacked directly. Then you claim to be above it all while sniping away at factoids. I'm calling it. You, Feargal are, albeit scholarly, full of carp.

John Swanson
ScienceIsCool
Member
 
Posts: 1,733
Joined: 05 Jul 2009 15:34

Re: Re:

03 Sep 2017 17:36

ScienceIsCool wrote:It's NOT part of the current financial model except in the narrowest of sense. A finish line beer garden has nothing in relation to filling stadium of hungry, thirsty fans. You know, this is a lot like "debating" sniper. You bite around the edges, looking to score a point, but you never actually advance a theory or thesis that can be attacked directly. Then you claim to be above it all while sniping away at factoids. I'm calling it. You, Feargal are, albeit scholarly, full of carp.

John Swanson
Ok, so now you accept it is part of the current financial model but want to say that that doesn't matter...I'm sorry, but it either is something that can and is being done, or it isn't.

If you don't understand what a mixed financial model actually means, I'm not the guy who's going to explain it to you.

The problem is that too many don't want a mixed model, they want a single solution, all the money coming in from one source (ASO's TV revenue, usually).
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,848
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

03 Sep 2017 17:50

fmk_RoI wrote:]Ok, so now you accept it is part of the current financial model but want to say that that doesn't matter...I'm sorry, but it either is something that can and is being done, or it isn't.

If you don't understand what a mixed financial model actually means, I'm not the guy who's going to explain it to you.

The problem is that too many don't want a mixed model, they want a single solution, all the money coming in from one source (ASO's TV revenue, usually).


How much do these glorified beer gardens bring in as a percentage of total revenue? Facts please! Cite your sources and submit your papers for review! <As a certain know it all likes to say>

John Swanson
ScienceIsCool
Member
 
Posts: 1,733
Joined: 05 Jul 2009 15:34

Re: Re:

03 Sep 2017 17:54

ScienceIsCool wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:]Ok, so now you accept it is part of the current financial model but want to say that that doesn't matter...I'm sorry, but it either is something that can and is being done, or it isn't.

If you don't understand what a mixed financial model actually means, I'm not the guy who's going to explain it to you.

The problem is that too many don't want a mixed model, they want a single solution, all the money coming in from one source (ASO's TV revenue, usually).


How much do these glorified beer gardens bring in as a percentage of total revenue? Facts please! Cite your sources and submit your papers for review! <As a certain know it all likes to say>

John Swanson
I think all the race organisers treat that as market sensitive information: we know it's part of their financial model - and looking at the way it's being done in Flanders they appear to like it, and the fact that ASO have twice used stadia this year suggests they like it too - but we don't know its actual contribution.

But this is progress: at a cost of a lot of unnecessary personal abuse I have at least moved you from your initial, inaccurate statement.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of other financial myths to be busted yet...
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,848
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

03 Sep 2017 17:59

fmk_RoI wrote:
ScienceIsCool wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:]Ok, so now you accept it is part of the current financial model but want to say that that doesn't matter...I'm sorry, but it either is something that can and is being done, or it isn't.

If you don't understand what a mixed financial model actually means, I'm not the guy who's going to explain it to you.

The problem is that too many don't want a mixed model, they want a single solution, all the money coming in from one source (ASO's TV revenue, usually).


How much do these glorified beer gardens bring in as a percentage of total revenue? Facts please! Cite your sources and submit your papers for review! <As a certain know it all likes to say>

John Swanson
I think all the race organisers treat that as market sensitive information: we know it's part of their financial model - and looking at the way it's being done in Flanders they appear to like it, and the fact that ASO have twice used stadia this year suggests they like it too - but we don't know its actual contribution.

But this is progress: at a cost of a lot of unnecessary personal abuse I have at least moved you from your initial, inaccurate statement.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of other financial myths to be busted yet...


<hand waving> You've moved me from nothing. How much are broadcast rights worth for Flanders? What's your spitball estimate for finish line beer garden revenue? No numbers means you've got no idea. This is the exact same thing you beat on others for. You, sir, are full of carp.

John Swanson
ScienceIsCool
Member
 
Posts: 1,733
Joined: 05 Jul 2009 15:34

03 Sep 2017 18:03

User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,848
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

03 Sep 2017 18:07

ScienceIsCool wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:
ScienceIsCool wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:]Ok, so now you accept it is part of the current financial model but want to say that that doesn't matter...I'm sorry, but it either is something that can and is being done, or it isn't.

If you don't understand what a mixed financial model actually means, I'm not the guy who's going to explain it to you.

The problem is that too many don't want a mixed model, they want a single solution, all the money coming in from one source (ASO's TV revenue, usually).


How much do these glorified beer gardens bring in as a percentage of total revenue? Facts please! Cite your sources and submit your papers for review! <As a certain know it all likes to say>

John Swanson
I think all the race organisers treat that as market sensitive information: we know it's part of their financial model - and looking at the way it's being done in Flanders they appear to like it, and the fact that ASO have twice used stadia this year suggests they like it too - but we don't know its actual contribution.

But this is progress: at a cost of a lot of unnecessary personal abuse I have at least moved you from your initial, inaccurate statement.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of other financial myths to be busted yet...


<hand waving> You've moved me from nothing. How much are broadcast rights worth for Flanders? What's your spitball estimate for finish line beer garden revenue? No numbers means you've got no idea. This is the exact same thing you beat on others for. You, sir, are full of carp.

John Swanson
John - a simple, calm reminder: you said none of this was an option. You said, and I quote: "The organizers also can't charge admission from the fans or sell t-shirts and beer." That is simply not true. The extent of it we can debate. But we cannot debate that it is not happening.

If we want to talk about the financing of races, let's also bring in the sportif element, as that is becoming an increasingly important revenue stream for organisers (look to the size of ASO's sportif arm, look to all the races that currently have them attached). We could also look at the recent American race and associated music festival.

This is what a mixed financial model entails, for race organisers.
Last edited by fmk_RoI on 03 Sep 2017 18:09, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,848
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re:

03 Sep 2017 18:09


Keep waving those hands Feargal. It's not very convincing. What was the media revenue for Flanders? Numbers and sources, please. Or maybe just walk it back a bit, yeah?

John Swanson
ScienceIsCool
Member
 
Posts: 1,733
Joined: 05 Jul 2009 15:34

Re: Financial Fair Play

03 Sep 2017 18:27

Professional sport is a business, a commercial enterprise. Successful businesses operate on a financial positive feedback loop. Build a better mousetrap, and the world will beat a path to your door. (--Emerson) Denying successful teams the ability to invest past profits to promote their future successes effectively reinforces failure.
User avatar StyrbjornSterki
Member
 
Posts: 922
Joined: 18 Jul 2010 22:00

Re: Re:

03 Sep 2017 21:59

fmk_RoI wrote:
Brullnux wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:
spalco wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:Back up the bus, buddy. I have not said Sky's wealth is responsible for driving up wages for all other teams too.


Well, I did. I don't know for sure if it's true, but I think it's plausible.
Some evidence for it would be useful. Do you have any? Or is it just a gut feeling?

It's definitely possible.
Was there big money in the sport before Sky? If you read carefully you'll see reference to this issue commencing in the 1980s and going on since. Was there wage inflation before Sky? Yes, there was. Clearly, then, Sky cannot be accused of having caused wage inflation, can they? Has wage inflation accelerated since Sky arrived? Produce the evidence. Are Sky the only Daddy Moneybags playing this game? How many times do I have to ask if you've read what was said about sugar daddies? If wage inflation has increased since Sky arrived, could there be other explanations? Indubitably: in the same way some have a gut reaction Sky is a problem, others said Oleg Tinkov's Peter Sagan / Alberto Contador man crushes were the real problem.

Too much of the debate about cycling's finances is built on guesses, hunches, gut feeling, utter bollix. The fly-by-night sponsors. the bogeyman du jour (Sky, Tinkov, Tapie), TV revenue that - if shared - would pay for what, a couple of spare wheels for the team bus? A little bit of evidence in support of these claims, is that really too much to ask for?

Did you read the whole of my post or did you give up halfway through? I said that Sky's money will have probably caused wage inflation as they entered the field with a larger budget than most had ever seen - how many teams in the past have had €35m budgets? Using my knowledge of how a market like this works, and empirical data from other sports, I think it is likely sky contributed to wage inflation. I did not say they were the sole factor or had caused it, which is something which you have decided I said so you could deviate off into sugar daddies, but likely a factor.

I don't have any evidence - why? Because as far as I'm aware there are no detailed balance sheets coming out of every team, there is no list of every single cyclist's pay since the turn of the millenium. Even current team's budgets are estimates - cycling doesn't strike me as the most transparent of sports. If I looked hard enough, dug deep in every document of every team; every article of every transfer, then yes I could almost certainly provide evidence. But I'm not paid to be a journalist, to investigate such matters. I have other things to do. I am interested in the topic, yes, but the things I will post are derived from my own hunches and background knowledge on markets and such like; but I while present them as such: not facts or statements, but beliefs.
Brullnux
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,359
Joined: 31 Mar 2015 14:41

04 Sep 2017 01:16

I feel this has become a only between friends discussion. I only recently have created an account and I haven't made much posts but would still like to be part of it.
User avatar jfazendeiro
Junior Member
 
Posts: 89
Joined: 08 Aug 2017 17:33

Re: Financial Fair Play

04 Sep 2017 05:10

If someone closed down one hundred miles of road, I would pay a very decent fee to ride down that road for a day, or for a series of days. I couldn't care less about racing. That's the kind of model I'd like to see. Let the racers race away to their heart's content, and I could just meander down the road.

The only kind of a cycling event that can make it is a participatory one, I think.

Cycling isn't much of a spectator sport. It's certainly not one worth paying to watch (unless you're in a chase car, or something cool like that). Who cares about doped up Type A anorexics and their obsession?
User avatar MarkvW
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,229
Joined: 10 Aug 2010 20:13

04 Sep 2017 05:41

To me, all FFP needs be is for financial commitments/contracts made to be honour-able and honoured, with sanctions applying to those who make such commitments without the means in place to honour them. e.g. say sign a high profile rider on a 3 year deal without actually having the forward budget (i.e. sponsor contracts) in place to pay for them.

I see no point in much more than that. Else it just layers on an additional farce of dealing with financial doping. And there are way more people expert in financial shenanigans than there are doping experts.

Worldwide at all levels the sport of road cycling loses money and is heavily subsidised by public money. About the only events that make money are TdF and the Giro (just).
User avatar Alex Simmons/RST
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,274
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 23:47
Location: Australia

Re: Financial Fair Play

04 Sep 2017 11:33

MarkvW wrote:If someone closed down one hundred miles of road, I would pay a very decent fee to ride down that road for a day, or for a series of days. I couldn't care less about racing. That's the kind of model I'd like to see. Let the racers race away to their heart's content, and I could just meander down the road.

The only kind of a cycling event that can make it is a participatory one, I think.
Mass participation is where a lot of organisers are going: ASO have a whole host of events, most attached to races, some not. RCS have their Fondos (Fondi?). Does Flanders Classics have any, can you ride the RvV? More importantly, I think, you have the 'upstart' organisers, like the British race with its mass participation event the day before, or the Cyclassics thing in Germany. That's also attached to the Velothon thing, which does stand-alone mass participation events, bringing to cycling the marathon model you see elsewhere. More race organisers seem to be turning to a more mixed revenue model, mixing hospitality and sportives with sponsorship and whatever they can get from TV (if they can get anything from TV - which only a few can). What the typical spend per head on these things is I'd love to know: I suppose once you've got someone in on the basic entry fee you're up-selling all sorts of tat and extra goodies to them?

But I'm not sure: are these the type of thing you're talking about, joining a peloton of sweating Freds wobbling all over the road in front of you, or are you looking for something a bit more, well, private?
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,848
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re:

04 Sep 2017 11:47

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:To me, all FFP needs be is for financial commitments/contracts made to be honour-able and honoured, with sanctions applying to those who make such commitments without the means in place to honour them. e.g. say sign a high profile rider on a 3 year deal without actually having the forward budget (i.e. sponsor contracts) in place to pay for them.
Cycling's current take on financial fair play involves the UCI setting minimum limits for some things, like wages, prize money, participation fees. You also have the areas in which costs are shared (eg the way teams, riders and race organisers all fund the CADF). Some of these are policed and easy to police but things like minimum wage, as we've seen with the pay-to-play scandal, seem to be beyond the wit of the UCI/local feds. Even getting teams to pay their wages - particularly at the lower levels of the sport - seems to be a challenge the UCI/local feds don't want to rise to.
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:Worldwide at all levels the sport of road cycling loses money and is heavily subsidised by public money.
This is a point a lot of people seem to miss, how effective public subsidies have carried the sport for so long. However, many of those subsidies are being replaced by costs: policing in particular is getting more and more expensive, across all sports (and only likely to get more expensive, given the current security climate). That means the money is either coming out of the race organiser's profits, or is being borne by the host town, which only makes it more expensive to host big bike races and harder for race organisers to raise such funds.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,848
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

04 Sep 2017 13:13

JV on Froome's communist comment and the need for budget caps:
Vaughters disagrees, both as a manager and someone who wrote a paper on budget caps within sport for a business MBA. “With all due respect, the evidence totally debunks that,” he said. “Communist? That’s ridiculous. In a budget-cap scenario the fanbase increases because of increased competitiveness. Do you want to watch a chess match where one player has one queen and the other has four, which is what [Sir Dave] Brailsford has?”
Also, franchises for life, again...
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,848
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 28 guests

Back to top