King Boonen wrote:But for other teams it's fine?
King Boonen wrote:
For clarity, I'm referring to to a second sponsor from a different country, not exclusively an American one.
Cimber wrote:Could also be the prime name sponsor. Cannondale and CSC comes to mind for example.
Cimber wrote:FDJ for the Tour:
I always been a fan of their regular jersey, but this one is nice too with the French colours.
Sky for the Tour:
manafana wrote:21st Century Fox are closely linked to SKy anyway all under same umbrella.
nick101 wrote:As main sponsor not necessarily. Sky are strongly british and pride themselves on being so. A main sponsor that's american damages that reputation/image. well that's my perception anyway. Some of the teams have bike frame/component companies as main sponsors - that's a slightly different situation as the amount of possible sponsors from the same country is limited (if any at all) in the bike industry.
Cimber wrote:Sky is a British team, but that has nothing to do with the sponsor as such. And really it isnt THAT national based compared to other teams. 2/3 of the riders are non-Brits and a lot of the DSs have historically been non-Brits too. Got logistiv and operational bases abroad.
So yes a British team, but not more national based that most of the other WT teams (even less compared to some of the other WT teams). Often pro contidental teams and lower are the teams that are most national based. The bigger the team and the bigger the budget the more international they become. Its not a bad thing though, its just the way it is.
Anyways, its pretty offtopic to this thread.
theyoungest wrote:The biggest budget teams are Anglosaxon, Russian, and Kazakh. None of these areas have huge numbers of pro riders, so it's only logical they don't have that many riders from the mother country.
But Sky is very much linked to British Cycling, BMC really want to be an American team considering how much they pay Tejay and Phinney. And Katusha and Astana... well, if these teams aren't founded to glorify the nation I'm Pat McQuaid.
FDJ.fr's new jersey for July.
Another blue jersey.
Cimber wrote:You are slow, but since its a nice looking jersey there is noth:)ing wrong with seeing it again
Cimber wrote:Yes all of the teams are to some extend rooted in their national base. But as I said that national tie is lessened the bigger the teams get (only natural), and its the same for all teams. Sky is not more or less national based than say BMC, Saxo, Orica, Garmin etc. They are all to a degree based on their national origin, but not to an extend that they can be considered semi national teams or to an extend where its natural to only consider sponsors of certain nationality
King Boonen wrote:Cimber, I've quoted you purely to highlight the continuation of the conversation, not because what I will write applies to what you have said.
Lets all be honest here, this is a silly conversation. We bemoan the lack of support for pro-cycling, with teams like HTC being forced to disband (I know a fair few were happy about that...) and Blanco, OGE and Radioshack-Leopard struggling to find big sponsors, then people complain when a "big money" sponsor comes in because they feel it isn't in line with the team and cycling's ethos (I'm assuming 21st Century Fox will be paying and it's not just splitting the current sponsorship pot between Murdoch organisations for tax reasons...).
The bigger the sponsors the better as far as I'm concerned. If Apple wanted to sponsor Lampre that'd be awesome. If Shell went for Europcar it'd be brilliant. It offers financial stability (Ok, I'm assuming that but the bigger the sponsor the less money it is in terms of their turnover) and that is drastically needed to secure a good future for cycling.
BYOP88 wrote:Great to see that Porte has rediscovered his 2010/11 climbing form. Hope he can keep it for the rest of the Tour and year.
BigMac wrote:Isn't the 21st Century Fox sponsor only for the Tour? At least i tought so.