11 major teams considering plans to break away from the UCI

[Anonymous]

Great. There was a reason I stopped watching F1 about ten years ago.

It got boring. Lets hope cycling isnt going to go the same way.

 

[Mambo95]

From Wikipedia: List of world's largest companies by revenue. Until I see a bicyle frame, chain lube, or energy drink manufacturer on this list, I'm going to have a hard time believing that cycling has anything important in common with F1.

1 WalMart
2 Exxon Mobil
3 BP
4 Royal Dutch Shell
5 Saudi Aramco
6 Toyota Motors
7 Japan Post Holdings
8 Sinopec
9 Vitol (Raw material)
10 Total S.A. (Oil and gas)
11 State Grid Corporation of China
13 Volkswagen Group
14 Chevron
15 ING Group
16 ConocoPhillips
17 General Electric
18 PetroChina
19 Glencore International Raw materials
20 Allianz
21 Berkshire Hathaway
23 General Motors
22 Daimler AG Automotive

Interestingly, in your list, of the bolded 'motor' companies hardly any have had high profile involvement in F1 (Toyota did, not sure about the rest), but of the non-'motor' companies two, ING and Allianz, have been primary sponsors for F1 teams - ING until 2009 with Renault, Allianz currently with Mercedes.

 

[BroDeal]

The key thing about American sports leagues, Formula 1, and a few other sports is that they rely on massive TV revenue. The structure of those sports is really about dividing the media dollars between the stake holders. Cycling is funded by sponsors. There just is not the type of money to divide up that is found in other sports. Vaughters may think that he can attract those big money media contracts, but I think it would require huge changes to the sport. Important events would have to be eclipsed by events that fit better into the new structure. Fans and organizers of those events will resist.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Anyone else get the feeling that all these new issues are a convenient distraction from the real issues effecting cycling and certain individuals?

The F1 model is all about TV rights for just one segment of motorsport.
So I believe there are no significant comparisons to Pro Cycling, with the exception of bringing all the stakeholders together and working for a common interest.

 

[LugHugger]

F1 is a double edged sword. I understand that the TV rights are rolled up and sold globally hence it's apparent success. However, one of the teams is given disproportionately more than any other team. Why? Because they have raced every championship since the sports inception. They feel that they are owed because of their heritage. Is this fair?
F1 might be held to be the shining example of successful TV globalisation of sport. But listen to the existing license holders. Many of the traditional markets are not interested in renewing. Many of the European circuits and promoters are unwilling to be held to ransom by the sport. This is the real reason for the expansionism to the East. The chase of the yuan/petrodollar and the emerging/emerged Tigers. F1 is a 20th century dinosaur managed by a supreme egotist interested not in the sport but lining his pockets.

 

[Race Radio]

Le0pard Trek?

Nope, they do not even have a title sponsor.....how is it the top team in the world, run by a marketing guy, does not have a title sponsor?

 

[ergmonkey]

Interestingly, in your list, of the bolded 'motor' companies hardly any have had high profile involvement in F1 (Toyota did, not sure about the rest), but of the non-'motor' companies two, ING and Allianz, have been primary sponsors for F1 teams - ING until 2009 with Renault, Allianz currently with Mercedes.

I honestly can't keep track of who remains involved in the F1 tech sector outside of the obvious title sponsorship involvement. I believe Toyota (and Honda, even, for that matter) remains very important in engine technologies for some of the other cars. Bottom line, F1 is seen as a critical R&D area for major players in the auto industry. The sport keeps very large, very well-run corporations interested for many reasons.

 

[ergmonkey]

And feel free to snicker at my calling auto companies "well-run."

 

[Anonymous]

I don't think the UCI are in a very good position here. What hammer do they have? The only real question I have is why is not every World Tour team not on board with this?

I have a feeling the ASO will throw McQuaid under the bus the very moment there is a viable alternative.

 

[BroDeal]

Interestingly, in your list, of the bolded 'motor' companies hardly any have had high profile involvement in F1 (Toyota did, not sure about the rest), but of the non-'motor' companies two, ING and Allianz, have been primary sponsors for F1 teams - ING until 2009 with Renault, Allianz currently with Mercedes.

F1 has become too expensive and too reliant on tricky innovation to give a reasonable and safe return on sponsorship dollars. Toyota dumped $400 million a year into their team, and what did they get in return? The random nature of technical innovation has made the competition a joke, as evidenced by a sap like Button winning the championship by being on a team that exploited a hole in new technical regulations that was not exploited by the major teams.

 

[BroDeal]

I don't think the UCI are in a very good position here. What hammer do they have? The only real question I have is why is not every World Tour team not on board with this?

I have a feeling the ASO will throw McQuaid under the bus the very moment there is a viable alternative.

The devil is always in the details. As soon as the teams begin suggesting that they need a cut of TV revenue, organizers will be much more hesitant to go along.

I knew JV could not be trusted.

 

[For The World]

Successful? Not on my continent.

I think before the last trainwreck I was referring to, there was an incident here where the leading rider let someone else pass him in the final lap? I don't remember why or the precise circumstances, but that's the stuff to turn people off.

Ah and circles? Not so much. You see, they're called ovals. :shakes head: Educate yourself before you talk about NASCAR (I can't believe I just said that).

Yeah that's all good and well, but seriously - this is such insular thinking it causes offence to sensible, rational people everywhere.

Why does the US have the World Series for baseball? You've only got one Canadian team, and most of the time they don't even make it (all teams from Toronto are garbage, really). Doesn't that reek of self importance?

Why does it take two NFL teams almost 4 hours to play 60 minutes of football? I've been to college games, and watched a few NFL games on TV, and how they manage to stretch the time like that I'll never know. At least Soccer, Rugby League and Rugby Union can finish a game within 120 minutes, and don't need two squads per team to do it.

Successful? Not anywhere else on the planet.

I've moved too far off topic however. Coming back on topic, if these teams move away from the UCI, and that then causes more teams to move, what will become of the national organisations that give the UCI its legitimacy? Will people still have to have bikes that conform to sometimes ridiculous guidelines? Will we need UCI stickers on our bikes? How will national championships and teams be recognised by this new organisation, if they're still part of the UCI?

This seems to me to be all about money for the top teams, and screwing the little guys over (yet again). If this sort of fracturing is happening with pro teams, what will become of cyclocross, mountain biking and track cycling?

To me, it seems as though it would be better to keep the UCI, but get rid of the imbeciles running it. You'll find they have similar rules in a new organisation, but just with different people.

 

[Eric8-A]

NASCAR. Drive round in circles all day ya'll!

Criteriums

 

[Pelican]

Don't look to F1, look to creating a Professional Sports Assoc

Sure F1 gets great TV revenue and sponsorship - that is something to try and emulate; but cycling needs more than this. It needs professional administration. I would support a 'break-away' professional league. McQuaid is inept, corrupt and highly conflicted. The UCI is full of second-rate sports administrators and is run at board and executive level by equally incapable management. They have no idea about how to exploit the sport on TV - they are amateurs destroying a professional sport at a time when the sport has the opportunity to wake from its slumber and shine.

Let the UCI look after rules and amateur governance; let them keep the World Champs... but put in place a professional, independent commission to run the sport on a global basis. We don't want a Bernie Ecclestone (he is a greedy, self-important tyrant) we want a balanced commission to find the right CEO and put in place a professional management group to guide the sports growth.

McQuaid is like Gaddafi - if he won't listen to the people, revolution is the only way.

 

[hubbard]

pat mcquaid and the uci should be thanked for single handedly running the sport into the ground.

 

[Skip Madness]

McQuaid is like Gaddafi

He's not really, is he.

 

[The Hitch]

Agreed. People point to F1 all the time as they were successful in packaging and selling a sport on a global basis.....even if that sport can be incredibly boring at times.

f1 as a sport, is far more boring than cycling. No rapid increase and decrease in gaps or attacks. Just as slow gap clawed out over a long period as they go round and round. Basically like Stage 10 of Tour where Paulinho won only without the sprint. Oh and no heart from the riders putting it all on the line. Also instead of the GC just the points jersey.



The advantage it has is that people see fast cars as cool. celebrities as cool. playboys who dont have to lift a finger but get to race fast cars on private tracks, very cool.

Hard working cyclists on 18th century inventions that you actually have to pedal, on normal roads. Thats so lame

 

[Dr. Maserati]

McQuaid is like Gaddafi .

He's not really, is he.

Agree - it's a bit of a stretch to say McQuaid and Gadaffi are alike.

I'm not sure if Gadaffi has his own nuclear bunker:

Cycling chief Pat McQuaid has a nuclear bunker in his Swiss home. Given the conflict gripping his sport, some in his position would be tempted to hide there.

 

[Met de Versnelling]

Interestingly, in your list, of the bolded 'motor' companies hardly any have had high profile involvement in F1 (Toyota did, not sure about the rest), but of the non-'motor' companies two, ING and Allianz, have been primary sponsors for F1 teams - ING until 2009 with Renault, Allianz currently with Mercedes.

Royal Dutch Shell, supply petrol, was in their exec area's through my mum's work for the Silverstone GP in '08. Great race it was too, sat by Maggots/Beckets.

BroDeal? Button? A sap?

Granted, his car was helped by Brawn's ingenuity and ability to read between the lines to when it comes to designed a car, but by that mark, the Shoe-maker was a sap as well. Button's a great driver, just watch him as he takes a turn, one movement of the wheel, and little to no corrections what so ever, just feels the car through the corners.

However, this F1 comparision, as pointed out by Libertine, is utter bull$^!%, sportscars is the best way of looking at it, for example:

Tour de France = Le Mans
Vuelta/Giro = GT2 series, Porsche Supercars
A WorldTour event such as TdU, Paris-Nice etc = V8 supercars/BTCC/DTM

Then so on and so forth, i can't think of sportscar equivalents to the Monuments though, maybe the likes of the Sebring 24 hours, but their Le Mans series races, so a bit iffy comparison.

 

[Flower5000]

More solutions would be nice ...

You Europeans do realize that F1 is considered one of the lamest events ever. The last time it made the news here was when IIRC most of the teams pussied out and the whole 'race' was among a handful of cars, most of which belonged to the same two or so teams? All because of a few raindrops.

Apparently it is popular in Europe. Maybe because it resembles so much congested highways so people can relate? I heard passing other cars is frowned upon?

Dear Cobblestones, I think the issue at the Indy race was a bit more complicated than the result of a few raindrops ... I mean, if we are going to go there, MotoGP runs in the rain, AMA does not (last I checked, I welcome correction if warranted) ... F1 runs in the rain ... NASCAR does not? ... I don't know about NASCAR because I don't really care about NASCAR. In all honesty (and joking at NASCAR's expense aside), I believe it was a safety issue not related to rain, but an incredibly poor match-up between Indy tarmac and F1 spec tires. I'm not European and I kind of enjoy F1 and it's fairly popular among my peers, although it can get boring at times true enough.

And I have to say I think you are perhaps wrong about the congested highways/passing is frowned upon generalization. Having driven (mostly a motorbike) fairly extensively in Europe (although born, raised, and living in the U.S.A) I can say my experience is not what you described at all (there is some congestion in the bigger cities perhaps). More importantly, I've never done so much passing in my life ... but maybe that just speaks for how I like to ride a motorbike.http://forum.cyclingnews.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

However, we do agree in that I'm also not convinced that F1 is the best comparison ... and everyone on this thread seems stuck discussing why F1 sucks instead of adding thoughtful insight into the notion of the professional cyclists breaking away from the UCI and creating their own organization or union or whatever it might be labeled as.

The problem as I see it is ... I would love to see the UCI promote and even govern amateur racing on a global scale ... organize a true amateur world championship, etc. But perhaps there is too much of a conflict of interest in the financial aspect of overseeing both amateur and professional cycling on a global scale. I don't know enough about the current structure of the UCI to know how much the amateur world of cycling is financed by the professional and/or vice versa. Maybe someone could refresh us all if it's pertinent to this discussion.

MOST Importantly, I think that at some level it would be nice if the profile of amateur cycling could be raised ... while letting the professional side of cycling explore it's need and desire to attract big sponsors, large crowds (in person and via TV), etc. If the UCI's mission is to bring the joy of cycling the world outside of Europe ... teams requiring multi-millions of Euros and all the associated flash probably peaks peoples' interest, but they need to get people on bikes ... or at least interested in watching their children, neighbors, and fellow country-folk race bikes. Perhaps that's way way too Polly-anna-ish of me, but a girl's gotta dream (point of fact, I'm a guy but that quote just sounds better when it's a girl doing the actual dreaming).

Anywho, I'd love to see some more suggestions or at least more on-topic discussion ... and would really love not to see more generalized statements about how lame F1 and NASCAR are to each xenophobic American and each snotty European respectively. http://forum.cyclingnews.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

 

[ksmith]

Successful? Not on my continent.

I think before the last trainwreck I was referring to, there was an incident here where the leading rider let someone else pass him in the final lap? I don't remember why or the precise circumstances, but that's the stuff to turn people off.

Ah and circles? Not so much. You see, they're called ovals. :shakes head: Educate yourself before you talk about NASCAR (I can't believe I just said that).

Never happens in cycling to gift a win !!!!!!

It would be intresting to see if the unwritten rules of cycling would continue, wait for a contender if he falls off or has a puncture, mechanical, pee, feedzone

I can't recall the last time Ferrari waited for Mclaren when they had a puncture, or they spun of the track,or any team for that matter.

11 teams, very special teams. Are other teams invited ? Are they allowed to win on an equal footing or is it as JV wants money wins ?

UCI stinks, but it is a darn sight better than what JV proposes ' the closed shop'. This is what the radio fiasco is all about. The cards are on the table.

Look at all the elite 'leagues' NHL, Premier league, MLB, NFL, Rugby.
All they care about is their League finances, sod the rest of the sport. there's no trickle down. Most also have a monetery cap, because the self serving has got out of hand.

Cycling is a unique sport, its quaint , old fashioned, and hard. I love it like this.

A lot of posts suggest Jv is not on the up and up in his dealings. Why the change?

 

[M Sport]

A break away series will never happen. The riders and teams can't even get together to stage a proper protest let alone bring various different interest groups together to run an opposition Pro Tour.

Pigs will fly before this gets off the ground.

 

[veganrob]

I can't believe people are actually talking about auto racing. Any kind of auto racing. It is incredibly lame. I would rather watch corn grow.

 

[Race Radio]

Again, F1 is only an analogy. It has nothing to do with the sport, cars, etc.

The F1 analogy refers to a sport, F1, that was a mess. When the stakeholders came together and agreed to a group strategy the sport flourished. Cycling is a mess. All of the stakeholders have different agendas and nobody trusts the guy who is supposedly in charge. In this chaos the toxic element flourishes.

McQuaid and the UCI are the key element preventing the sport from moving forward. Moving on without them, or forcing certain elements out of the picture, makes a lot of sense.

 

[Martin318is]

You Europeans do realize that F1 is considered one of the lamest events ever. The last time it made the news here was when IIRC most of the teams pussied out and the whole 'race' was among a handful of cars, most of which belonged to the same two or so teams? All because of a few raindrops.

No, it was because there were two tyre providers at the time and whilst the Bridgestone teams (3 of them) were fine, the Michelin shod teams were advised not to start because the final bend onto the straight was through one of the Indy corners backwards and the various forces on the tyres were causing consistent failures.

Still a screwed up situation, but it wasn't rain that did it, it was Insurance risk.