- Jun 16, 2009
- 3,035
- 0
- 0
Race Radio said:
And yet there is near constant talk of potential breakaway series' amongst the F1 teams. Mainly over % of TV revenue and lately over some of the rules the FIA attempts to make the series adopt
And yet there is near constant talk of potential breakaway series' amongst the F1 teams. Mainly over % of TV revenue and lately over some of the rules the FIA attempts to make the series adopt
- Aug 30, 2010
- 3,838
- 529
- 15,080
I totally believe the UCI is a corrupt organization. They need to be done away with. I have argued from the beginning the whole AC drama is a charade. For many other discussions.
One of the hurdles in achieving what you propose, and the other teams propose is to gain the confidence from European teams that teams like Garmin, Sky etc are not trying to take over the sport for their own interest. We are very new to the sport and have now placed how many teams in Pro Tour. Would you trust JV? Ehhh. So there is a lot of old cultural issues to overcome also I think.
One of the hurdles in achieving what you propose, and the other teams propose is to gain the confidence from European teams that teams like Garmin, Sky etc are not trying to take over the sport for their own interest. We are very new to the sport and have now placed how many teams in Pro Tour. Would you trust JV? Ehhh. So there is a lot of old cultural issues to overcome also I think.
I'm skeptical about their success too, but I thought the NFL would never lockout...
I don't know much about F1, but in general competition rarely is the key to the popularity of a sport. Every fan will admit that no one goes to American football games for the game; its all about the tailgate food, drinking on a Sunday, ect. I'd also bet that less than half of the sports coverage is about the time spent in competition.
For cycling, I think that the proposed business-like organization proposed by the secessionists will be more effective at creating the consumer culture that will build cycling. I think cycling will get to that point (for the better), but my biggest fear is that the immutability of those in charge will condemn us to a fractured/protested league for a few seasons in the process.
I don't know much about F1, but in general competition rarely is the key to the popularity of a sport. Every fan will admit that no one goes to American football games for the game; its all about the tailgate food, drinking on a Sunday, ect. I'd also bet that less than half of the sports coverage is about the time spent in competition.
For cycling, I think that the proposed business-like organization proposed by the secessionists will be more effective at creating the consumer culture that will build cycling. I think cycling will get to that point (for the better), but my biggest fear is that the immutability of those in charge will condemn us to a fractured/protested league for a few seasons in the process.
A breakaway isn't completely impossible, but it's very unlikely at this point.
What's going is that the teams, race organisers and UCI are involved in a power struggle. As long as there's no credible threat of an alternative structure, the UCI holds the best cards. Particularly as there are conflicts of interest between race organisers and teams and between the teams themselves. If a credible threat of a breakaway can be created however, the value of the cards in each players hand shifts significantly.
The UCI doesn't own the events nor does it hold the rider's contracts (in many sports whether players are centrally contracted or contracted to private teams has been a major factor in internal power struggles). All they provide is a structure. The value of that provision is largely determined by whether or not they hold a secure monopoly.
Race radios are a relatively minor issue, but they illustrate the current balance of power. The UCI wants them gone, the teams do not. The UCI wins because the teams ultimately don't have any choice but to compete within the UCI structure, and so there opposition has been ineffectual.
The teams don't want to see a divided sport, or at least they won't go that route lightly. What they want is to change the balance of power.
What's going is that the teams, race organisers and UCI are involved in a power struggle. As long as there's no credible threat of an alternative structure, the UCI holds the best cards. Particularly as there are conflicts of interest between race organisers and teams and between the teams themselves. If a credible threat of a breakaway can be created however, the value of the cards in each players hand shifts significantly.
The UCI doesn't own the events nor does it hold the rider's contracts (in many sports whether players are centrally contracted or contracted to private teams has been a major factor in internal power struggles). All they provide is a structure. The value of that provision is largely determined by whether or not they hold a secure monopoly.
Race radios are a relatively minor issue, but they illustrate the current balance of power. The UCI wants them gone, the teams do not. The UCI wins because the teams ultimately don't have any choice but to compete within the UCI structure, and so there opposition has been ineffectual.
The teams don't want to see a divided sport, or at least they won't go that route lightly. What they want is to change the balance of power.
- Jun 17, 2010
- 5,139
- 237
- 17,880
ergmonkey said:
Agree and agree. I wouldn't be surprised if PM's approach is going to destroy cycling as we know it. But then that could just end up making it better if a new race league is created as indicated by the article in the OP. What I don't get is why is Paddy McQuaid willing to fall on his own sword over use of race radios??? Makes no sense to me.
Get the RCS, ASO and Flanders Classics on board and you have your breakaway league. Block participation in the World Championships so it becomes a farce, UCI loses a major revenue stream. But no breakaway league will be possible unless you have commitments for TV rights purchase (as a package). Don't just recreate the same model under a new name with no UCI... there needs to be complete commitment to a unified TV deal, and one where teams and riders are guaranteed a considerable slice of the beef.
What concerns me is who will be the power players in the new model. Ownership should be spread across the board, with no one individual or collective having Bernie type control (seems I have to mention F1 to post in this thread). The problem with that may be that by default, the ASO should have a much bigger share than anyone else.
What concerns me is who will be the power players in the new model. Ownership should be spread across the board, with no one individual or collective having Bernie type control (seems I have to mention F1 to post in this thread). The problem with that may be that by default, the ASO should have a much bigger share than anyone else.
- May 20, 2010
- 718
- 1
- 0
UCI/cycling could learn much from various well organised sports.
Unfortunately the current (and recent past) administration presents as though they (think they) have a monopoly on wisdom and excellent administrative processes... to which many of us say "deceived fools".
As others have indicated: F1 has one feature that must not be replicated "a self interested, egotistical tyrant" of an owner. Cycling deserves an independent administrative board.
Regulation and administration of the sport should be, at the very least, separated by "Chinese walls". For example drug testing should be conducted by an independent body.
May be the current problems evidenced within the UCI can be overcome, however not with the current senior administrative staff. Perhaps only "burning the structure to the ground" will remove the "cancer" within....
Perhaps doing so will 'kill' the sport...at least for a while???
maybe the current ructions will lead to positive change...More likely is a continuing shambles with cycling stumbling along for a good while yet.
****** ****** uuuuuuuuug!
Unfortunately the current (and recent past) administration presents as though they (think they) have a monopoly on wisdom and excellent administrative processes... to which many of us say "deceived fools".
As others have indicated: F1 has one feature that must not be replicated "a self interested, egotistical tyrant" of an owner. Cycling deserves an independent administrative board.
Regulation and administration of the sport should be, at the very least, separated by "Chinese walls". For example drug testing should be conducted by an independent body.
May be the current problems evidenced within the UCI can be overcome, however not with the current senior administrative staff. Perhaps only "burning the structure to the ground" will remove the "cancer" within....
Perhaps doing so will 'kill' the sport...at least for a while???
maybe the current ructions will lead to positive change...More likely is a continuing shambles with cycling stumbling along for a good while yet.
****** ****** uuuuuuuuug!
- Aug 13, 2009
- 12,854
- 2
- 0
- Jun 17, 2010
- 5,139
- 237
- 17,880
Ferminal said:
Good thoughts there. And definately not the same model. I liked SOME of JV's 10-point plan to reinvigorate cycling (Vaughters' 10-point plan to reinvigorate cycling), especially the ones focused on selling the sport... like helmet or bike cams and the like. Maybe a new league could adopt some of that.
JA.Tri said:
No kidding .... just look at triathlon and Ironman. Completely independent of some tri federation and tri TT bikes are delivering more revenue and sales than TT bikes used for road racing.
- Jun 17, 2010
- 5,139
- 237
- 17,880
- Mar 18, 2009
- 14,644
- 81
- 22,580
Zinoviev Letter said:
The UCI does have contracts and agreements with the major races for participation of the ProTour teams. I assume that ProTour licenses came with contracts that would make it difficult for the teams to not race the World Tour events. Some teams may be locked in for four years. I think that setting up a rival series will be a legal minefield.
The F1 breakaway attempt was timed to take place at the end of the Concorde Agreement.
- Feb 27, 2010
- 100
- 0
- 0
If you see the "10 points by Jonathan Vaughters", you will perceive that he wants a Formule 1 or NBA system. More long-term guaranteed entry to big races for professional teams it's a evident NBA's character, and cameras on bikes, inside cars, helmets and inside team is inspirated in F1, as open radios to the public.
"Equipment innovation to see if the the smartest team wins sometimes, rather than the strongest" is a idea to have a balanced competition like NBA with Draft and salary cap.
Increase the number of TTTs would serve to create rivalry between teams and consolidate the relation team-fan.
Well, I can't say if it would be good or bad for the highest level cycling, but would destroy the medium and small teams and the medium and small races. Good or bad for the highest level cycling, we aren't prepared for a change so drastic.
"Equipment innovation to see if the the smartest team wins sometimes, rather than the strongest" is a idea to have a balanced competition like NBA with Draft and salary cap.
Increase the number of TTTs would serve to create rivalry between teams and consolidate the relation team-fan.
Well, I can't say if it would be good or bad for the highest level cycling, but would destroy the medium and small teams and the medium and small races. Good or bad for the highest level cycling, we aren't prepared for a change so drastic.
- Jun 16, 2009
- 3,035
- 0
- 0
ksmith said:
Need to go back to the days of Stirling Moss, et al - the gentlemen drivers. Back then they used to give each other engines and stop when they saw others had had accidents etc. (Read about Jackie Stewart at Spa)
- Jan 1, 2011
- 98
- 0
- 0
Why wouldn't the ASO want this? Seems like this deal would give them a lot more power/freedom than they already have. I bet if they signed up, RCS and the others would soon follow.
Without having read much of the previous posts I'd just like to announce my full support to the breakaway organisation whatever it may be or if it is at all true.
The UCI with its antique view of cycling has been standing in the way of progress in cycling for far too long now. McQuak's open letter almost had me laughing out loud on a few occasions. Ground Control to Major Quak: The Germans really quit the broadcasting because the UCI stands in the way of any major clean up of the sport and they have given up believing in the regurgitation of its same old lies! I'm surprised that other countries haven't followed suit. Or how do you explain the acquittal of Contador versus suspension of Fuyu Li and others? Why did it take more than a month to announce the positive? Why was it hastily announced after a German (surprise, surprise!!!) journo threatened to bust the bombshell?
The UCI not only opposes any changes in attitude of its riders but also advancements in technology. Nowadays they're even forcing manufacturers to have their rigs tested for "compliance" to ancient and arbitrary rules. Why again is it illegal to race the Specialized Shiv in UCI events? Ahh, yeah that's right something about the "nose" being aerodynamic instead of structural. Hello! Wake up it's the 21st century!!! Why does the hour record only constitute a record if it's done on a Merckx era style bike? Where would humanity be if we hadn't constantly used advancements in technology to our advantage?
The UCI repeatedly fails to publish the "rules" to pro team selection. They simply prefer to make them up as they go along. How do you become a pro tour team if you have no idea what the selection criteria are??? Arrrghhhh,…
I could go on but I stop here because it simply makes me angrier the more I think about it. All the UCI does is generate money into the pockets of those in its midst. It's a bit like a communist regime where no opposing opinion counts and any opposition is brutally slain. What we need is democracy in the world of cycling, for the progress of cycling, for the popularity of cycling but first and foremost for the credibility of cycling - VIVE LA REVOLUTION!!!
The UCI with its antique view of cycling has been standing in the way of progress in cycling for far too long now. McQuak's open letter almost had me laughing out loud on a few occasions. Ground Control to Major Quak: The Germans really quit the broadcasting because the UCI stands in the way of any major clean up of the sport and they have given up believing in the regurgitation of its same old lies! I'm surprised that other countries haven't followed suit. Or how do you explain the acquittal of Contador versus suspension of Fuyu Li and others? Why did it take more than a month to announce the positive? Why was it hastily announced after a German (surprise, surprise!!!) journo threatened to bust the bombshell?
The UCI not only opposes any changes in attitude of its riders but also advancements in technology. Nowadays they're even forcing manufacturers to have their rigs tested for "compliance" to ancient and arbitrary rules. Why again is it illegal to race the Specialized Shiv in UCI events? Ahh, yeah that's right something about the "nose" being aerodynamic instead of structural. Hello! Wake up it's the 21st century!!! Why does the hour record only constitute a record if it's done on a Merckx era style bike? Where would humanity be if we hadn't constantly used advancements in technology to our advantage?
The UCI repeatedly fails to publish the "rules" to pro team selection. They simply prefer to make them up as they go along. How do you become a pro tour team if you have no idea what the selection criteria are??? Arrrghhhh,…
I could go on but I stop here because it simply makes me angrier the more I think about it. All the UCI does is generate money into the pockets of those in its midst. It's a bit like a communist regime where no opposing opinion counts and any opposition is brutally slain. What we need is democracy in the world of cycling, for the progress of cycling, for the popularity of cycling but first and foremost for the credibility of cycling - VIVE LA REVOLUTION!!!
BroDeal said:
Unless key UCI players are implicated in fraud. If that happens the UCI will have to settle and settle fast. Read my post in JV goes whole hog; I think it's just a power play to make the whole scene more like the NFL where the Owner's have the franchise value. ASO won't like it but it looks like the trained chimps have learned to type...
- Feb 25, 2010
- 3,854
- 1
- 0
Who puts money into pro cycling? teams and sponsors so teams have to please sponsors to get money.
If the UCI are getting in the way they should step down and let the people who put big$$$ into the sport have some say in it.
The other point is we should have some at the helm who can ride a bike. I dont know Pats caperbilitys in this feild but has he ever ridden a bike race himself any one know.
Or did he just take the job on with no knowledge of what it is like to race up a big mountain or ride a stage race.
we need real people at the top running the UCI
If the UCI are getting in the way they should step down and let the people who put big$$$ into the sport have some say in it.
The other point is we should have some at the helm who can ride a bike. I dont know Pats caperbilitys in this feild but has he ever ridden a bike race himself any one know.
Or did he just take the job on with no knowledge of what it is like to race up a big mountain or ride a stage race.
we need real people at the top running the UCI
- Feb 16, 2010
- 15,332
- 6,029
- 28,180
Plus
Who thinks to own the ups, the downs, the plains, the crowds,
the streets, the roads, the cinder-paths, the mountains?
Who thinks to own the ups, the downs, the plains, the crowds,
the streets, the roads, the cinder-paths, the mountains?
- Mar 19, 2009
- 832
- 0
- 0
If you look at F1 management's general revenue breakdown, it's about:
40% TV money
40% promoter's fees
10% series sponsors
A new cycling organization could definitely improve the sponsorship situation by signing series sponsors.
Promoter's fees are a different story, they aren't going to get anywhere by charging establish races fees but they should be able to wrest some money away as the CN story points out, if a new structure can greatly increase revenue opportunities for everybody.
I remember Wim, who used to do the great Cycling4all website, writing about a future with many closed course races so whoever is in charge could monetize attendance. Obviously the lack of attendance fees sets cycling apart from other sports.
40% TV money
40% promoter's fees
10% series sponsors
A new cycling organization could definitely improve the sponsorship situation by signing series sponsors.
Promoter's fees are a different story, they aren't going to get anywhere by charging establish races fees but they should be able to wrest some money away as the CN story points out, if a new structure can greatly increase revenue opportunities for everybody.
I remember Wim, who used to do the great Cycling4all website, writing about a future with many closed course races so whoever is in charge could monetize attendance. Obviously the lack of attendance fees sets cycling apart from other sports.
- Jun 22, 2009
- 10,644
- 2
- 0
brianf7 said:
not always true, I really wouldn't want Merckx in charge of the uci either.
JV brought up some decent points, but a lot of it a bit much imo.
Anyway the way the UCI handles the sport, it will only be a matter of time before the sport does split away. The current system is poor at best.
A lot of this will depend on race organizers obviously, especially the ASO, who like it or not make a lot of the revenue within the sport.
- Mar 11, 2009
- 748
- 1
- 0
It is worth note that many of the Leagues\teams held up as examples here are in deep financial trouble.
Many Premiere League clubs are deep in debt. There is financial trouble in the NBA and the NFL is not exactly balanced and on the verge of a strike.
Obviously there are problems with Cycling and the current situation is not the best. A better model is needed if cycling wants to improve rather than transfer power.
Many Premiere League clubs are deep in debt. There is financial trouble in the NBA and the NFL is not exactly balanced and on the verge of a strike.
Obviously there are problems with Cycling and the current situation is not the best. A better model is needed if cycling wants to improve rather than transfer power.
- Mar 19, 2009
- 832
- 0
- 0
dolophonic said:
Yes it's true that the NFL and NBA have labor issues, but...the players in those leagues get more than 50% of revenue. What percentage of revenue do Pro Tour cyclists get? I'm talking about percentage of all revenue, team sponsorship and money taken in by race promoters. I bet it's below 20%, maybe well below. The sport is still run the way things were 50 years ago.
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 35K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 41K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram