ASO wants to leave World Tour in 2017

[staubsauger]

Re:

The UCI, too, has little leverage, but it can bring its own rules and regulations to bear.

ASO plans to place its races under the second-tier HC category, where races like the Amgen Tour of California and USA Pro Challenge currently reside. However, a UCI rule stipulates that new HC races can only be five days long.

It’s unclear whether the Tour would be considered a “new” HC race. But Vaughters suggested that the UCI could alter its rule to require that all HC races be limited to five days, which he said “would throw a fox in the henhouse.”

http://velonews.competitor.com/2015...gives-aso-a-big-edge-in-power-struggle_391559

Is there any sort of loop hole through this. How can you not call the Tour a new HC race?

Maybe they gonna call it historical calendar like in 2008?

 

[Jspear]

Re:

One thing i donot understand. Can RCS for eg not step in and create its own LBL or PR or any other race?

Riders wouldn't consider it the same as the actual LBL and PR. It couldn't compare in prestige, history, ect. LBL and PR are monuments - These wins look great on a riders palmares. It wouldn't be the same if RCS had it's own race.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Re: Re:

One thing i donot understand. Can RCS for eg not step in and create its own LBL or PR or any other race?

Riders wouldn't consider it the same as the actual LBL and PR. It couldn't compare in prestige, history, ect. LBL and PR are monuments - These wins look great on a riders palmares. It wouldn't be the same if RCS had it's own race.

Should such a thing happen, the winners of the squabble between the UCI/RCS and the ASO would write the history books, deciding retrospectively what was the "real" race. It won't happen though.

Ultimately from the point of view of the fans, we are faced with a row between an unrepresentative and all too often self-interested bureaucracy and a completely unrepresentative and self-interested private company. The UCI is about the worst possible custodian of cycling... with the exception of a private company interested only in profiting from races it owns with no interest in the well being of the sport beyond that.

 

[doperhopper]

Want to dismantle ASO/Tour?Easy:move Giro to July.

Teams/UCI/RCS can agree on that quite happily, if it's done well in advance, sponsors, TV industry involved (who cares about some weird private race in France for 2nd tierriders/teams). There can also be another parallel non-ASO race in Spain (maybe in May), and TdCali can upgrade to the 3rd GT...and why not having 4th, 5th, if the first 3 shave off few racing days (and especially the off days).

Several equally important stage races would be much better than one monopoly.

 

[Alexandre B.]

Want to dismantle ASO/Tour?Easy:move Giro to July.

Teams/UCI/RCS can agree on that quite happily, if it's done well in advance, sponsors, TV industry involved (who cares about some weird private race in France for 2nd tierriders/teams). There can also be another parallel non-ASO race in Spain (maybe in May), and TdCali can upgrade to the 3rd GT...and why not having 4th, 5th, if the first 3 shave off few racing days (and especially the off days).

Several equally important stage races would be much better than one monopoly.

That's why we need to strengthen the Giro, in MAY.
If you move the Giro to July, it will weaken it. Because it will face Le Tour de France, cycling's most valuable race.

 

[pastronef]

Want to dismantle ASO/Tour?Easy:move Giro to July.

Teams/UCI/RCS can agree on that quite happily, if it's done well in advance, sponsors, TV industry involved (who cares about some weird private race in France for 2nd tierriders/teams). There can also be another parallel non-ASO race in Spain (maybe in May), and TdCali can upgrade to the 3rd GT...and why not having 4th, 5th, if the first 3 shave off few racing days (and especially the off days).

Several equally important stage races would be much better than one monopoly.

That's why we need to strengthen the Giro, in MAY.
If you move the Giro to July, it will weaken it. Because it will face Le Tour de France, cycling's most valuable race.

strengthen: more "stars"?

make it the zenith of the cycling season, instead of the Tour?

it will take years, and it might not work.
the Tour is just too important, teams balance their season on the Tour. the sponsor too.
I dont know
2017 is still far away. after the initial shock, Aso and Uci will have to find a deal. the sponsors will ask to find a deal

 

[poupou]

I am not sure that as much people would look at Giro in July even if there were no TDF. I do believe that the non-cycling fans are used to watch TDF, if it's dissapear, a part of them will switch on something else.

 

[myrideissteelerthanyours]

In my opinion the whole purpose of the current arrangement is to bring about the current conditions: a few superstars like AC and Froome that use the WT as prep races to get fit for 1 or maybe 2 big events a year. The ***-small races are expected to enjoy the radiant glow of the superstars that deign to show up and that is supposed to raise their visibility and profitability and the excitement of the racing.

I agree with other posters that sending all the WT teams to LBL for example detracts from the race in many ways. Not because of nationalism I dont give a crap if its "their" race or anything I just like to see good racing and not packfill riding their giro/tour prep.

 

[B_Ugli]

ASO don't have the monopoly on organising a 3 week race around France, and others suggestions to move the Giro to July sounds like a fantastic Idea. ASO just want to hold on to the race monopoly they have had since the L'Equipe early days of this and Paris Roubaix being their two main races.

If another company came along and replicated the TDF concept at the same time in the year according to UCI/Velon rules, what can ASO do?

Absolutely nothing - in fact maybe that's what Tinkov should stick his money into.

 

[poupou]

Re:

ASO don't have the monopoly on organising a 3 week race around France, and others suggestions to move the Giro to July sounds like a fantastic Idea. ASO just want to hold on to the race monopoly they have had since the L'Equipe early days of this and Paris Roubaix being their two main races.

If another company came along and replicated the TDF concept at the same time in the year according to UCI/Velon rules, what can ASO do?

Absolutely nothing - in fact maybe that's what Tinkov should stick his money into.

How much money would need and spend Tinkov before he could turn it to a profit?
If it were a reasonnable bet, that would have be done.

If ASO falls, a lot of others races will disappear. If you take money from the most profitable organisers, that would be less money for smallest races.
So better to have a look at the whole picture that to focus on a particuliar point.

 

[Gloin22]

Re:

ASO don't have the monopoly on organising a 3 week race around France, and others suggestions to move the Giro to July sounds like a fantastic Idea. ASO just want to hold on to the race monopoly they have had since the L'Equipe early days of this and Paris Roubaix being their two main races.

If another company came along and replicated the TDF concept at the same time in the year according to UCI/Velon rules, what can ASO do?

Absolutely nothing - in fact maybe that's what Tinkov should stick his money into.

Tour is cycling. Tour makes cycling remotely viable. Tour is the goal for all sponsors coming into this busines. Do you think if Giro was moved to July to compete with Giro, any sponsor would care? No..

 

[Alexandre B.]

Did Cookson really think he's above Monuments of the sport?

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/dec/23/cycling-uci-brian-cookson-hein-verbruggen-circ-report

 

[ice&fire]

Re:

ASO don't have the monopoly on organising a 3 week race around France, and others suggestions to move the Giro to July sounds like a fantastic Idea. ASO just want to hold on to the race monopoly they have had since the L'Equipe early days of this and Paris Roubaix being their two main races.

If another company came along and replicated the TDF concept at the same time in the year according to UCI/Velon rules, what can ASO do?

Absolutely nothing - in fact maybe that's what Tinkov should stick his money into.

If another company wants to use French public roads, they'll need permission from the French authorities.

 

[Jspear]

Re: Re:

ASO don't have the monopoly on organising a 3 week race around France, and others suggestions to move the Giro to July sounds like a fantastic Idea. ASO just want to hold on to the race monopoly they have had since the L'Equipe early days of this and Paris Roubaix being their two main races.

If another company came along and replicated the TDF concept at the same time in the year according to UCI/Velon rules, what can ASO do?

Absolutely nothing - in fact maybe that's what Tinkov should stick his money into.

If another company wants to use French public roads, they'll need permission from the French authorities.

The french authorities probably wouldn't be to much of a problem - As long as they're making money.

 

[Jspear]

Re:

Did Cookson really think he's above Monuments of the sport?

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/dec/23/cycling-uci-brian-cookson-hein-verbruggen-circ-report

This would be an issue that the ASO brings on themselves. If they want to downgrade to HC status, then they have to abide by the rules in that classification.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

What the hell is Cookson going on about maximum length for .HC races for?

2015 .HC races just in Europe:

Driedaagse de Panne-Koksijde stage 2: 217km
Brabantse Pijl: 205km
Rund um Frankfurt (cancelled): 205km
Bayern Rundfahrt stage 1: 221km
Bayern Rundfahrt stage 3: 206km
Ronde van België stage 2: 201km
Tour de Luxembourg stage 1: 213km
Österreich Rundfahrt stage 2: 207km
Österreich Rundfahrt stage 5: 209km
Tour de Wallonie stage 3: 218km
Post Danmark Rundt stage 2: 235km
Arctic Race of Norway stage 1: 214km
Brussels Cycling Classic: 201km
GP de Fourmies: 205km
Tour of Britain stage 3: 216km
Tour of Britain stage 4: 217km
Tour of Britain stage 7: 227km
Paris-Tours: 231km

 

[burning]

I just hope that UCI will detonate into pieces because of the pressure from ASO. It is amazing that how Cookson is much more worse than McQuaid and many people somehow predicted that.

 

[doperhopper]

Re: Re:

ASO don't have the monopoly on organising a 3 week race around France, and others suggestions to move the Giro to July sounds like a fantastic Idea. ASO just want to hold on to the race monopoly they have had since the L'Equipe early days of this and Paris Roubaix being their two main races.

If another company came along and replicated the TDF concept at the same time in the year according to UCI/Velon rules, what can ASO do?

Absolutely nothing - in fact maybe that's what Tinkov should stick his money into.

If another company wants to use French public roads, they'll need permission from the French authorities.

The french authorities probably wouldn't be to much of a problem - As long as they're making money.

well, do not underestimate politics and ASO... I'm afraid that the options like "second Tour" or taking the Tour from ASO would be even harder than burying it under megaJulyGiro (provided it attracted all big teams, all the TV/sponsor money), and then, once ASO goes bankrupt, one can think of recreating it. Unless the politics backfires, and kicks ASO when the politicians realize that megaJulyGiro is too much a threat.

 

[Jancouver]

If you have the best riders/teams, July Giro is fine with me. Usually much better route and not as boring/predictable event as the TDF.

 

[thehook]

Sponsors will want the exposure of the TDF. However if TEAM OWNERS want to have Franchises. Then this is there opportunity. If they were to run the Giro in July. Or create a Big Tour in France. Name it whatever you want. They would need big money to back it for years to come. It could work IMHO.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Alternatively, look at American Open Wheel Racing. When CART split because Tony George was a money-grubbing, useless idiot, CART (and its successor CCWS) had the best cars, by far the higher quality drivers and racing, and IRL, which was restricted almost entirely to ovals, suffered. BUT it had the Indy 500, the one AOWR race which has global recognition value, which meant a lot to sponsors. The gulf in class was massively shown one year when Newman-Haas, a leading CART team, showed up to the "open entry" Indy 500 in the late 90s, and won it by a street with Juan Pablo Montoya. This gained a lot more exposure for the team than racing the CART season only could, and eventually big teams started defecting over to the IRL to compete under their rules despite the woefully obsolete cars and much less historic series. CART and CCWS contributed to its own demise with a dreadful business model, but eventually were subsumed into IRL a few years later, which abandoned some of its controversial calendar plans that had been a part of the split in the first place and appropriated some of the more prestigious CCWS races for itself (the Long Beach and Surfers' Paradise rounds in particular), reuniting AOWR but with massively reduced audiences and viewing figures.

RCS should have no intention of running the Giro in July against the Tour; the Giro is an institution in May. A "Big Tour in France" will never be the Tour de France, and ASO will likely be able to protect certain trademarks such as the jersey colours that have become so iconic in the sport; "open entry" races along the lines of the Pro-Am events in the Iron Curtain days may even lead to more interesting fields, if not higher level fields. No matter how much money UCI throws at a substitute Tour de France, it will not be the Tour de France, just a parody, a facsimile thereof, just like the US500 at Michigan was a complete failure at replacing the Indy 500, or the Friendship Games for the Soviet bloc nations when they boycotted the LA Olympics.

Like it or not, ASO has the control in this game, and given some of the ludicrous things the UCI has been trying to table since long before Brian Cookson's Ecclestonesque self-interest group took over the helm, that isn't actually a bad thing. Under Pat's watch we had the Tour of Beijing and the mooted World Tour Tour of Russia, the desperate attempts to make California ProTour, the enforced internationalization that led to farces like Euskaltel at Roubaix every year or year 1 Orica in the Giro where they couldn't muster enough finishers to qualify for the Teams Classification, the happy handouts of ProTour licences to anybody with money regardless of what they actually brought to the table at the expense of long-term investment and stability. Under Cookson we have had the no-overlapping, no-race-over-six-days rule, the 22-riders-per-team rule, the move towards ticketed, popcorn-selling circuit racing and the attempt at developing a calendar with a top tier tour of just about every pan-flat oil rich state in the Middle East and the relegation of the likes of Catalunya and Romandie to nothing races.

ASO are reactionary, conservative and, because their current position is one of strength, extremely resistant to change. But as long as the changes that are being tabled are counterproductive at best and short-sighted money grabs at the expense of the entire history, culture and romance of the sport at worst, that's actually the better position.

 

[thehook]

WOW! Great post Libertine.

I was a CART Fan growing up. The split destroyed open wheel racing IMHO

 

[Swifty's Cakes]

Does the UCI have anything that ASO wants? If not its hard to see what basis there is for any negotiation.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Re:

Does the UCI have anything that ASO wants? If not its hard to see what basis there is for any negotiation.

If UCI really wanted to play hardball, they hold control over the right for these races to be held as anything above national calendar level, and therefore the eligibility of professional teams to take part. The ASO say they want these to be HC races, but that will only happen if the UCI agree. How big a fight do they want?

 

[poupou]

Re: Re:

Does the UCI have anything that ASO wants? If not its hard to see what basis there is for any negotiation.

If UCI really wanted to play hardball, they hold control over the right for these races to be held as anything above national calendar level, and therefore the eligibility of professional teams to take part. The ASO say they want these to be HC races, but that will only happen if the UCI agree. How big a fight do they want?

UCI has probably not such leverage, they have to follow their rules, and if they fail they can be sued.
And as we have seen in the past, ASO can run TDF under french federation.
Isn't it so ridiculous for a federation to have a fight with its major organisers when races are already disappearing?