• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Breaking Away - "Top cycling teams explore creating new competitive league"

Page 17 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
I'm against the proposed breakaway. Not enough money and the Arabs will soon get bored and pull out. I see it becoming what I believe is now commonly called a shite show.
But many sports top levels of racing are now being run by organisations under the auspices of the governing body, but separate with rights to run as they see fit.
Formula one, Moto GP, Speedway, Motocross are a few examples.
UCI have themselves done the same with Discovery and mountain biking. Cyclocross is similar with Flanders Classics organising the world cups.
Perhaps the more acceptable solution might be ASO to run top level racing.
 
I'm against the proposed breakaway. Not enough money and the Arabs will soon get bored and pull out. I see it becoming what I believe is now commonly called a shite show.
But many sports top levels of racing are now being run by organisations under the auspices of the governing body, but separate with rights to run as they see fit.
Formula one, Moto GP, Speedway, Motocross are a few examples.
UCI have themselves done the same with Discovery and mountain biking. Cyclocross is similar with Flanders Classics organising the world cups.
Perhaps the more acceptable solution might be ASO to run top level racing.
Watched 2 videos about the Bora Hansgrohe- Redbull hybrid transition and what the team and sponsorship might look like.. Both mentioned the possibility (?) of a breakaway bike racing league being a real thing and you try to have a level of neutrality.. But Saudis talking, Soudal talking about it.. Redbull betting on it..big.. Plugge sent Santa a note asking that Visma Lease a Bike be involved.. And at one point Remco's father was told that something big was getting ready to happen that would make existing contracts up for negotiation.. I certainly don't know anything.. But lots of hints from people..

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CsCHLlMCgvc&pp=ygUacmVkIGJ1bGwgY3ljbGluZyB0ZWFtIEJvcmE%3D


Few of these out there
 
Well, that's whenever changes are proposed. People are against it, or agree that it should be changed but it should be changed differently. People virtually always oppose change.
That's true generally but in this case it is also because the proposals that get any media attention always come from the same quarters, from people who share particular views on what the sport should be like and who are pushing in a very specific direction we disagree with. Refusing to ever reconsider your views no matter the circumstances is bad, holding consistent views that form a coherent whole is not bad
 
  • Like
Reactions: pastronef
Seems like when they start talking details, it does not seem such a good deal -
https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wo...-cycling-project-due-to-crazy-business-model/
"Crazy business model if there is even one," one team manager, who did not want to be identified, told Cyclingnews.
L'Equipe suggested that several team managers were asked to "sign a commitment letter as a blank cheque, without telling them what this signature covered."

Other teams reportedly backed out after SRJ Sports Investments requested a €100 million return on their investment in the first year, with the teams obliged to make up for any shortfall. With teams usually spending 100% of their annual budget on rider salaries and costs, it would be unclear how they could cover any deficit.
 
More ... https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wo...-cycling-project-due-to-crazy-business-model/
A presentation and meetings were held in London, as the consulting firm EY pushed to finalise a deal and earn a significant fee.
EY (formerly Ernst and Young) have had ties to Cadel Evans in Australia - from 2011
https://web.archive.org/web/2013110...nd-Young-renews-relationship-with-Cadel-Evans
EY today announced a continued relationship with Cadel Evans, Tour De France 2011 winner, which will include a broader program of events for our people and our clients over the next three years.
and - https://www.ey.com/en_gl/webcasts/doubleshift

DoubleShift 2023 webcast series: professional cycling insights

With this webcast series, you will have exclusive access to insights on the business of cycling and interviews with the leaders in the sport.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
Other teams reportedly backed out after SRJ Sports Investments requested a €100 million return on their investment in the first year, with the teams obliged to make up for any shortfall. With teams usually spending 100% of their annual budget on rider salaries and costs, it would be unclear how they could cover any deficit.https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wo...-cycling-project-due-to-crazy-business-model/
Remember that earlier calculations came out to a gain of 2 to 3 million euros per team per year if thing went to plan. This would be a cost of 6 to 10 million euros per team depending on the number of teams signing up, if SRJ broke even in the first year. Apparently 8 teams are stupid enough to think that’s a good deal. Anyone in the media who continues to talk up Richard Plugge as a smart businessman should be laughed out of the sport…
 
So after a quick look at this, I wonder if EY are pushing for this rather then the Saudis, given EY's own website details going back to 2021 and EY's current financial difficulties - from april 2023
https://www.bbc.com/news/65247525
Earlier this month, Germany's accounting watchdog fined and banned EY for its handling of audits for Wirecard, the insolvent electronic payment processor.
The company owes creditors almost $4bn, after admitting large sums never existed on its books as part of a global fraud operation.

The ban forbids EY from conducting from accepting major new audit mandates for two years.
Last year, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) fined EY $100m after its auditors were caught cheating on the exam needed to obtain and maintain their Certified Public Accountant licence.
It was the largest penalty against an audit firm which was also accused of misleading investigators.
At the time, Gurbir Grewal, director of the SEC's enforcement division said: "It's simply outrageous that the very professionals responsible for catching cheating by clients cheated on ethics exams of all things.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Sandisfan
I kind of thought the Saudis mostly cared about getting good publicity rather than making money, since that always seemed like a questionable outcome, but if they can simply milk the teams for all they've got, then that's obviously a much more achievable business plan.
 
Whenever L’Equipe says something on this case, take it with a HUGE grain of salt. The parent company of ASO also owns L’Equipe.
As with public statements by all organizations, but as ASO have the Tour and everyone's favourite cyclist Teddy's team are not involved, things don't look promising for Danny Townsend (SRJ) and the EY consultants.

Also Plugge seems to be saying the exact things EY have on their website, so he's either drank "the koolaid"or just wants more income.
 
Last edited:
That’s true, but I’m more of the opinion to just wait and give them the possibility to present changes, and THEN I’ll make a proper judgement. I don’t like too shoot stuff down beforehand.
If by "wait and give them the possibility to present changes" you mean "actively promote and dismiss any criticism and defend any and all actions by the breakaway at length, no matter what mental gymnastics it takes, even as everything we learn about the project backs up that criticism", then yes.

This is like when you had hockey fans trying to defend Alexander Ovechkin in 2022, saying he had no other choice when it came to supporting Putin. There are lots of Russian NHL players and apart from Panarin few actively opposed Putin. But Ovechkin was the one who was literally raising funds for Putin's election bids, setting up a team and going out recruiting other players to do exhibition matches in support of Putin. He doesn't get to say "oh, I was non-committal, just doing what I needed to to avoid being seen as oppositional". He's an active part of the propaganda, whether he meant for that or not.
 
If by "wait and give them the possibility to present changes" you mean "actively promote and dismiss any criticism and defend any and all actions by the breakaway at length, no matter what mental gymnastics it takes, even as everything we learn about the project backs up that criticism", then yes.
Because people are saying things that are just incorrect, mostly because we just don't know yet. And I'm all for a more sustainable business model for cycling.
 
Because people are saying things that are just incorrect, mostly because we just don't know yet. And I'm all for a more sustainable business model for cycling.
You mean like when you said they weren't aiming at charging entrance fees and that was an apocalyptic vision, until it became clear from further information that was one of the things they were looking at integrating, and you said that that was a good thing because it showed they were looking at alternative revenue streams?

Come on. It's not about reserving judgement. You've clearly already judged that whatever this is, it's a good idea, because you're going to great lengths to protect it from criticism, much of which is based in actual information about what the proposals will entail, and the rest of which is based on the several failed attempts these same people have already made before to try to revolutionise cycling. I'm actually amazed the euphemistic meaning of "more sustainable business model for cycling" (which you parrot verbatim) hasn't become more of a meme, to be honest.
 
You mean like when you said they weren't aiming at charging entrance fees and that was an apocalyptic vision, until it became clear from further information that was one of the things they were looking at integrating, and you said that that was a good thing because it showed they were looking at alternative revenue streams?
Did I say that? Can't even remember that.

I also don't see an issue with the phrase "more sustainable business model", when 80% of your revenue is dependant on sponsorship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scribers