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

[The fridge in the blue trees]

What perks?

The best position to be is actually best ProTeam. You get the right to participate in all ProTour races, but not the obligation that the WT Teams have.

 

[Rob5091]

Just an aside, but I seem to remember reading that in French Law, the Tour must be shown on national TV for free.

Edit - add - yep, it was on Mr Ring's blog back in 2015
https://inrng.com/2015/02/the-tour-de-frances-tv-guarantee/

 

[Rob5091]

Vaughters says that packaging together smaller races will somehow make them more attractive to sponsors etc. I'm sure Joe 6 pack (whatever happened to him?) will set his alarm for 4 a.m. to watch Le Samyn and rush out to buy a "IheartHugoHofstetter" t-shirt.
But going back to the financial crash of 2008 and the joys of securitization, we learned that putting together a pile of rubbish, does not make it suddenly gold, but just more rubbish. Alchemy is what's at work here.
If the Saudis etc want to sponsor races and teams, then ok - support the sport.

 

[Berniece]

The UCI determines that, not some break away teams with Saudi $ and a stupid idea

The uci is aware of the new possible league. As I said before this might already start in 2026 with the calendar reform.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Just for the LOLs - I'm not really suggesting they could turn to this page of their playbook but, as with the manner in which the Amaurys forced Laurent Fignon to sell Paris-Nice to them, it does show that the Amaurys have form for blocking rivals, or potential rivals:

Back in 1994, to counter the launch of Info Matin, Philippe Amaury sought to pull the rug from underneath its feet by launching a national edition of Le Parisien – Aujourd’hui en France. When, in 2007, the German Springer group proposed the launch of a French Bild the Amaurys prepared a new title of their own – codenamed ‘KillBild' – to counter the German incursion into their market. The Germans retreated. The following year, when faced with a new sports daily, Le10 Sport, the Amaurys launched a low-cost, low-budget sports daily of their own: Aujourd’hui Sport. Both titles ended as failures, but Le 10 Sport failed first, meaning the Amaurys won.​

IIRC the person responsible for Kill Bild was Aurore Amaury, the daughter of Marie-Odile and current CEO of EPA.

 

[ManicJack]

The uci is aware of the new possible league. As I said before this might already start in 2026 with the calendar reform.

Being aware of, and being in support of, are two very different things. What's in it for the UCI?

 

[fbjim]

I don't think the issue is that some rando might suddenly be interested in the GP Plouay or something, so much as someone might be more inclined to get a streaming package if it includes the entire cycling season rather than the insane situation now where eg Americans have to get three different streaming packages to get all the major races..

 

[Rob5091]

I don't think the issue is that some rando might suddenly be interested in the GP Plouay or something, so much as someone might be more inclined to get a streaming package if it includes the entire cycling season rather than the insane situation now where eg Americans have to get three different streaming packages to get all the major races..

TV rights are one thing, but Vaughters was going on about having some new competition that bundles together races from February until October. Then trying to sell that with new TV-rights.
Obviously 3 TV packages for cycling is crazy but it's happened for a reason. One of the big media companies needs an incentive to get together all three and that's normally more profit/viewers which is not happening at the moment.

 

[Berniece]

Being aware of, and being in support of, are two very different things. What's in it for the UCI?

Long term existence if the sport, a better business model for cycling which means more money and chances of corruption for them too.

 

[roundabout]

estimate of WT team budgets 2023

What are the budgets of the WorldTour cycling teams in 2023? -

Teams rarely discuss their actual budget figures, although a recent trend has seen Richard Plugge of Jumbo-Visma claim that they are around 5th or 6th in the table of budgets this season. So with plenty of smoke and mirrors, it’s hard to really know for sure the exact budget figures. What we can...

procyclinguk.com

Taking the lower end of the estimate, the total budget for 18 teams is 440M. Supposing for a second that even the lower end of the estimate was inflated by 25% (very unrealistic IMO), it is still 330M.

Supposing again (again unrealistically) that teams get all the extra money from the "better business model" ™, does anyone think that there is at least an extra 300-400M per year to be had from TV rights (assuming that the goal of the whole 'reform' is for teams to be able to survive on TV rights money alone) once the rights are repackaged to include all races?

I dunno, seems really doubtful to me. With this kind of supposed mispricing of TV rights, it would have already been corrected in the nearly 20 years that PT/WT has existed.

 

[Berniece]

estimate of WT team budgets 2023

What are the budgets of the WorldTour cycling teams in 2023? -

Teams rarely discuss their actual budget figures, although a recent trend has seen Richard Plugge of Jumbo-Visma claim that they are around 5th or 6th in the table of budgets this season. So with plenty of smoke and mirrors, it’s hard to really know for sure the exact budget figures. What we can...

procyclinguk.com

Taking the lower end of the estimate, the total budget for 18 teams is 440M. Supposing for a second that even the lower end of the estimate was inflated by 25% (very unrealistic IMO), it is still 330M.

Supposing again (again unrealistically) that teams get all the extra money from the "better business model" ™, does anyone think that there is at least an extra 300-400M per year to be had from TV rights (assuming that the goal of the whole 'reform' is for teams to be able to survive on TV rights money alone) once the rights are repackaged to include all races?

I dunno, seems really doubtful to me. With this kind of supposed mispricing of TV rights, it would have already been corrected in the nearly 20 years that PT/WT has existed.

Not right away, but it's also about growing the sport itself. The more interesting the sport becomes to watch, the more people will actually watch it, thus more money from TV rights and merchandising. Having a new format is not only about dividing the current pie properly, it's also about making the whole pie much bigger. Cycling used to be the 2nd biggest sport in Italy, now it's not even top 5. A new league and formula might be more entertaining for the masses.

 

[roundabout]

2nd biggest sport in terms of what? I do not live in Italy so I do not know how things are there, but from the outside I can watch more Italian races now than I could 5-10-15-20 years ago.

Edit: and dividing the current pie properly would not make it any bigger nor would it help the teams achieve independence from sponsor money. I mean I have posted the ASO net profit before and it's not that much despite probably having the rights to

Tour
Paris-Nice
Volta Catalunya
Roubaix
Fleche Wallonne
Liege-Bastogne-Liege
Eschborn Frankfurt
Dauphine
Vuelta

That's 9/35 of the current WT events, but I would guess a lot more than 9/35 of the total exposure.

 

[fmk_RoI]

One of the big media companies needs an incentive to get together all three and that's normally more profit/viewers which is not happening at the moment.

It's not happening except for where it is happening, such as Discovery.

 

[Berniece]

2nd biggest sport in terms of what? I do not live in Italy so I do not know how things are there, but from the outside I can watch more Italian races now than I could 5-10-15-20 years ago.

Edit: and dividing the current pie properly would not make it any bigger nor would it help the teams achieve independence from sponsor money. I mean I have posted the ASO net profit before and it's not that much despite probably having the rights to

Tour
Paris-Nice
Volta Catalunya
Roubaix
Fleche Wallonne
Liege-Bastogne-Liege
Eschborn Frankfurt
Dauphine
Vuelta

That's 9/35 of the current WT events, but I would guess a lot more than 9/35 of the total exposure.

In terms of viewership and participations. The fact that you can watch more Italian races now than years ago has to do with lower costs to broadcast a race, not the popularity in Italy.

I'm saying that they are trying to make the pie bigger AND divide it properly. This will make sure that the sport becomes more sustainable. You don't think it's weird that if a single sponsor stops the whole team might need to quit? That everything is purely dependant on sponsors is not durable. So it makes a lot of sense to try and fix this.

ASO is much more than only cycling. So we don't really know enough about the financials of their cycling branche, and definitely not about specific races.

 

[hrotha]

That everything is purely dependant on sponsors is not durable.

It's been going on for a minute

 

[Rob5091]

As we were talking US TV coverage, this is how it stands at the moment - according to
https://escapecollective.com/how-to-watch-pro-bike-racing-in-the-us-in-2023/
The ASO, owners of the Tour de France, Paris-Roubaix, and the Vuelta España, have long sold US coverage rights to Peacock (aka Comcast/NBC’s streaming platform). Flanders Classics, the consortium that puts on one-day Classics like the Tour of Flanders and Amstel Gold Race, is with FloBikes. And RCS Sport, which produces the Giro d’Italia, Milan-San Remo, and Strade Bianche, is on GCN+.

Which is somehow peculiarly typical of pro-cycling. How Vaughters plans to undo this gordian knot of a setup is still a mystery - unless he's just thinking big bucks will do it.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Supposing again (again unrealistically) that teams get all the extra money from the "better business model" ™, does anyone think that there is at least an extra 300-400M per year to be had from TV rights (assuming that the goal of the whole 'reform' is for teams to be able to survive on TV rights money alone) once the rights are repackaged to include all races?

Even if the money was there, you'd have to ask what would happen to it?

Budgets would rise, more money would get spent and teams would still be scrabbling for cash at the end of the season.

In other sports - not comparable ones, but just other sports - they can leverage their assets and borrow to fuel their spending. Vaughters several years ago suggested that teams with a shortfall in their budget could sell a stake in the team to raise cash. Give the teams today an asset - a perpetual invite to the new league - and some will find a way to borrow against it, driving them into debt and out of business.

Personally, I think not letting them have any more money is actually a kindness and is protecting the sport.

 

[roundabout]

In terms of viewership and participations. The fact that you can watch more Italian races now than years ago has to do with lower costs to broadcast a race, not the popularity in Italy.

I'm saying that they are trying to make the pie bigger AND divide it properly. This will make sure that the sport becomes more sustainable. You don't think it's weird that if a single sponsor stops the whole team might need to quit? That everything is purely dependant on sponsors is not durable. So it makes a lot of sense to try and fix this.

ASO is much more than only cycling. So we don't really know enough about the financials of their cycling branche, and definitely not about specific races.

So more races on TV is not automatically better? Or is that not the inference on can make from the first paragraph?

The question is not whether or not it makes sense to change anything, the question is whether the changes would have the expected effect.

And about ASO, what's your point, that it's only cycling that makes money for them while everything else loses money, so there is more than the extra 72M to share around?

 

[Berniece]

So more races on TV is not automatically better? Or is that not the inference on can make from the first paragraph?

The question is not whether or not it makes sense to change anything, the question is whether the changes would have the expected effect.

And about ASO, what's your point, that it's only cycling that makes money for them while everything else loses money, so there is more than the extra 72M to share around?

We were talking about popularity. That more races are on tv now has nothing to do with cycling being more popular, but the lower broadcasting cost. More races on tv is better for the sport, yes, but that doesn't mean that everything is already better than it used to be. Cycling is still losing ground to other sports.

You can't be 100% sure if the changes will have the expected effect, but we can't keep doing the same thing over and over again because the sport will fade away in the long run. The current system is sponsored by a couple of billionaires that like the sport, if that would stop, the system would collapse.

About ASO, my point is, we don't know, so let's not make assumptions.

 

[ManicJack]

In terms of viewership and participations. .

Quick search (multiple sites) show cycling as #6 in Italy

 

[roundabout]

We were talking about popularity. That more races are on tv now has nothing to do with cycling being more popular, but the lower broadcasting cost. More races on tv is better for the sport, yes, but that doesn't mean that everything is already better than it used to be. Cycling is still losing ground to other sports.

You can't be 100% sure if the changes will have the expected effect, but we can't keep doing the same thing over and over again because the sport will fade away in the long run. The current system is sponsored by a couple of billionaires that like the sport, if that would stop, the system would collapse.

About ASO, my point is, we don't know, so let's not make assumptions.

More races being on TV should mean extra exposure and extra sponsorship value, no? And what you write is the whole point, putting more cycling on TV may not be enough alone.

Look at the team ranking section of the 2005 UCI PT

2005 UCI ProTour - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Most of those teams are gone, but there are 18 WT teams today anyway. It's probably not the most stable working environment, but sponsors and teams have been entering and leaving for ages while the sport is still there.

About ASO, there is nothing wrong in trying to put an estimate on what extra money may be available currently to understand how achievable the goal of independence from sponsorship is, instead of repeating over and over again that there is a "better business model" ™ that may solve all cycling problems without trying to think what exactly it is and what it may mean.

 

[Eddy Evenepoel]

Look at the team ranking section of the 2005 UCI PT

2005 UCI ProTour - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Most of those teams are gone,

If we are a little creative one could say that 10 of those 20 teams are still around.

Rabobank -> Jumbo-Visma
Davitamon Lotto -> Lotto-Dstiny
Illes Baleares -> Movistar
Cofidis
Quick Step
Liquigas -> EF (Liquigas -> Cannondale and Cannondale merged with Garmin)
Lampre -> UAE
Bouygues Telecom -> Total Energies
FDJ

 

[Izzyeviel]

We've got more races being shown live & in full then ever before. If its not already bringing in extra exposure & sponsors even more races won't.

We keep losing teams and races all the time because relying on sponsors is very difficult to sustain. & the powers that be keep reorganising the system to compensate.

Cycling is popular, the sport of cycling is not. Sepp Kuss had to win the Vuelta to get past 30,000 twitter followers. The powers that be are rubbish at promoting cycling. It's not going to change no matter how much money from dodgy countries you throw at the sport.

 

[ManicJack]

.

Cycling is popular, the sport of cycling is not. Sepp Kuss had to win the Vuelta to get past 30,000 twitter followers. The powers that be are rubbish at promoting cycling. It's not going to change no matter how much money from dodgy countries you throw at the sport.

Yep. Nearly as many people watched The Masked Singer last Weds night in the US as those that watched stage 16 of the past TdF globally. Stage 16 was the most watched by the way.

 

[Berniece]

Quick search (multiple sites) show cycling as #6 in Italy

It used to be #2.

More races being on TV should mean extra exposure and extra sponsorship value, no? And what you write is the whole point, putting more cycling on TV may not be enough alone.

Indeed, that's why they want to change the complete formula, the competition as a whole. Because otherwise you just have a package of races, but the goal is to make the league itself worth watching. So people aren't only watching TDF, but also smaller races.