Dan Martin - "Now I know you can win clean"

[Dr. Maserati]

Of course JV takes a big salary running slipstream sports. That comes out of sponsorship money. Bet he takes a shares prize money too.

How big is his salary? Why would you bet JV shares in the prize money?
A link to all this would help your case....

And again, even if true (which would go against other teams and prize money) - bigger wins means bigger prize money - why does JV the great businessman go for a clean image and earn less?

Where does sniper claim that?

Where did I claim Sniper claimed that?
I asked him a question, hence the question mark at the end, you do understand what a question is? Even rhetorical ones, don't you Netserk?

 

[Netserk]

Where did I claim Sniper claimed that?
I asked him a question, hence the question mark at the end, you do understand what a question is? Even rhetorical ones, don't you Netserk?

Where did I claim that you claimed that sniper claimed that?

 

[Netserk]

And again, even if true (which would go against other teams and prize money) - bigger wins means bigger prize money - why does JV the great businessman go for a clean image and earn less?

Please back up this statement.

 

[sniper]

How big is his salary? Why would you bet JV shares in the prize money?
A link to all this would help your case....

And again, even if true (which would go against other teams and prize money) - bigger wins means bigger prize money - why does JV the great businessman go for a clean image and earn less?

whether successful or not is a different question.
i simply think clean(er) cycling was/is his businessplan.

-some good results each year,
-zero positives,
-propagate the image of cleanliness.

i think the pilar of this businessplan was/is to have zero positives, not to have actual clean riders.
this doesn't mean he's encouraging his riders to dope, of course.
it means his priority is with the zero positives.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Please back up this statement.

It wasn't a statement - it was a question - hence the question mark.

But Garmin are a lot smaller than other teams - a quick look at budgets from 2011,
http://cyclingtips.com.au/2011/07/le-tour-diary-stage-8-team-budgets/

Where did I claim that you claimed that sniper claimed that?

Right here....

Where does sniper claim that?

Any further dumb OT questions you wish to ask me, take it to the sidebar thread.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

whether successful or not is a different question.
i simply think clean(er) cycling was/is his businessplan.

-some good results each year,
-zero positives,
-propagate the image of cleanliness.

i think the pilar of this businessplan was/is to have zero positives, not to have actual clean riders.
this doesn't mean he's encouraging his riders to dope, of course.
it means his priority is with the zero positives.

Not much of a business plan. One positive and it all could go, unlike other teams.
Again - how is he making money from clean cycling? You have avoided that.

 

[EnacheV]

Not much of a business plan. One positive and it all could go, unlike other teams.
Again - how is he making money from clean cycling? You have avoided that.

Imo having a "clean" sport image earns you more money as more money enter the sport, more people follow it.

Preaching a clean sport raise the paychecks across the board.

Also having the image of a clean team can go well in securing some sponsors that are afraid of bad publicity.

Cycling is not more doped than other sports. Just it made the "mistake" of exposing it's cheaters. Wealthy sports are "clean" so you either have a clean sport or you don't expose your cheaters.

 

[Netserk]

1)It wasn't a statement - it was a question - hence the question mark.

But Garmin are a lot smaller than other teams - a quick look at budgets from 2011,
http://cyclingtips.com.au/2011/07/le-tour-diary-stage-8-team-budgets/



2)Right here....

Any further dumb OT questions you wish to ask me, take it to the sidebar thread.

1) "why does JV the great businessman go for a clean image and earn less?" is a question containing a statement. You state that he currently goes for a clean image and earn less.

2) No I don't.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Not much of a business plan. One positive and it all could go, unlike other teams.
Again - how is he making money from clean cycling? You have avoided that.

Corporation XYZ gives him a bundle of money to have a bike racing team in elite races. That's how he, personally, makes money. Does he make much money in this or related endeavours? <shrug>

 

[sniper]

Not much of a business plan. One positive and it all could go, unlike other teams.
Again - how is he making money from clean cycling? You have avoided that.

again, sponsorship agreements.
I think JV's plan was/is to attract sponsors by creating a clean image.
It's a good and respectable plan.
Surely guys at Sky/BMC make more money, but their public image is not s good as JV's.
I think JV is genuinely concerned about the zero positives and about having a clean image.
Meanwhile he's made quite a decent reputation for himself and garmin.
The only handful of JV critics reside here in the clinic.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

1) "why does JV the great businessman go for a clean image and earn less?" is a question containing a statement. You state that he currently goes for a clean image and earn less.

2) No I don't.

The statement is from Snipers reasoning - not mine.

Don't worry, it doesn't make sense to me either, hence my question.

Imo having a "clean" sport image earns you more money as more money enter the sport, more people follow it.

Preaching a clean sport raise the paychecks across the board.

Also having the image of a clean team can go well in securing some sponsors that are afraid of bad publicity.

Cycling is not more doped than other sports. Just it made the "mistake" of exposing it's cheaters. Wealthy sports are "clean" so you either have a clean sport or you don't expose your cheaters.

Overall - that would be true.

But the reasoning here is that JV is the businessman making money from it.
The simple question remains - how?

Particularly that there are teams that do not try and sell clean/cleanER cycling who get more sponsorship money.

 

[Netserk]

The statement is from Snipers reasoning - not mine.

Don't worry, it doesn't make sense to me either, hence my question.

No it's not. You introduced it. Otherwise show where sniper says that.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

No it's not. You introduced it. Otherwise show where sniper says that.

Here you go...

Please explain how it helps JVs bank account,

ehm, sponsorship perhaps?

Ok, so JV pockets all the sponsorship money?

Where does sniper claim that?

 

[sniper]

But the reasoning here is that JV is the businessman making money from it.
the simple question remains - how?

no it's not.
the reasoning is that he's a DS whose aim it is/was to earn a living for himself.
his businessplan was to do that by means of a clean cycling concept.
he's getting a decent salary, isn't he?
sure, he's earning less than brailsford et al., but how is that relevant?
i said i think clean cycling was his businessplan. and a respectable plan.
i never said it was his plan to make as much money as possible.

Particularly that there are teams that do not try and sell clean/cleanER cycling who get more sponsorship money.

indeed there are. so what?
how does that contradict the idea that jv tries to make money with a clean(er) cycling concept?
different men, different concepts, different salaries.
but decent salaries they all have.

 

[Ventoux Boar]

Imo having a "clean" sport image earns you more money as more money enter the sport, more people follow it.

Preaching a clean sport raise the paychecks across the board.

Also having the image of a clean team can go well in securing some sponsors that are afraid of bad publicity.

Cycling is not more doped than other sports. Just it made the "mistake" of exposing it's cheaters. Wealthy sports are "clean" so you either have a clean sport or you don't expose your cheaters.

Well put. Agree entirely.

 

[Netserk]

Here you go...

And where does he state that he pockets *all* the sponsorship money? He doesn't. That was your claim.

 

[Netserk]

"why does JV the great businessman go for a clean image and earn less?"

Please back up the highlighted claim.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

no it's not.
the reasoning is that he's a DS whose aim it is/was to earn a living for himself.
his businessplan was to do that by means of a clean cycling concept.
he's getting a decent salary, isn't he?
sure, he's earning less than brailsford et al.
is that relevant?
i said i think clean cycling was his businessplan. and a respectable plan.
i never said it was his plan to make as much money as possible.

indeed there are. so what?
how does that contradict the idea that jv tries to make money with a clean(er) cycling concept?
different men, different concepts, different salaries.
but decent salaries they all have.

Well logic would dictate that a good business plan would be to make as much money or profit as possible.

He gets paid to do his job, which is GM not a DS. Does he get more for cleaner, or have an additional revenue stream? The answer is no.
Not a very business like plan.

"why does JV the great businessman go for a clean image and earn less?"

Please back up the highlighted claim.

I already did with the link of team budgets.
His team earns less in sponsorship than most other teams.
Others view is that JV is "selling clean cycling"- when I ask how does he profit on this, they can only point to sponsorship, i.e. by their rational, he earns less.

 

[MarkvW]

Imo having a "clean" sport image earns you more money as more money enter the sport, more people follow it.

Preaching a clean sport raise the paychecks across the board.

Also having the image of a clean team can go well in securing some sponsors that are afraid of bad publicity.

Cycling is not more doped than other sports. Just it made the "mistake" of exposing it's cheaters. Wealthy sports are "clean" so you either have a clean sport or you don't expose your cheaters.

Cycling had to make that mistake because riders were dying in their sleep. A doped image might be bad for business, but dying riders...now that's really bad for business. :0

 

[Netserk]

Well logic would dictate that a good business plan would be to make as much money or profit as possible.

No it doesn't. Risk is also important.

And sniper never claimed that JV's plan was the best.

 

[Ventoux Boar]

Cycling had to make that mistake because riders were dying in their sleep. A doped image might be bad for business, but dying riders...now that's really bad for business. :0

Horrific. This is another personal ethical barrier a doping supremo/blind-eye turner has to overcome. Being prepared to cheat at games is one thing, but risking rider's health is another level.

 

[Netserk]

I already did with the link of team budgets.
His team earns less in sponsorship than most other teams.
Others view is that JV is "selling clean cycling"- when I ask how does he profit on this, they can only point to sponsorship, i.e. by their rational, he earns less.

No you didn't. Just because his team doesn't have the biggest budget, doesn't mean that his clean image has made him earn less. Please back up that statement.

 

[Gung Ho Gun]

Yet as far as we know, not a single rider reacted when Manzano almost literally dropped dead right next to them

 

[Netserk]

@Maserati

You still haven't addressed post #437.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

No it doesn't. Risk is also important.

And sniper never claimed that JV's plan was the best.

Risk is indeed important.
So when you sell "clean cycling" and yet you run a dirty team (as often alluded too) then you run a higher risk of ruining that image (bye bye sponsors) than a team that does not care if it has positives.

JV "earns" less than other teams, with a higher risk. Not a good business plan.

No you didn't. Just because his team doesn't have the biggest budget, doesn't mean that his clean image has made him earn less. Please back up that statement.

I asked how did JV earn more, the answer was sponsorship - please stalk the person who introduced that.

@Maserati

You still haven't addressed post #437.

I marked it as Return To Sender.