• 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!

Eurosport commentary

Page 280 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Look at Euro 2024, who on earth are Hisense? basically a Chinese Samsung make electrical tech stuff, they've paid millions to be involved in this tournament, just because they get massive exposure from it.

They make cheap TV's. It feels like most supermarkets in France have been littered with football themed Hisense TV deals for years & years now.

On the topic of cycling's economic model, there was a delirious documentary on French tv recently about how cycling needs to go global or risk becoming irrelevant. It's a recurring theme which many pseudo experts seem to cling to like gospel (aka the tired old "the west is dying, the world is the future!" schtick). On the contrary, i.e. going 'global' (whatever that even means) would achieve one thing only: a dilution of the sport's actual character & cycling really would become irrelevant. The Tour de France for example is not for export. No France, no TdF! You can't just go & create a new race at the other side of the world with new audiences & peoples without a cultural base in this stuff & say "Ta-da, here's your new global cycling of the future!".

People won't watch it. Bean counters have been making the same mistake for years. It's like Hollywood pandering to the Chinese market with Chinese product placement & actors. It didn't work.

But they just don't learn (or they refuse to for whatever reason).
 
They make cheap TV's. It feels like most supermarkets in France have been littered with football themed Hisense TV deals for years & years now.

On the topic of cycling's economic model, there was a delirious documentary on French tv recently about how cycling needs to go global or risk becoming irrelevant. It's a recurring theme which many pseudo experts seem to cling to like gospel (aka the tired old "the west is dying, the world is the future!" schtick). On the contrary, i.e. going 'global' (whatever that even means) would achieve one thing only: a dilution of the sport's actual character & cycling really would become irrelevant. The Tour de France for example is not for export. No France, no TdF! You can't just go & create a new race at the other side of the world with new audiences & peoples without a cultural base in this stuff & say "Ta-da, here's your new global cycling of the future!".

People won't watch it. Bean counters have been making the same mistake for years. It's like Hollywood pandering to the Chinese market with Chinese product placement & actors. It didn't work.

But they just don't learn (or they refuse to for whatever reason).
The idea of expansion always requires new audience. Therefore there is always this assumption that the existing fanbase will follow the sport to wherever it goes and there will be no detrimental impact to the sport by reducing the number of events in its traditional heartlands where the majority of the fans are, plus they can tap into this huge potential market on top of it.

Of course, it doesn't work like that all the time, or in fact particularly often. Cycling has had several attempts to break into places like China, usually resulting in some dreary races seen as afterthoughts, broadcast at inconvenient times for the fans in the sport's traditional audience bases, and failing to really generate any local interest. Hell, even the sport's attempts to develop a US audience in this manner has hit against obstacle after obstacle, and that's a country which at least does have both successful enough riders to get the patriotic factor involved (I can't imagine many Chinese fans would have been as drawn into Wang Meiyin's 79th place in the Tour of Guangxi in 2019 as would be invested in the performances of a Sepp Kuss at any reinvigorated US stage race) and a long enough history in the sport to have an established viewership and fanbase.
 
Sport needs to realise putting their events behind a paywall won't attract new fans and therefore won't bring in more money.
A paywall will give you money right now, but it'll hurt you in the future.

tell that to the English Premier League, been stuck behind a paywall for 32 years. the combined tv rights deal is now worth nearly 7billion pounds.

those are the figures that the decision makers in cycling be they team owners or UCI, ASO etc etc look at and go yeah we want some of lucre
 
tell that to the English Premier League, been stuck behind a paywall for 32 years. the combined tv rights deal is now worth nearly 7billion pounds.

those are the figures that the decision makers in cycling be they team owners or UCI, ASO etc etc look at and go yeah we want some of lucre
The thing is, Football is never gonna lose that interest because of the vast number of people already into it.
 
I gave up watching the breakaway because it has started to become more about the personalities involved rather than the actual cycling, but Dan always stood out among those as being not interested in that part and just being a good decent commentator or pundit who wouldnt get sidetracked by any amount of bantz central and could actually describe the action on screen without hyperbole, which seems to be an increasingly lost art.

GCNs gain is Eurosports big loss imo.