Hopefully, this will turn out to be as ridiculous a rumour as the Evenepoel-to-Ineos one.
Polti & Tudor should be safe for the 2024 Giro d'Italia. Especially Tudor, due to their sponsorship of the race and since they've added Dainese & Storer to their roster!
But is that not the difference between a merger and a takeover? In a true merger, the assets and responsibilities of both parties remain. Where there is duplication, the new combined entity either has excess assets to sell, or financial resposibility for resources that it cannot use or contracts that it no longer needs, so disruption follows, but the merged entity decides which to retain and which to discard.I don't know their contracts and I doubt you do either?
But if you have a contract with X and X becomes Y, then legally it seems Y is a new entity. I am reaching here, but you catch my drift I think.
1: Patrick Lefevere was spotted at the Jumbo-Visma service course on Monday
2: Jumbo-Visma and Specialized representatives were spotted meeting each other in Breda yesterday.
Use twitter.com instead of x.com.daaaamn why can’t I get the Twitter embed to work…
This guy saw Jumbo and Specialized:I'd like to know the source
The legal entity that owns the UCI license and has Soudal as an advertising partner need not disband just because it gives up a UCI license.It all hangs off the paying agent. Essentially a merger isn't technically possible. One team is disbanded completely because the UCI rules do not allow one merged team to have two paying agents afaik.
Of course they disband, there's one licence owner and one paying agent that either registers the team and contracted riders for the following season or they don't. If they don't, the number of UCI world tour teams is 1 team less. Individual contracts from the disbanded team can of course be renegotiated with the paying agent absorbing them though obviously, but many contracts are also made invalid so those riders are free to search for new teams.The legal entity that owns the UCI license and has Soudal as an advertising partner need not disband just because it gives up a UCI license.
Some riders have individual sponsorships that supplement or compose the majority of their salary. Wout wears that awful helmet for example. So I don't think it's a problem if a lot of your salary comes from somewhere outside a UCI team. (Sort of an exploitable loophole for all those rider salary protections the UCI attempts to enforce, but then what UCI regulation doesn't have a loophole?)