Inner Peace said:
EDIT: Libertine Serguros - I found your comments interesting. I think sponsors have a huge incentive to find out where the best coverage for their brand is. They do all kinds of research. It's not just how many people turn on their TV to watch, as you suggested that measure is inadequate as women's racing is limited on television.
While this is true, TV coverage is one of the things that turns people into cycling fans. If I hadn't seen cycle racing on TV, and been keen enough to look up online about it, I wouldn't have known that a semi-Classic would be passing right outside my window when I lived in Germany a few years ago. Then I wouldn't have attended, wouldn't have caught the bug, and wouldn't be a big cycling fan. While the attendance for women's racing is poor, a lot of the time people who might want to attend don't have the opportunity to know it's even on. Admittedly, a lot of the race organisers don't help themselves; the Tour de l'Aude and the Giro del Trentino have made hunting for their results a very difficult and slow process, and fans are often reduced to hunting through the tweets of Anton Vos and the various teams to put together the results piecemeal. This makes the reward of finding the results not worth the effort of searching for them to many (kinda like when I gave up on dance music, because I'd be listening to 5 hours of radio to hear about 2 tracks I thought were worth my money). There isn't much money in organising the races, which means they can't promote them anything like as much as the men's events. Again, it's chicken and egg. Is the lack of money because of poor attendance and no demand? Or is the poor attendance and no demand because of lack of money and inability to promote?
But those companies do a tonne of market research and surveys and they look at what type of 'hits' certain niche areas get and decide to invest in that area. Hell, they could just take a 180k drive down the roads before/after a women's race to see the 'real' level of demand if they wanted... The fact that they haven't invested nearly as much in women's racing is an indicator that supply and demand is the true reason for this inequality of race coverage.
But then, a lot of the sponsors in men's cycling do so at a loss. Many do so simply because the CEO or some other higher-up is a cycling fan (see Discovery). The women's péloton, similarly, has some long-lasting sponsors such as Safi-Pasta Zara, who've been around for a long time. The Giro Donne will feature a stage finishing circuit that pulls laps around their factory as a means of thanking them, since RAI cover the Giro Donne and they'll get some TV coverage. There's TV coverage of the Giro Del Trentino up online actually, quite interesting to see. Also, you have Columbia, Cervélo and Lotto, who all have women's teams, plus Rabobank have Rabo Lady Force, a development team, and TopSport Vlaanderen have a women's equivalent. At least one of the Basque teams is tied to the Fundación Euskadi, which is also responsible for the management of the Euskaltel team. Of course, at the opposite end of the spectrum you have Team Sky, where Dave Brailsford will talk about technical prowess and skinsuits etc., and take the credit for Nicole Cooke's 2008 Olympic medal, but has no interest in a women's team even when Nicole personally goes cap in hand to him because her 2010 ride has fallen through. Some of the teams don't help themselves; apparently the managers of Equipe Nürnberger Versicherung had started acting on their 2010 budget before their sponsorship change to Skyter-Shipping had been finalised; Skyter pulled out, team fell apart, now being kept apart out of the personal finances of the manager and his son. Selle Italia-Ghezzi (semi-linked to Androni) fell apart last year because two of the DSes had a childish spat they couldn't resolve. They reminded me of Gogol's
How Ivan Ivanovich Quarrelled With Ivan Nikiforovich, if you've read that.
Also, some of the UCI's rather arbitrary laws do not help women's cycling at all. The 'stage races must have an average stage length of no more than 100km' rule, for example. Why must this be? The women have proven with the likes of the women's Ronde that they can comfortably handle more than that. The same goes for the track, where women do shorter pursuits and shorter TTs than men. You could point out that the lower power and slower pace in the women's events mean that time restraints should come into play, and I'd say fair enough. Women's tennis is best of 3 sets, while men's is best of 5, for example. But athletics sees (mostly) equality, with the heptathlon vs. decathlon the only clear example I can think of where the women do less.
In fact, maybe someone from cyclingnews can provide the data of the number of 'hits' the articles on women's racing get as a percentage of men's racing...
SERIOUSLY, CNFORUM MODS CAN YOU EASILY ACCESS THIS DATA??? - IT WOULD BE A GOOD INDICATOR OF THE LEVEL OF DEMAND FOR WOMEN'S CYCLING, PROPORTIONAL TO MENS. THANKS IF IT'S ACHIEVABLE
This should be achievable. I think it would be fairer to compare the hits to those of similarly rated races, i.e. mostly 2.2-rated and occasionally 2.1-rated events. As I've said before in these comments, I don't think anybody is advocating that we hype Trentino up above the Tour de Suisse or anything like that. But to stick it below the likes of the Tour de Beauce and the Tour of Małopolska is the debate. It's in being hidden below the likes of these that the disappointment for followers of women's cycling lies.
It's also interesting that everyone preaches the politically favourable argument that they are just as interested in the men's racing as the women's. That's interesting because i don't see these posters starting race threads about womens racing.. why hasn't anyone started pre-race threads for all the women's races/stages like Moondance and ACF94 do for the men's races?? supply and demand. that's why. don't preach the demand exists when it doesn't.
But I
do start articles and threads about women's races sometimes. I just don't do it
here, because the reaction will be poor. On some forums I've seen plenty of reason to discuss women's races. Here, there is none. I don't know if that's a result of location, of atmosphere, of the attitude to the sport of the site the forums are attached to, or simply the behaviour of the posters, but to talk about women's racing here, when few of us will ever get to see the races, and many just dismiss it out of hand, strikes me as futile. Which in turn, makes it not worth the investment for many sponsors, which in turn means the races don't make much money, which in turn makes the TV companies stay away, which in turn means it doesn't get discussed on forums, and it's a vicious circle.