Which suggests that the sponsorship situation might not be that rosy at the moment.
I will pray for a positive ending.
That would be positive in my book.you mean the teams stopping after 2023?
That would be positive in my book.
It's really not.I'd swap having 4 DSM-like teams in the peloton for Astana finally folding. DSM is more than fine
This is the DSM thread. You said DSM are more than fine. They're really not.even just for Clinic-related issues and oligarch money, DSM is better than Astana. ffs, Astana
You have no idea what you are talking about.If money is not good, people start to change their view on things.
A 20 year old has a contract with DSM, always was happy there. Then good results come, and his manager tells him he could earn a lot more at, let‘s say, Ineos - and immediately. The young guy feels like Pogacar, wants to move into a tax heaven and have a new house and car. Plus, his girlfriend expects expensive rings, watches, clothes, and so on.
Then maybe his manager tells him, „You‘re too good for DSM. You earn more elsewhere. Plus, I (manager) want a nice part of your future (hopefully big) income. So you better spit on DSM!“…
The rider gets confused, and finally decides ti leave DSM. He says: „It‘s all bad there!“. What he means, but doesn‘t say: „DSM is good, but the income there is not good enough.“.
So DSM in the end loses their riders, and their reputation gets damaged every time. They are considered a bad team - whereas I think they are actually great…![]()
You have no idea what you are talking about.
If there was a facepalm-emoji, I would use it to react to your post.If money is not good, people start to change their view on things.
A 20 year old has a contract with DSM, always was happy there. Then good results come, and his manager tells him he could earn a lot more at, let‘s say, Ineos - and immediately. The young guy feels like Pogacar, wants to move into a tax heaven and have a new house and car. Plus, his girlfriend expects expensive rings, watches, clothes, and so on.
Then maybe his manager tells him, „You‘re too good for DSM. You earn more elsewhere. Plus, I (manager) want a nice part of your future (hopefully big) income. So you better spit on DSM!“…
The rider gets confused, and finally decides ti leave DSM. He says: „It‘s all bad there!“. What he means, but doesn‘t say: „DSM is good, but the income there is not good enough.“.
So DSM in the end loses their riders, and their reputation gets damaged every time. They are considered a bad team - whereas I think they are actually great…![]()
DSM forbids to change it last minute, because in the preparation that saddle height was established. During that preparation the rider provides input. After the race you can discuss it again. To me this does makes sense. It might impact the result in that race (or not), but you will get information for the rest of the year.An example:
Rider A wants to lower his saddle, he believes it will relief some pressure on his back and allow him to push harder.
DSM forbids this.
Harry Sweeny in 2021, so not that long ago.Dinham is the first neo-pro to ride Tour de France since when?
The all-caps writing in that video is a bit annoying.View: https://twitter.com/TeamDSM/status/1671805223642300417
Dinham is the first neo-pro to ride Tour de France since when?