• 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!

Team Ineos Discussion thread

Page 89 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
I guess they didn't have too much faith in the younger Britons after all.

"A major sponsor leaving the sport" is not a good thing, but it isn't, of itself, a bad thing. Especially when that major sponsor has enabled a team to become a marketplace killer which has had a detrimental effect on the spectacle to the extent that fans are turned away.

I think we ought to be more sad if a team like Lotto or Movistar, which have been around since the 1980s, folded, rather than a bunch of moneyed Johnny-Come-Latelys whose business model is based on pricing everybody else out of the game and repeating corporate jargon mantras running the risk of not having quite as much of a financial advantage anymore. HTC fell not because no backers could be found, but because no backers at the level Stapleton wanted, to keep the team going in its previous pre-eminent position in the péloton, could be found. It depends how keen Brailsford is to keep things going, and we will learn how toxic his brand has become - his PR may have taken a few blows but he's managed to rally it before. He may have to take a lower budget (and we'll see if his ego is willing to let this happen) or hold out longer than he'd like if he wants to find a backer that puts in sufficient funds to keep the team in their current pre-eminent position, but if the team take a lower budget and have to disperse some of the talent to other teams, that would create more competitive match-ups all over the cycling calendar and introduce brand new rivalries and oppositions that we've never seen before.

Or, another way, if the Emirati backers decided to leave Manchester City and instead sold it to another oligarch whose wealth was more like Abramovich's, would that really be that bad for the EPL? After all, they'd still have great players, they'd still have Guardiola, they'd just have a transfer budget more in line with everybody else. But more matches would likely be competitive as they'd not be able to just wave big bucks under the noses of other people's star players and buy whoever they want whenever they want. Would that really be a bad thing?
 
A title sponsor leaving is never fully a good thing. However, in this case it is a good thing as Sky has turned off many fans and sponsors from the sport. The ratings have dropped. This isn't US Postal bringing in more than than they are turning off. Great Britain doesn't have the population for that. The big question is: Is Brailsford willing to take a sponsor with a reduced budget or not? If the answer is no then it is highly likely the team folds. If he's willing to swallow his ego and take a sponsorship that is in the range of the other teams in the peloton then it is more likely the team will find a sponsor and survive. There are very, very few teams with a sponsorship deal at 20 million or higher. Even Movistar's team budget is less than that. Also can Brailsford over come the PR disaster the team has had for the past year plus. We will see what type of sponsorship they are able to find.
 
Re:

Libertine Seguros said:
I guess they didn't have too much faith in the younger Britons after all.

"A major sponsor leaving the sport" is not a good thing, but it isn't, of itself, a bad thing. Especially when that major sponsor has enabled a team to become a marketplace killer which has had a detrimental effect on the spectacle to the extent that fans are turned away.

I think we ought to be more sad if a team like Lotto or Movistar, which have been around since the 1980s, folded, rather than a bunch of moneyed Johnny-Come-Latelys whose business model is based on pricing everybody else out of the game and repeating corporate jargon mantras running the risk of not having quite as much of a financial advantage anymore. HTC fell not because no backers could be found, but because no backers at the level Stapleton wanted, to keep the team going in its previous pre-eminent position in the péloton, could be found. It depends how keen Brailsford is to keep things going, and we will learn how toxic his brand has become - his PR may have taken a few blows but he's managed to rally it before. He may have to take a lower budget (and we'll see if his ego is willing to let this happen) or hold out longer than he'd like if he wants to find a backer that puts in sufficient funds to keep the team in their current pre-eminent position, but if the team take a lower budget and have to disperse some of the talent to other teams, that would create more competitive match-ups all over the cycling calendar and introduce brand new rivalries and oppositions that we've never seen before.

Or, another way, if the Emirati backers decided to leave Manchester City and instead sold it to another oligarch whose wealth was more like Abramovich's, would that really be that bad for the EPL? After all, they'd still have great players, they'd still have Guardiola, they'd just have a transfer budget more in line with everybody else. But more matches would likely be competitive as they'd not be able to just wave big bucks under the noses of other people's star players and buy whoever they want whenever they want. Would that really be a bad thing?

first sentence...talking shite


thats plenty
 
Re: Re:

Axel Hangleck said:
rick james said:
A major sponsor leaving and people are happy..... some just want to watch the world burn

Cycling certainly attracts some idiots - many of them on here. In what possible way is a major sponsor leaving the sport good? Honestly.......it beggars belief..

You get the sport you deserve; maybe some would prefer steel frames, singlespeeds, woollen jerseys, etc
Sounds perfect to me! :D Fixed though...
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
Axel Hangleck said:
rick james said:
A major sponsor leaving and people are happy..... some just want to watch the world burn

Cycling certainly attracts some idiots - many of them on here. In what possible way is a major sponsor leaving the sport good? Honestly.......it beggars belief..

You get the sport you deserve; maybe some would prefer steel frames, singlespeeds, woollen jerseys, etc
Sounds perfect to me! :D Fixed though...
Fixed gear rider, may I introduce you to La Vuelta in the 21st century?
 
Re: Re:

Axel Hangleck said:
rick james said:
A major sponsor leaving and people are happy..... some just want to watch the world burn

Cycling certainly attracts some idiots - many of them on here. In what possible way is a major sponsor leaving the sport good? Honestly.......it beggars belief..

You get the sport you deserve; maybe some would prefer steel frames, singlespeeds, woollen jerseys, etc

As if the sport would be in the stone ages if not for the great contributions of Team Sky. The name calling doesn't contribute to the conversation either.

The primary implication in the positives that are stated that could result from Sky being potentially reduced in their deep pocket spending (10 riders at 1 million a year or more) is the chance of a distribution of talent to other teams instead of the hording and poaching that has been the recent norm.

If universally recognized as being hard enough to get sponsors in the sport what incentive is there for potential sponsors to take the plunge if there is an existing sponsor/team that has a significant financial advantage over the majority of other teams? The chance to compete is minimized and the entertainment value and predictability of the ultimate result is severely diminished. All of this obvious to some but with blinders on, others just can't see it or simply don't want to.
 
Re: Re:

rick james said:
Libertine Seguros said:
I guess they didn't have too much faith in the younger Britons after all.

"A major sponsor leaving the sport" is not a good thing, but it isn't, of itself, a bad thing. Especially when that major sponsor has enabled a team to become a marketplace killer which has had a detrimental effect on the spectacle to the extent that fans are turned away.

I think we ought to be more sad if a team like Lotto or Movistar, which have been around since the 1980s, folded, rather than a bunch of moneyed Johnny-Come-Latelys whose business model is based on pricing everybody else out of the game and repeating corporate jargon mantras running the risk of not having quite as much of a financial advantage anymore. HTC fell not because no backers could be found, but because no backers at the level Stapleton wanted, to keep the team going in its previous pre-eminent position in the péloton, could be found. It depends how keen Brailsford is to keep things going, and we will learn how toxic his brand has become - his PR may have taken a few blows but he's managed to rally it before. He may have to take a lower budget (and we'll see if his ego is willing to let this happen) or hold out longer than he'd like if he wants to find a backer that puts in sufficient funds to keep the team in their current pre-eminent position, but if the team take a lower budget and have to disperse some of the talent to other teams, that would create more competitive match-ups all over the cycling calendar and introduce brand new rivalries and oppositions that we've never seen before.

Or, another way, if the Emirati backers decided to leave Manchester City and instead sold it to another oligarch whose wealth was more like Abramovich's, would that really be that bad for the EPL? After all, they'd still have great players, they'd still have Guardiola, they'd just have a transfer budget more in line with everybody else. But more matches would likely be competitive as they'd not be able to just wave big bucks under the noses of other people's star players and buy whoever they want whenever they want. Would that really be a bad thing?

first sentence...talking shite


thats plenty

I'd be curious to hear what your thoughts are on the rest of LS's post.
 
Not surprised by the news after Comcast's acquisition. It remains to be seen if they manage to find a backer that puts up anywhere near the money that Sky were doing, my guess would be not. Though if they were to build a team around Bernal (and maybe Sosa), they wouldn't need anywhere near the domestique talent that have at the moment.

It seems they want a decision on 2020 before July next year, so the summer could be a very interesting free for all if the team folds.
 
Re:

Pricey_sky said:
Not surprised by the news after Comcast's acquisition. It remains to be seen if they manage to find a backer that puts up anywhere near the money that Sky were doing, my guess would be not. Though if they were to build a team around Bernal (and maybe Sosa), they wouldn't need anywhere near the domestique talent that have at the moment.

It seems they want a decision on 2020 before July next year, so the summer could be a very interesting free for all if the team folds.


Then add in several big name riders whose contracts are up at the end of 2019 as well. (Plus Movistar's contract is also up at the end of 2019, although I expect Mr Unzue will either resign them or have a new sponsor signed before the end of the year. Their budget is pretty much in line with the rest of teams.)
 
Re: Re:

Koronin said:
Pricey_sky said:
Not surprised by the news after Comcast's acquisition. It remains to be seen if they manage to find a backer that puts up anywhere near the money that Sky were doing, my guess would be not. Though if they were to build a team around Bernal (and maybe Sosa), they wouldn't need anywhere near the domestique talent that have at the moment.

It seems they want a decision on 2020 before July next year, so the summer could be a very interesting free for all if the team folds.


Then add in several big name riders whose contracts are up at the end of 2019 as well. (Plus Movistar's contract is also up at the end of 2019, although I expect Mr Unzue will either resign them or have a new sponsor signed before the end of the year. Their budget is pretty much in line with the rest of teams.)

it seems Movistar will re-up until 2021
 
Re: Re:

pastronef said:
Koronin said:
Pricey_sky said:
Not surprised by the news after Comcast's acquisition. It remains to be seen if they manage to find a backer that puts up anywhere near the money that Sky were doing, my guess would be not. Though if they were to build a team around Bernal (and maybe Sosa), they wouldn't need anywhere near the domestique talent that have at the moment.

It seems they want a decision on 2020 before July next year, so the summer could be a very interesting free for all if the team folds.


Then add in several big name riders whose contracts are up at the end of 2019 as well. (Plus Movistar's contract is also up at the end of 2019, although I expect Mr Unzue will either resign them or have a new sponsor signed before the end of the year. Their budget is pretty much in line with the rest of teams.)

it seems Movistar will re-up until 2021


Thanks.
 
Jun 30, 2014
7,060
2
0
Visit site
Re:

Jancouver said:
"Cyclingnews sources say that 10 Team Sky riders earn more than €1 million per season."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-to-closely-follow-team-sky-sponsorship-search/

Who can name those 10 millionaires?
Froome
Thomas
Wanker Poels
Bernal
Kwait
Rosa (3.5M overall for 3 years and he hasn't done a lot since signing with them, winning!)
I wouldn't be surprised if Castro and De la Cruz also earn Rosa level money
Rowe (has been their main guy for the cobbles)
Maybe Moscon, if he got a better deal when he resigned with them.
 
Re:

Pricey_sky said:
Not surprised by the news after Comcast's acquisition. It remains to be seen if they manage to find a backer that puts up anywhere near the money that Sky were doing, my guess would be not. Though if they were to build a team around Bernal (and maybe Sosa), they wouldn't need anywhere near the domestique talent that have at the moment.

It seems they want a decision on 2020 before July next year, so the summer could be a very interesting free for all if the team folds.

Why does it have to be one?
 
Re: Team Sky Discussion thread

King Of The Wolds said:
I think all are agreed that finding another, comparable commercial sponsor is going to be incredibly difficult, if not impossible. Other, smaller sponsors, with less budget, for the best team in cycling - yeah, almost a given. That said, Brailsford's ruthless ambition and sizeable ego isn't going to accept taking a backward step to mid-pack fodder.

I think there's 2 scenarios, either Brailsford leaves for pastures new and onto challenges outside of cycling and Team Sky ceases to exist (Brailsford is Team Sky, after all), or he can attract a non-commercial sponsor, i.e. some kind middle-eastern state sponsorship or wealthy cycling enthusiast who quite fancies the proposition of having Brailsford win him a TdF. Tinkoff anyone?

Saudi Arabia maybe?
 
Re: Re:

MatParker117 said:
Pricey_sky said:
Not surprised by the news after Comcast's acquisition. It remains to be seen if they manage to find a backer that puts up anywhere near the money that Sky were doing, my guess would be not. Though if they were to build a team around Bernal (and maybe Sosa), they wouldn't need anywhere near the domestique talent that have at the moment.

It seems they want a decision on 2020 before July next year, so the summer could be a very interesting free for all if the team folds.

Why does it have to be one?

I presume you are talking about one backer here?
Of course it doesn't, but either way I cant see them getting a package together that pays as much as Sky puts in each year.
 
Well, the news certainly created some publicity, and that might just have been its purpose during this off season time.
Could be a pure technicality created out of Comcast takeover which should be finalized during the next spring.
We'll see what is it all about..
 
Re: Re:

Mayomaniac said:
Jancouver said:
"Cyclingnews sources say that 10 Team Sky riders earn more than €1 million per season."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-to-closely-follow-team-sky-sponsorship-search/

Who can name those 10 millionaires?
Froome
Thomas
'custard' Poels
Bernal
Kwait
Rosa (3.5M overall for 3 years and he hasn't done a lot since signing with them, winning!)
I wouldn't be surprised if Castro and De la Cruz also earn Rosa level money
Rowe (has been their main guy for the cobbles)
Maybe Moscon, if he got a better deal when he resigned with them.
Sergio Henao?
Moscon almost has to be.
Dunno when Stannard last resigned but he was doing great on the cobbles a few years ago.

Castro I can definitely see, and DLC was brought in as supposed secondary leader for GTs.
 

TRENDING THREADS