The Goose That Laid The Golden Egg . . .

[sartain]

This is one of the main reason why some of the powers that be in the sport of cycling do not want the truth exposed . . . it's all about the MONEY!

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/armstrongs-comeback-boosts-the-tour-de-france-profits

 

[Kodiak]

is this where we're supposed to be surprised????

 

[Benotti69]

This is one of the main reason why some of the powers that be in the sport of cycling do not want the truth exposed . . . it's all about the MONEY!

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/armstrongs-comeback-boosts-the-tour-de-france-profits

bit of creative accounting going on there i imagine..

imagine how much more it could be if the sport was clean and run by professionals.

 

[BotanyBay]

This is one of the main reason why some of the powers that be in the sport of cycling do not want the truth exposed . . . it's all about the MONEY!

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/armstrongs-comeback-boosts-the-tour-de-france-profits

Mookie always say: I gots ta gets paid.

 

[Berzin]

Now some of you may begin to understand the importance of having Contador at next year's Tour.

If he's banned, it's going to be a promenade for Andy Schleck. People don't want to see this-they want to see these two riders challenge each other like they did this year.

Without the drama, ratings and profits will drop.

 

[flicker]

Now some of you may begin to understand the importance of having Contador at next year's Tour.

If he's banned, it's going to be a promenade for Andy Schleck. People don't want to see this-they want to see these two riders challenge each other like they did this year.

Without the drama, ratings and profits will drop.

Oh finally some sanity. Still Basso will challange Schleck. Liquigas is still the best stage racing team.. Of course my Lord Armstrong could come out of retirement as well as Botero, Rico Sella etc. folks who do so much for cycling unlike the haters.

 

[hrotha]

Okay, I've read the article several times and it still makes absolutely no sense to me.

The seven-time Tour winner and ASO often had a difficult relationship but Armstrong’s return to the Tour de France helped add $32 million to the company’s turnover as Skoda, Orange and other companies renewed their sponsorship.

The Bloomberg news agency claims to have seen an email of ASO’s filing to a company registry in Nanterre, France. It reports that sales from ASO’s sporting events, which includes the former Paris-Dakar rally, the Paris marathon and their other cycling races, rose 20% to 145.2 million euros ($195.4 million). The Tour’s global television audience increased 10 percent although net income fell 1.2% to 31.8 million euros.

Seriously, what? Honestly the only figure that seems relevant to me is the 10% audience increase.

 

[roundabout]

Are this the 2009 accounts? Wasn't the Dakar canceled in 2008?

 

[thehog]

Okay, I've read the article several times and it still makes absolutely no sense to me.

Seriously, what? Honestly the only figure that seems relevant to me is the 10% audience increase.

Yes thats a profit at a net income loss! No wonder the world in in recession with math like this.

Lance increased profit whilst they lost money. How can this article even begin to be serious.

Cyclingnews shame on you for the gratuitous reprint and to the other posters for not reading it and picking up on the fact.

 

[Polish]

Now some of you may begin to understand the importance of having Contador at next year's Tour.

Without the drama, ratings and profits will drop.

Drama?
How about Drama Queen meow.

The TdF crowds have already shown how much they like Mr Bang Bang....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-wNgH0VJuA

Fans used to spit on Lance until they came to their senses.
But he still attracted huge crowds even back then.

Will Alberto handle the hate as well as Lance did?
Will Vino encourage a HUMO Part 2 come June2011?

Anyway, the Tour would be ok without Alberto.
(UNIBET is giving the odds without Alberto)

Best finishing position without Contador
No refunds on non-starters. Others on request.

Schleck, Andy 1.85
Nibali, V 10.00
Basso, I 12.00
Menchov, D 13.00
Schleck, Frank 13.00
Evans, C 15.00
Gesink, R 20.00
Sanchez, S 20.00
Brajkovic, J 35.00
Van den Broeck, J 35.00
Wiggins, B 35.00
Kreuziger, R 40.00
Rodriguez, J 40.00
Vinokourov, A 40.00
Klöden, A 50.00
Leipheimer, L 50.00
Pellizotti, F 50.00
Karpets, V 100.0
Martin, Tony 100.0
Rogers, M 100.0

 

[BotanyBay]

Now some of you may begin to understand the importance of having Contador at next year's Tour.

If he's banned, it's going to be a promenade for Andy Schleck. People don't want to see this-they want to see these two riders challenge each other like they did this year.

Without the drama, ratings and profits will drop.

Simple solution:

 

[The Hitch]

Now some of you may begin to understand the importance of having Contador at next year's Tour.

If he's banned, it's going to be a promenade for Andy Schleck. People don't want to see this-they want to see these two riders challenge each other like they did this year.

Without the drama, ratings and profits will drop.

Solution. Make sure Schleck isnt there. Luxemburg may be passionate but their not htat big (sorry Christian). Having Basso vs Samu vs Menchov vs Cuddles = Italy vs Spain vs Russia vs Australia.

More interest, mo money better racing, everyones happy.

 

[Oldman]

Now some of you may begin to understand the importance of having Contador at next year's Tour.

If he's banned, it's going to be a promenade for Andy Schleck. People don't want to see this-they want to see these two riders challenge each other like they did this year.

Without the drama, ratings and profits will drop.[/QUOTE]

So? Are we paying for false drama and accepting it like WWF fans?

 

[Hugh Januss]

Drama?




Anyway, the Tour would be ok without Alberto.

Originally Posted by UNIBET
Best finishing position without Contador
No refunds on non-starters. Others on request.

Schleck, Andy 1.85
Nibali, V 10.00
Basso, I 12.00
Menchov, D 13.00
Schleck, Frank 13.00
Evans, C 15.00
Gesink, R 20.00
Sanchez, S 20.00
Brajkovic, J 35.00
Van den Broeck, J 35.00
Wiggins, B 35.00
Kreuziger, R 40.00
Rodriguez, J 40.00
Vinokourov, A 40.00
Klöden, A 50.00
Leipheimer, L 50.00
Pellizotti, F 50.00
Karpets, V 100.0
Martin, Tony 100.0
Rogers, M 100.0

(UNIBET is giving the odds without Alberto)

OK? With those relative odds it's gonna be riveting. Hold on to your hats guys this could go right down to the 5th or 6th stage!

 

[patricknd]

Now some of you may begin to understand the importance of having Contador at next year's Tour.

If he's banned, it's going to be a promenade for Andy Schleck. People don't want to see this-they want to see these two riders challenge each other like they did this year.

Without the drama, ratings and profits will drop.

He cheated. He is at fault. You want to sweep that under the rug for ratings? Do you work for the uci, by chance?

 

[BikeCentric]

Yes thats a profit at a net income loss! No wonder the world in in recession with math like this.

Lance increased profit whilst they lost money. How can this article even begin to be serious.

Cyclingnews shame on you for the gratuitous reprint and to the other posters for not reading it and picking up on the fact.

Yes, Net Income = (Revenue - Expenses). So they reported a Revenue increase from the Le Tour yet somehow they've spent more than they brought in so the actual reality is that they lost money with the Uniballer back in the race. We're not given any information on what those expenses were so all we can do is speculate. I'd be willing to speculate that they didn't spend more money on drug testing, ho ho ho!

My bet is that ASO was a little too hopefull of the "Hope Rides Again" campaign and they spent too much in advertising to hype the return of the Uniballer. And then while they admittedly did get an increase in Revenue from Sir Lancelot's return they didn't make enough to cover their outlays.

I certainly won't be watching the Tour next year to watch the snoozefest that will be Andy the whiner dropping Vince the diesel climber who just might be able to not lose by a lot because of his TT'ing skills. The Italian Cadel Evans?!

 

[BikeCentric]

He cheated. He is at fault. You want to sweep that under the rug for ratings? Do you work for the uci, by chance?

Trust me, he doesn't, not that he needs me to speak for him. Berzin is just pointing out the reality of why the UCI protects its star riders.

 

[dsut4392]

Yes, Net Income = (Revenue - Expenses). So they reported a Revenue increase from the Le Tour yet somehow they've spent more than they brought in so the actual reality is that they lost money with the Uniballer back in the race. We're not given any information on what those expenses were so all we can do is speculate. I'd be willing to speculate that they didn't spend more money on drug testing, ho ho ho!

Perhaps it's pedantic of me to say so, but "the actual reality is that they lost money with the Uniballer back in the race" is a patent falsehood. The most that you could really say is that "the costs of the race this year, including the costs associated with the Uniballer's participation, increased more than the revenue earned from the race". ASO still made a tidy net profit after all...

No doubt some of the extra expenses were spent fueling the uniballer bandwagon, but "employing more people, and paying each of them more money than last year" would rank at the top of my list of speculation as to how money disappears from an organisation's bottom line.

I'd be the first to entertain the argument that his Lanceness hasn't been good for the sport of cycling, but the business of cycling is a different matter...

 

[Hugh Januss]

Trust me, he doesn't, not that he needs me to speak for him. Berzin is just pointing out the reality of why the UCI protects its star riders.

Yeah, don't worry 10 of us would have jumped all on his fanboy **** if we thought he was serious.

 

[patricknd]

Yeah, don't worry 10 of us would have jumped all on his fanboy **** if we thought he was serious.

would that be on or up ?

 

[BikeCentric]

Perhaps it's pedantic of me to say so, but "the actual reality is that they lost money with the Uniballer back in the race" is a patent falsehood. The most that you could really say is that "the costs of the race this year, including the costs associated with the Uniballer's participation, increased more than the revenue earned from the race". ASO still made a tidy net profit after all...

Whoops, you're right, I didn't phrase my post properly. The quote from the article I was referring to was this:

The Tour’s global television audience increased 10 percent although net income fell 1.2% to 31.8 million euros.

So you're quite right, net income was still positive and they quite certainly made a tidy profit. I stated that "they actually lost money" when I clearly should have stated that net income actually decreased from the prior year despite the prescence of our everyman single-balled hero.

Regardless it was poor phrasing to the point of being WRONG and I will certainly admit it and take my lumps when I am wrong.

 

[D-Queued]

....

...I will certainly admit it and take my lumps when I am wrong.

You are so not cut out to be in the pro peloton or to ever consider a job at the UCI.

Dave.

 

[simo1733]

Now some of you may begin to understand the importance of having Contador at next year's Tour.

If he's banned, it's going to be a promenade for Andy Schleck. People don't want to see this-they want to see these two riders challenge each other like they did this year.

Without the drama, ratings and profits will drop.

Under current UCI rules the best that Contador can hope for is a ban reduced to 12 months.That is not to say that the UCI will follow their own rules of course.

 

[movingtarget]

I have doubts about Basso making the podium at next year's TDF even if he is not riding the Giro.

 

[Angliru]

Yes thats a profit at a net income loss! No wonder the world in in recession with math like this.

Lance increased profit whilst they lost money. How can this article even begin to be serious.

Cyclingnews shame on you for the gratuitous reprint and to the other posters for not reading it and picking up on the fact.

Yeah, I saw that too and it all left me rather puzzled about what was the point of posting the article with the chosen headline. In the end they lost money but that's a good thing?