Tobacco sponsorship in cycling

[kelin2]

With the 4th edition of the UCI sanctioned Tour of Hainan (China) just completed, how come in this day and age can an International Cycling event have as one of its major sponsors one of China’s largest Tobacco manufacturers, “HONGTA GROUP”. Smoking in China kills 1,000,000 every year. It’s great to see the rise of cycling in Asia, but at what cost.

 

[Hugh Januss]

With the 4th edition of the UCI sanctioned Tour of Hainan (China) just completed, how come in this day and age can an International Cycling event have as one of its major sponsors one of China’s largest Tobacco manufacturers, “HONGTA GROUP”. Smoking in China kills 1,000,000 every year. It’s great to see the rise of cycling in Asia, but at what cost.

Like pro cycling can afford to be picky about sponsors right now?

 

[timmers]

Well to the best of my knowledge there are no UCI regulations regarding sponsors of events. So you should perhaps write to the organisers or the Chinese government asking them to enact anti-smoking legislation. Good Luck!

 

[auscyclefan94]

It's just a sponsor.
Look at the Amgen tour of California or Omega pharma Lotto. Having a gambling company in the sport could be looked upon badly but really it's just about the money.

 

[Murray]

It's just a sponsor.
Look at the Amgen tour of California or Omega pharma Lotto. Having a gambling company in the sport could be looked upon badly but really it's just about the money.

I think the difference is that pharma companies make drugs that actually do help people and gambling can be done safely in moderation (although, yes addiction is a problem).

On the other hand, smoking is harmful in any amount and causes a huge public health burden. Here in Canada there are strict rules restricting tobacco sponsorship of events.... likely to happen in China? Not really.

 

[Greg Johnson]

It's just a sponsor.

Rock up in the middle east with a Fosters or VB sponsorship and see how long it takes before you're escorted to the border. It's not 'just' a sponsor, it's an insult to an entire culture. You can ask for exemptions, but it's rare.

We've been asked to remove images of team members drinking champagne on podiums in other countries before, as it's such a disgrace in their homeland.

Regarding tobacco - it's banned in most places. There's a reason Marlboro was paying Ferrari $120 million a year and only getting eight white boxes in return. Sadly, that's also a reflection on how strong the brand association was at that time - they didn't need to display their name for everyone to know what it was.

Look at the Amgen tour of California

Erm, do you know what you're talking about? Smokes cause cancer, Amgen's business (some of it at least) is ridding cancer. Pretty big difference in social acceptance there.

Having a gambling company in the sport could be looked upon badly but really it's just about the money.

Yes, but if sporting federations were THAT socially concerned about the impacts of gambling, they would move to prevent companies from betting on their sport as well as banning those types of sponsorships. However instead many of them partner up and licence official betting partners. I don't know the stats, some will argue with me, but I'm confident the social and real costs of smoking is somewhat greater than that of gambling - but that's not to say the latter isn't an issue.

Cheers
Greg Johnson

 

[Ferminal]

With the 4th edition of the UCI sanctioned Tour of Hainan (China) just completed, how come in this day and age can an International Cycling event have as one of its major sponsors one of China’s largest Tobacco manufacturers, “HONGTA GROUP”. Smoking in China kills 1,000,000 every year. It’s great to see the rise of cycling in Asia, but at what cost.

It's a political issue.

Obviously there is no law in PRC to stop the sponsorship, so if they aren't sponsoring cycling, they're sponsoring/advertising somewhere else.

It's not exactly the role of sporting bodies. What happens if the FA says it's severing ties with Carling? It might seem like the moral choice, but for what reward? Governments need to make these big decisions.

 

[pedaling squares]

We have had this debate in Canada in the past few years. For a while, tobacco sponsorship was to be banned and we nearly lost events like the Benson & Hedges fireworks competition in Vancouver and our F1 & Champ car races.

Nobody like seeing tobacco ads splashed over athletic events, but the problem is that we are dealing with a substance that is legal in our countries. It might be a scourge on our societies that is killing many of us, but until it is made illegal it's hard for us to ask them not to advertise their product in an adult market. And I assume this is how it is in China.

 

[kelin2]

To Murray and Greg Johnson I agree with your comments.
F1 had to clean up its act regarding Tobacco Sponsorship.
It just seems to me to be a bit incongruous to have a sport which promotes a healthy way of life to be promoted by a tobacco company. It is why I still enjoy cycling even after 30 years of retirement from competitive racing.
And yes it is political, China has actually signed the “WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control” which puts them on a timetable to introduce such things as smoking bans in hospitals, government buildings and to implement quit smoking programs. Although TV advertising is banned in China, huge billboards promoting cigarettes and tobacco companies are everywhere. The HONGTA group proudly boast on their website how much money they donate to primary schools etc. Sure Chinese schools needs all the money they can get but they don’t need to have Tobacco company quasi advertising onto primary school aged children. (I am currently studying in China if people are wondering).
I think sporting bodies do have a role in deciding who they accept sponsorship from in promoting the development of their sport. Basically the reason for my original post. Whilst I congratulation the UCI for promoting cycling in Asia they should take a leading role in deciding which sponsorship to take. (“UCI to take a leading role”- did I really say that).
For a while there I thought the only answers I was going to get were, Take the sponsorship money from where ever it came. Would auscyclefan94 like to see the SunTour sponsored by the Moran brothers of Melbourne’s underworld fame (oh I forgot, haven’t they both been shot).
Cheers

 

[Dodger]

Surely the answer is because its China. As a world we do tend to turn a blind eye to these sorts of things, pretend they are not happening as it were.

 

[sandman]

A sponsor is a sponsor. While Tobacco sponsorship in cycling does not make any sense in cycling, it did make some sense in F1.

Not all F1 fans are health obsessed, skinny fellas.

As for the whole smoking debate, I agree that smoking kills people and is a dangerous substance. Everything in moderation is ok though.

Don't think that your commuting/riding/jogging throughout city limits or in congested areas is any better then inhaling cigarette smoke.

Anti-smoking fanatics are almost worst then feminist and religious pushers these days...

 

[Andrichuk]

Smoking opens the lungs!!!!!

 

[auscyclefan94]

Rock up in the middle east with a Fosters or VB sponsorship and see how long it takes before you're escorted to the border. It's not 'just' a sponsor, it's an insult to an entire culture. You can ask for exemptions, but it's rare.

We've been asked to remove images of team members drinking champagne on podiums in other countries before, as it's such a disgrace in their homeland.

Regarding tobacco - it's banned in most places. There's a reason Marlboro was paying Ferrari $120 million a year and only getting eight white boxes in return. Sadly, that's also a reflection on how strong the brand association was at that time - they didn't need to display their name for everyone to know what it was.



Erm, do you know what you're talking about? Smokes cause cancer, Amgen's business (some of it at least) is ridding cancer. Pretty big difference in social acceptance there.



Yes, but if sporting federations were THAT socially concerned about the impacts of gambling, they would move to prevent companies from betting on their sport as well as banning those types of sponsorships. However instead many of them partner up and licence official betting partners. I don't know the stats, some will argue with me, but I'm confident the social and real costs of smoking is somewhat greater than that of gambling - but that's not to say the latter isn't an issue.

Cheers
Greg Johnson

Greg, I do know what you are talking about here, i was just making the point that some organisers of races and team sponsors only see those drrug companies as sponsors for money. They just see it just as a sponsor, but others looking from the outside in would say that having Omega Pharma and Amgen in a sport which has had a lot of doping problems, gives out a wrong/bad message for cycling.
I may have worded the first post badly.

 

[Lifeshape]

Not an advocate for any drug use...

Smoking opens the lungs!!!!!

In the paraphrased words of Bridget Fonda's character in Jackie Brown, "...smoking and coughing are good for you. It opens your lungs and you get higher."

Not to mention the coping mechanisms needed for chinese carbon bike frame builders. A shame to be sure.

 

[dolophonic]

William Hill sponsored the Veulta this year, they are a bookmaker.
Either smoking is legal or not that should be the issue.