Dirty money in cycling.
BikingBernie
Posts: 2,163
As we all know, 'British cycling' has effectively jumped into bed, via a sponsorship deal carrying the 'Sky' TV name, with right-wing demagogue Rupert Murdoch. As ever, it seems that pro cycling never worries too much about where it get's its money from and the general attitude seems to be that no money is too 'dirty' to turn down.
Another example was the infamous Unibet outfit, whose sponsor cynically tried to circumvent European laws controlling the promotion of dodgy on-line Casino outfits by backing a pro cycling team. Other examples of 'dirty money' that I can think of include British American Tobacco's sponsorship of the 1995 and 1996 Tours of China and the sponsorship of a pro team by the dodgy French pyramid selling group Le Groupement, which had close links to the notorious Amway group in the US.
Can anyone give any other examples of pro cycling's taste for 'dirty money’?
Another example was the infamous Unibet outfit, whose sponsor cynically tried to circumvent European laws controlling the promotion of dodgy on-line Casino outfits by backing a pro cycling team. Other examples of 'dirty money' that I can think of include British American Tobacco's sponsorship of the 1995 and 1996 Tours of China and the sponsorship of a pro team by the dodgy French pyramid selling group Le Groupement, which had close links to the notorious Amway group in the US.
Can anyone give any other examples of pro cycling's taste for 'dirty money’?
0
Comments
-
How is Sky's money 'dirty'? My understanding of 'dirty money' is money obtained illegally. As far as I'm aware both Sky and News Corp make money through legal activities. You may not like Murdoch's politics, and you may not like Sky's product, but calling it 'dirty' money is just nonsense.0
-
Francaise des Jeux - Lottery is just a tax on the poor, innit?
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
I presume you think banks are far more ethical than other profit driven companies then0
-
Team RBS fronted by David Millar and Chris Hoy. Now that would be controversial!0
-
No fan of Murdoch here and his media empire, the way he and his family do business, well let's just say their success relies on crushing rivals and establising a monopoly, using parts of one business to subsidise another. But a media baron is a media baron.
Still, if you're talking about odd money, look no further than Astana for a current example. To my knowledge, opponents of Rupert Murdoch don't get assassinated but if you speak out in Kazakhstan, you risk death.
Katusha is a project backed by the Russian state, reasonably above board. But in the past, we had Roslotto. This team was allegded to be a front to allow some in Russia to get money out of their country and into Italy, possibly for the purposes of money laundering or at least putting it beyond the reach of others in Russia. Similarly, there has been speculation that some of the Columbian involvement in cycling saw some of the teams being funded by the narcotics industry.
And there was a small Dutch team sponsored by a brothel, the Sauna Diana team. The team owner Jan Siemens was an ex-pro with parents who... ran a brother in Holland. I seem to remember that for one year the TVM team lost its team bus and rented the Sauna Diana's large "Winnebago" bus for the team to ride the Vuelta.0 -
Bernie, sadly we don't need to cross the Channel to find dodgy sponsors. Look around here:
-La Française des Jeux: the State Lottery a.k.a. the idiot tax ('the greater the idiot, the greater the tax, etc')
So what have we here? Our government actually promoting gambling and addictive behaviour. Just another way of taxing the poor and gullible. Like is there actually a chance of winning something significant? One in 17 million? Er... Isn't that what we calll a scam?
-Cofidis: revolving credit company and one of the scummiest for that matter: 21.2% interest rate? Adjustable? Loan sharks. And will Stéphane Augé smash my fingers if I don't pay them back before the end of the week?
-BBox Bouygues Tel: A cellphone'n'internet company. Yuk. Tried their hotline the other day and felt like joining the Taliban. And Bouygues, isn't that the group owning that infamous television channel called TF1? Yeah, TF1, the biggest media in France, the one where the bosses and journalists popped Champagne when Sarkozy won the election two years ago? Wow, talk about ethical standards...
And tell me, why do various workers associations in various sectors of the economy keep petioning against AG2R's health insurance ? And why oh why do they never have my size at Besson Chaussures when I'm looking for a new pair of Kappas? And why would Agritubel hire CHristophe Moreau, now isn't that dodgy? I mean would you give a job to this man?
French pros should be ashamed of themselves for riding for such lousy sponsors. I just hope they'll never win anything. Er, actually they never win anything.0 -
I guess until The Guardian, Islington Council, Greenpeace, Amnesty International and Friends of The Earth begin stumping up about 50 million euros a year each to run professional teams we will just have to put up with those filthy capitalist running dogs doing it.0
-
Well put Echo. I couldn't believe the comments about Tesco in Cake Stop, saying that they just sell anything.
Have these people never been to a Carrefour?! Or for that matter Auchan?
And as for Bouygues? Worse customer service than Ryanair!0 -
"Dirty money"? To use the vernacular purrrr-lease! He doesn't make money through extortion or theft, he makes it by packaging and selling Premier League Football to people who want to watch it. Then sells advertising to go with it.
He's right wing you say? Oh my! Just because somebodies politics don't coincide with your own doesn't make them an evil person does it? I disagree with lots of your poilitcs, but i've never let it take me down the road of thinking you're a bad person.
Murdoch has not, it is reported, attempted to exercise any sort of editorial control over his publications/stations since the mid 90s and, it is reported, views Fox News as an embarassment. He is human you know...
Oh and his "Dirty Money" pretty much saved Rugby League as a professional sport in the UK, it's now thriving and attracting new fans."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
Interesting comments from some. Good knowledge.Contador is the Greatest0
-
A couple of great answers from Kléber and Echo. As to some of the other replies, should the BNP ever decide to get into pro bike racing, I feel the team will have some ready fans!
As to Murdoch not exercising 'any sort of editorial control over his publications'. He doesn't really need to given that he takes care to only install editors who know full well what the party line is.0 -
BikingBernie wrote:A couple of great answers from Kléber and Echo. As to some of the other replies, should the BNP ever decide to get into pro bike racing, I feel the team will have some ready fans!
As to Murdoch not exercising 'any sort of editorial control over his publications'. He doesn't really need to given that he takes care to only install editors who know full well what the party line is.
Hehe, good spot! By the way, your BNP comments are just silly. You do tend to have a "with me or against me" attitude. Just because people disagree with you doesn't make them wrong, right, racist or anything. The left doesn't have a monopoly on niceness. And you're a better debator than that."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
What about Herbalife? They're pretty much a multi-level pyramid scheme selling dodgy (borderline dangerous) food supplements. They've had various run-ins with the FDA, and been on the wrong end of a class action lawsuit about their illegal telemarketing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbalife#Controversies
They sponsor the points jersey in the Tour of California, co-sponsor the Toshiba continental team, and there was even some talk about them becoming the co-sponsor of Garmin before the Tour de France (when Contador was close to jumping ship).0 -
I'm not sure what you mean here. By 'niceness' I take it you mean empathy and compassion for others, perhaps along with a desire to protect the interests of minority groups who lack power, are marginalised or of a low status. Thing is such attitudes naturally follow from the basic tenets of 'leftist' thought and go hand in glove with such 'leftist' principles as a belief that wealth should be more equitably distributed in society, that hierarchical power is undesirable and so on.disgruntledgoat wrote:The left doesn't have a monopoly on niceness.
I would agree that some people with right-wing views can still be human in their outlook, but in general the tenets of right-wing thought, such as a belief in 'to the winner the spoils' status-seeking competitive individualism, a belief in the utility of hierarchism and inequality, a belief in nationalism rather than internationalism and so on all run counter to the promotion of compassion and empathy. Numerous psychological studies of the 'right wing' mindset have reached similar conclusions, ranging from the work of Theodore Adorno in the 1950's through to Bob Altemeyer today.
In addition, it could well be argued that the only thing that really differentiates say, a Daily-Mail reading Tory calling for benefits be taken a way from 'dole scroungers', and someone like Hitler arguing "Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live" is the degree to which the individual is willing to 'extend the logic' of their belief system.
Anyhow, perhaps you could explain to me how, in your view, 'niceness' is psychologically compatible with right-wing ideology?0 -
BikingBernie wrote:As to some of the other replies, should the BNP ever decide to get into pro bike racing, I feel the team will have some ready fans!
Right. So some people don't have any issues with Sky sponsoring a team, therefore they'd support a BNP team. Sky. BNP. The same thing. How had I not noticed before?0 -
BikingBernie wrote:A couple of great answers from Kléber and Echo. As to some of the other replies, should the BNP ever decide to get into pro bike racing, I feel the team will have some ready fans!
As to Murdoch not exercising 'any sort of editorial control over his publications'. He doesn't really need to given that he takes care to only install editors who know full well what the party line is.
Isn't it terrible when people who's opinions differ from yours are allowed a voice. Hopefully free speech and democracy will soon be a thing of the past and everyone will fall into line with your world view.
PS I like Sky TV.Twitter: @RichN950 -
P.s the following discussion of the link between traditional right-wing and 'Authoritarian' (here termed 'Fascist' ) attitudes is taken from 'The Authoritarian Personality' by T.W Adorno et al and printed in 1950.
…The general pattern we are investigating here is characterized by an all-pervasive feature. These subjects want no pity for the poor, neither here nor abroad. This trail seems to be strictly confined to high scorers and to be one of the most differentiating features in political philosophy. At this point, the interrelatedness of some ideas measured by the PEC [Political-Economic Conservatism] scale and certain attitudes caught by the F [Fascism] scale should be stressed. Abolition of the dole, rejection of state interference with the "natural" play of supply and demand on the labor market, the spirit of the adage "who does not work, shall not eat" belong to the traditional wisdom of economic rugged individualism and are stressed by all those who regard the liberal system as being endangered by socialism. At the same time, the ideas involved have a tinge of punitiveness and authoritarian aggressiveness which makes them ideal receptacles of some typical psychological urges of the prejudiced character…
The attitude of indifference to the lot of the poor together with admiration for rich and successful people sheds light on the potential attitude of the high scorers toward the prospective victims of fascism in a critical situation. Those who humiliate mentally those who are down-trodden anyway, are more than likely to react the same way when an outgroup is being "liquidated."0 -
Perhaps the point I was making was too subtle for you to understand. To clarify what I was saying, some on here have argued that as long as an organisation keeps within the law there can be no objection to them sponsoring a pro team on the basis that they are offering 'dirty money', and that no matter how distasteful someone’s politics might be, this is again no reason to oppose their sponsorship of a pro cycling team. Do you see the point I was making now?mwo wrote:Right. So some people don't have any issues with Sky sponsoring a team, therefore they'd support a BNP team. Sky. BNP. The same thing. How had I not noticed before?0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
Perhaps the point I was making was too subtle for you to understand. To clarify what I was saying, some on here have argued that as long as an organisation keeps within the law there can be no objection to them sponsoring a pro team on the basis that they are offering 'dirty money', and that no matter how distasteful someone’s politics might be, this is again no reason to oppose their sponsorship of a pro cycling team. See the similarity now?mwo wrote:Right. So some people don't have any issues with Sky sponsoring a team, therefore they'd support a BNP team. Sky. BNP. The same thing. How had I not noticed before?
Allow me to introduce to my good friend Freedom of Speech. I don't care how stupid, evil, wrongheaded or crazy your idea is, you can't ban people from expressing what they believe. Likewise, if you disagree with something, you don't solve the percieved problem by banning it.
Can you explain why the BNP shouldn't be able to, subject to coming up with the readies, sponsor a cycling team? Leaving aside whether somebody would take their money."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean here. By 'niceness' I take it you mean empathy and compassion for others, perhaps along with a desire to protect the interests of minority groups who lack power, are marginalised or of a low status. Thing is such attitudes naturally follow from the basic tenets of 'leftist' thought and go hand in glove with such 'leftist' principles as a belief that wealth should be more equitably distributed in society, that hierarchical power is undesirable and so on.disgruntledgoat wrote:The left doesn't have a monopoly on niceness.
I would agree that some people with right-wing views can still be human in their outlook, but in general the tenets of right-wing thought, such as a belief in 'to the winner the spoils' status-seeking competitive individualism, a belief in the utility of hierarchism and inequality, a belief in nationalism rather than internationalism and so on all run counter to the promotion of compassion and empathy. Numerous psychological studies of the 'right wing' mindset have reached similar conclusions, ranging from the work of Theodore Adorno in the 1950's through to Bob Altemeyer today.
In addition, it could well be argued that the only thing that really differentiates say, a Daily-Mail reading Tory calling for benefits be taken a way from 'dole scroungers', and someone like Hitler arguing "Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live" is the degree to which the individual is willing to 'extend the logic' of their belief system.
Anyhow, perhaps you could explain to me how, in your view, 'niceness' is psychologically compatible with right-wing ideology?
I don't believe that forcing people into an idealised model of a society, implemented top down for peoples own good is very nice. I beleive that letting people make their own decisions as to what they do with their money adn not hectoring, taxing and monitoring them into submission is nice. There you go.
Incidentally... Hitler you say? Planned economy.... Party membership required to work... A totalitarian is a totalitarian, you can cherry pick bits from the right or the left to suit your argument about any of them, but they invariably end up the same way, bread lines and gulags."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
BikingBernie wrote:Perhaps the point I was making was too subtle for you to understand. To clarify what I was saying, some on here have argued that as long as an organisation keeps within the law there can be no objection to them sponsoring a pro team on the basis that they are offering 'dirty money', and that no matter how distasteful someone’s politics might be, this is again no reason to oppose their sponsorship of a pro cycling team. Do you see the point I was making now?
No, but feel free to condescend to me some more
I didn't see anybody argue that. I did see it suggested that a legitimate business like Sky should be allowed to sponsor a team, despite politics of the owner or the editorial staff. Those politics are hardly as extreme as the BNP, so I don't think the comparison is valid.
Other than your own personal dislike of Murdoch's politics, why shouldn't Sky be allowed to sponsor a cycling team?0 -
Surely the present corporate, capitalist system offers the perfect example of 'forcing people into an idealised model of a society, implemented top down' ?disgruntledgoat wrote:I don't believe that forcing people into an idealised model of a society, implemented top down for peoples own good is very nice. I beleive that letting people make their own decisions as to what they do with their money adn not hectoring, taxing and monitoring them into submission is nice.
Do you really believe that in a world dominated by PR, advertising and the sort of corporate-owned media that Murdoch specialises in that people are really free to make their own decisions?0 -
BikingBernie is a master debater, providing knowledge, evidence and clear structure. You may not agree with his points (I do for the most part) yet he puts them coherently sans expletives etc.. My only slight issue is how everything seems to turn to politics!Contador is the Greatest0
-
Could you show me where I argued that Sky shouldn't be allowed to sponsor a cycling team? All I did was to point out that when it comes to pro cycling, anyone's money seems to be considered to be good enough to set up a team...mwo wrote:Other than your own personal dislike of Murdoch's politics, why shouldn't Sky be allowed to sponsor a cycling team?
P.s. Nor have I argued that anyones viewpoints should be banned!0 -
Oh my god. Never in my life have I read so much rubbish coming from one person's keyboard. Murdoch? Dirty Money?
I have nothing more to say on the matter.0 -
disgruntledgoat wrote:"Dirty money"? To use the vernacular purrrr-lease! He doesn't make money through extortion or theft, he makes it by packaging and selling Premier League Football to people who want to watch it. Then sells advertising to go with it.
I think that what you mean is that he takes football away from the fans and then sells it to those that can afford it. Now you have the situation where say, a pensioner who supported his/her local football club for decades can't go to matches and can't afford to watch it live in his/her own home, 'cos Murdoch is selling it to a load of Johnny-cum-lately gimps who think that spoon-fed "entertainment" and morons on a PA system is better than fans creating the atmosphere.
Aaaah, I feel a lot better now.
0 -
He'd do just the same with pro bike racing if he could and could make money by doing so!johnfinch wrote:I think that what you mean is that he takes football away from the fans and then sells it to those that can afford it. Now you have the situation where say, a pensioner who supported his/her local football club for decades can't go to matches and can't afford to watch it live in his/her own home, 'cos Murdoch is selling it to a load of Johnny-cum-lately gimps who think that spoon-fed "entertainment" and morons on a PA system is better than fans creating the atmosphere.0 -
BikingBernie wrote:Could you show me where I argued that Sky shouldn't be allowed to sponsor a cycling team? All I did was to point out that when it comes to pro cycling, anyone's money seems to be considered to be good enough to set up a team...
What was your point then? That Brailsford should have turned down Sky's money because Murdoch's a bit right-wing?
And anyone's money being good enough is hardly a situation unique to cycling. Cycling may have Kazakhstan, English football until recently had Thaksin Shinawatra. A man who makes Murdoch look positively cuddly.0 -
Evil man making all that money. Boo hoo hoo hoo hooBikingBernie wrote:
He'd do just the same with pro bike racing if he could and could make money by doing so!johnfinch wrote:I think that what you mean is that he takes football away from the fans and then sells it to those that can afford it. Now you have the situation where say, a pensioner who supported his/her local football club for decades can't go to matches and can't afford to watch it live in his/her own home, 'cos Murdoch is selling it to a load of Johnny-cum-lately gimps who think that spoon-fed "entertainment" and morons on a PA system is better than fans creating the atmosphere.
I'd hate to think what your take up of the financial industry is (especially the banks and their bonuses). At least you get something out of Murdoch.
I think the best bet for you is to move to 1980's Russia.I have nothing more to say on the matter.0 -
On the subject of Murdoch and the media - if any other product told lies - say food packaging labels, or misleading advertising, they could be prosecuted. Yet newspapers (right, centre and left) are allowed to get away with the most ludicrously biased reporting, and nobody says a word (well, apart from Bernie). Now, Im not suggesting any sort of restriction on freedom of speech, but maybe newspapers could be forced to carry a tagline - warning, what you are reading in here is propaganda based on advancing the cause of political ideology x, y or z. Do not forget to read critically.0
