There Must be a Sponsor out there?

NervexProf

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_s ... 182399.stm

A multi world champion and Olympic Gold Medalist - and not a sponsor in sight! - scandal.

There must be many sponsors out there to back Nicole one of our stars - surely a trade sponsor would gain great exposure with some modest, yet solid financial backing?

mrushton

Simple truth - no money in UK womens cycling. Might be some in the US or Europe but here it's a minority sport along with kite surfing.

FJS

mrushton wrote:

Simple truth - no money in UK womens cycling. Might be some in the US or Europe but here it's a minority sport along with kite surfing.

you're right there, although the real difference is that in the UK men's cycling too is a minority sport with kite surfing, where it isn't in some of Europe.

I don't see an enormous difference here in the media attention male and female cyclists get, whereas the difference in say Flanders or Spain is huge: men's cycling every weekend live on tv and on the front pages, women's cycling tucked away with kite surfing.

Kléber

It costs a bit to pay for a whole team. Cooke might gain some coverage but only within the cycling world and maybe in Wales, but women's cycling gets as much coverage as badminton.

Why doesn't she join a European squad?

prawny

Kléber wrote:

It costs a bit to pay for a whole team. Cooke might gain some coverage but only within the cycling world and maybe in Wales, but women's cycling gets as much coverage as badminton.

Why doesn't she join a European squad?

I heard she had a load of offers after the Halfords thing went belly up but she wanted to run her own team and give something back, which is fair enough. I think she'll sign for someone else next year. Columbia like winners don't they?

BikingBernie

Before anyone flames me, I am just pointing out the way the world is, rather than the way we might like it to be, but this isn't all that surprising.

Sponsoring a whole team costs big money and Cooke simply doesn't have that 'extra something' above and beyond her wins that would make her involvement a big draw for sponsors. If she were a road racer Victoria Pendleton would be a much more ‘attractive’ proposition, if you get my drift, and just look at the exposure she has had over the last year. OK, so perhaps it is sad that physical appearance is so important, but on the other hand those who have it benefit to a degree that eclipses their sporting talents, like certain tennis players I could think of.

From what I have seen Cooke hardly crackles with wit and intelligence either. Again, just look how Pendleton has spoken out in a very intelligent way about the poor treatment cyclists get in the UK, and has got her comments into the national press. In comparison the only 'campaigning' comments I have see Cooke make were in support of making the wearing of polystyrene hats compulsory when riding a bike!

On top of that, all women's sport has the problem that sport is supposed to be about superlatives. Given that any decent male second cat could be up there in international women's road racing, the 'Wow, that's amazing' factor is bound to be lacking in women's cycling. And this problem affects many other sports in addition to women's cycle racing. Any sporting competition where the entry is restricted on the grounds that the competitors couldn't 'cut the mustard' in elite male sport, such as with competitions for junior and disabled athletes, doesn't get the same degree of coverage as would an elite men’s event.

I was a long time fan of Cooke's, admiring her gritty way of racing, but even I was disappointed when her saw her and the other women competitors in the Women’s Tour of Flanders. Despite the race being half the distance of the main event, in comparison with the men they just looked slow on the climbs and as I recall only averaged 23 Mph. It was a bit like watching Superbike racing on mopeds!

RichN95.

FJS wrote:

I don't see an enormous difference here in the media attention male and female cyclists get, whereas the difference in say Flanders or Spain is huge: men's cycling every weekend live on tv and on the front pages, women's cycling tucked away with kite surfing.

The Men have the Tour de France though. It gets quite a bit of attention here and gets good ratings for ITV4. Plus you don't see the women on TV much (World Champs only), while almost every Protour men's race gets some TV coverage.

FJS

RichN95 wrote:

FJS wrote:

I don't see an enormous difference here in the media attention male and female cyclists get, whereas the difference in say Flanders or Spain is huge: men's cycling every weekend live on tv and on the front pages, women's cycling tucked away with kite surfing.

The Men have the Tour de France though. It gets quite a bit of attention here and gets good ratings for ITV4. Plus you don't see the women on TV much (World Champs only), while almost every Protour men's race gets some TV coverage.

Granted, but it's nothing, absolutely nothing compared with the attention for men's cycling during the Tour de France and the rest of the year in most of the rest of Europe, let alone in Flanders or Spain. Whereas, on the other hand I really do not think women's cycling gets any more coverage in Belgium than in Britain. With the Olympics and Pendleton-oggling perhaps even less! The only women's races covered on Sporza, which brings hours and hours of live men's cycling more or less every weekend of the year on the equivalent of BBC2, are the women's world championships road race and cyclo-cross world championships. And even those often through highlights as I remember. That's about what we get on women's cycling here (track instead of cross).

BikingBernie

FJS wrote:

I really do not think women's cycling gets any more coverage in Belgium than in Britain. With the Olympics and Pendleton-oggling perhaps even less!

I wonder why anyone should want to 'oggle' Pendleton rather than Cooke?


vs.

mrushton

Womens cycling just isn't .....sexy. Strange because when I see Triathlon on TV, the ladies look great and ar working hard. OK, not as fast as the men but even so. It's just womens sports suffer because women do them. People would rather see the Mens tennis finals than the Womens etc. Someone I know who plays golf to a high level actually learns more from watching the Pro Women golfers as he says his ability is nearer to theirs than the leading male golfers.

Also that pic. comparison isn't fair. Cooke has just won the Olympic Gold after pulling her tripes out in the RR in a torrential rainstorm. VP has been photographed for the cover of a glossy mag with all that entails ie. lights,make-up,budget and airbrushing

BikingBernie

mrushton wrote:

Also that pic. comparison isn't fair. Cooke has just won the Olympic Gold after pulling her tripes out in the RR in a torrential rainstorm. VP has been photographed for the cover of a glossy mag with all that entails ie. lights,make-up,budget and airbrushing

Are you saying that Ms. Pendleton is actually a bit of a hound? :shock:

I think that it would take a bit more than make-up to make Nicole Cooke look feminine. Just check out those arms and that, ahem, 'chest'.

gabriel959

Such a shame to be honest - she might not have Pendleton looks but she is 10 times better athlete IMO. She works the whole year round to achieve being the best at her sport.

I personally think it is great though that a big personality like Cooke campaigns for the use of helmets.

Women sports don't sell - the only one that does is Tennis.

Nice photo of Cooke

prawny

BikingBernie wrote:

mrushton wrote:

Also that pic. comparison isn't fair. Cooke has just won the Olympic Gold after pulling her tripes out in the RR in a torrential rainstorm. VP has been photographed for the cover of a glossy mag with all that entails ie. lights,make-up,budget and airbrushing

Are you saying that Ms. Pendleton is actually a bit of a hound? :shock:

I think that it would take a bit more than make-up to make Nicole Cooke look feminine. Just check out those arms and that, ahem, 'chest'.

There was a profile on nicole cooke in one of the UK mags I forget which one and there were some great pictures of her, just in civvies she's quite pretty. Nice eyes and that.

prawny

And this is the one I was talking about before - nice eyes

BikingBernie

gabriel959 wrote:

I personally think it is great though that a big personality like Cooke campaigns for the use of helmets.

That make you, as well as her, a misguided fool...

BikingBernie

Fek! That's scarier than the one I posted!

As to complimenting a girl on her 'nice eyes', that's probably up there with telling a girl she has a 'nice personality'!

mrushton

BikingBernie wrote:

mrushton wrote:

Also that pic. comparison isn't fair. Cooke has just won the Olympic Gold after pulling her tripes out in the RR in a torrential rainstorm. VP has been photographed for the cover of a glossy mag with all that entails ie. lights,make-up,budget and airbrushing

Are you saying that Ms. Pendleton is actually a bit of a hound? :shock:

I think that it would take a bit more than make-up to make Nicole Cooke look feminine. Just check out those arms and that, ahem, 'chest'.

She is a road-racer and as such her physique is defined by that discipline. You don't see pro fat road cyclists. Big as in physique maybe eg Boonen. I'll assume you know that road racing involves burning fat (and a lot of it). the female breast is mainly fat so I'll let you join the dots. VP looks lovely, but her discipline gives her a different look (eg Chris Hoy is a different build to Thor Hushovd) and she is posing for a men's magazine. A pic like that costs a lot of money to produce in order to sell copies so the editors are going to do their best to glam her up. Anyone here know what that cover shot would cost in terms of production? Sad that on this forum, their ability seems to be judged on how they look - plus c'est change!

NervexProf

BikingBernie wrote:

Before anyone flames me, I am just pointing out the way the world is, rather than the way we might like it to be, but this isn't all that surprising.

Sponsoring a whole team costs big money and Cooke simply doesn't have that 'extra something' above and beyond her wins that would make her involvement a big draw for sponsors. If she were a road racer Victoria Pendleton would be a much more ‘attractive’ proposition, if you get my drift, and just look at the exposure she has had over the last year. OK, so perhaps it is sad that physical appearance is so important, but on the other hand those who have it benefit to a degree that eclipses their sporting talents, like certain tennis players I could think of.

From what I have seen Cooke hardly crackles with wit and intelligence either. Again, just look how Pendleton has spoken out in a very intelligent way about the poor treatment cyclists get in the UK, and has got her comments into the national press. In comparison the only 'campaigning' comments I have see Cooke make were in support of making the wearing of polystyrene hats compulsory when riding a bike!

On top of that, all women's sport has the problem that sport is supposed to be about superlatives. Given that any decent male second cat could be up there in international women's road racing, the 'Wow, that's amazing' factor is bound to be lacking in women's cycling. And this problem affects many other sports in addition to women's cycle racing. Any sporting competition where the entry is restricted on the grounds that the competitors couldn't 'cut the mustard' in elite male sport, such as with competitions for junior and disabled athletes, doesn't get the same degree of coverage as would an elite men’s event.

I was a long time fan of Cooke's, admiring her gritty way of racing, but even I was disappointed when her saw her and the other women competitors in the Women’s Tour of Flanders. Despite the race being half the distance of the main event, in comparison with the men they just looked slow on the climbs and as I recall only averaged 23 Mph. It was a bit like watching Superbike racing on mopeds!

Bernie - a bit harsh methinks.

Consider what Nicole has achieved: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicole_Cooke

Lets say you area Brand Manager - and want to promote a healthy living product, maybe a cereal, or an energy drink - commercial TV slots in prime time come in at £35k for a 30 second slot, and that is only for a UK domestic audience. Nicole's Olympic and World Champsionship win must have been exposed to a substantial world audience, for much longer.

Nicole is beyond doubt an outstanding athlete - and in my view deserves a worthy and committed sponsor. May she soon fine one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-Otf5JigvE&feature=fvw

afx237vi

BikingBernie wrote:

Before anyone flames me, I am just pointing out the way the world is, rather than the way we might like it to be, but this isn't all that surprising.

Sponsoring a whole team costs big money and Cooke simply doesn't have that 'extra something' above and beyond her wins that would make her involvement a big draw for sponsors. If she were a road racer Victoria Pendleton would be a much more ‘attractive’ proposition, if you get my drift, and just look at the exposure she has had over the last year. OK, so perhaps it is sad that physical appearance is so important, but on the other hand those who have it benefit to a degree that eclipses their sporting talents, like certain tennis players I could think of

I see what you're saying, and it's true in some cases, but how do you explain Paula Radcliffe? She ain't exactly a looker, yet she's managed to do exceedingly well in terms of endorsements and the like.

disgruntledgoat

BikingBernie wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

I personally think it is great though that a big personality like Cooke campaigns for the use of helmets.

That make you, as well as her, a misguided fool...

NO it doesn't... It means they both disagree with you which, despite your belief, is not the same thing.

Kléber

Radcliffe, she's managed a few wins in a well-televised sport at a time when almost no Brit, male or female, was capable of winning a medal.

It's all a bit harsh on Cooke, I think being an Olympic champ and World Champ is marketable. The trouble thought seems to be not just backing Cooke but paying for the whole team, you pay for near-anonymous riders and a support staff too when all a sponsor wants is Cooke.

mrushton

[

I see what you're saying, and it's true in some cases, but how do you explain Paula Radcliffe? She ain't exactly a looker, yet she's managed to do exceedingly well in terms of endorsements and the like.[/quote]

why does it have to be based on looks? It's about success and translating that success into a commercial vision. In a different arena, Gibson guitars used that guy from The Darkness,Justin Hawkins and Slash from GnR to sell Les Paul guitars (which they did v.well). I don't think the punters shelling out £1k for a guitar thought God, Slash/Justin is ugly, should I get one of these? They saw that vid of 'Sweet Child' and said 'I WANT SOME OF THAT'. People want to buy into perceived success which is why Slash saved Gibson from bankruptcy, Lance made Trek bikes huge and Oakley love seeing Cavendish cross that line.

Kléber

For female sport looks are part of the equation.

Selling Gibson guitars to middle-aged men is a very different proposition, it's about respect for the artists and trying to emulate them. Female sport is about glamour, health and body tone. A top-20 tennis player with platinum blonde hair and the right sort of cheekbones will earn way more than a top-10 player with bingo wings.

BikingBernie

mrushton wrote:

She is a road-racer and as such her physique is defined by that discipline. You don't see pro fat road cyclists.

I would suggest that Ms. Cookes' bra size' has a lot more to do with genetics. I have certainly seen plenty of very slender females, including athletes and cyclists, who are still 'curvy'. My own missus often complains that she looks like 'Two balloons on a stick'. She seems to think that this is a bad thing!

mrushton wrote:

Sad that on this forum, their ability seems to be judged on how they look - plus c'est change!

No one has judged anyone’s ability on the basis of how they look. Rather, it has been pointed out that the 'marketability' of female (and come to that male) athletes is in part dependent on how they look.

Anyhow, I can't see this thread lasting long. I am surprised that Cooke's awful 'competitive father' hasn't already appeared demanding that it be deleted.

BikingBernie

NervexProf wrote:

Bernie - a bit harsh methinks.

Maybe.

NervexProf wrote:

Lets say you area Brand Manager - and want to promote a healthy living product, maybe a cereal, or an energy drink - commercial TV slots in prime time come in at £35k for a 30 second slot, and that is only for a UK domestic audience. Nicole's Olympic and World Champsionship win must have been exposed to a substantial world audience, for much longer.

Unfortunately for Cooke she is still a 'cyclist', and thus a figure of derision for many British consumers, something which must also devalue her marketing potential. At least with regards UK sponsors unconnected with the sport.

Roscobob

afx237vi wrote:

BikingBernie wrote:

Before anyone flames me, I am just pointing out the way the world is, rather than the way we might like it to be, but this isn't all that surprising.

Sponsoring a whole team costs big money and Cooke simply doesn't have that 'extra something' above and beyond her wins that would make her involvement a big draw for sponsors. If she were a road racer Victoria Pendleton would be a much more ‘attractive’ proposition, if you get my drift, and just look at the exposure she has had over the last year. OK, so perhaps it is sad that physical appearance is so important, but on the other hand those who have it benefit to a degree that eclipses their sporting talents, like certain tennis players I could think of

I see what you're saying, and it's true in some cases, but how do you explain Paula Radcliffe? She ain't exactly a looker, yet she's managed to do exceedingly well in terms of endorsements and the like.

I dunno, like, I'd pump Radcliffe! :oops:

secretsqirrel

BikingBernie wrote:

mrushton wrote:

Also that pic. comparison isn't fair. Cooke has just won the Olympic Gold after pulling her tripes out in the RR in a torrential rainstorm. VP has been photographed for the cover of a glossy mag with all that entails ie. lights,make-up,budget and airbrushing

Are you saying that Ms. Pendleton is actually a bit of a hound? :shock:

I think that it would take a bit more than make-up to make Nicole Cooke look feminine. Just check out those arms and that, ahem, 'chest'.

Pendleton has no ahem t1ts either.

BikingBernie

SecretSqirrel wrote:

Pendleton has no ahem t1ts either.

I know, 'tis a crying shame...

eh

Thing you have to ask is why sponser a team run by Nicole Cooke? Very little coverage, and most of it comes from Cooke herself so why not save the cash and just sponser her alone?

I'm also dubious about Cooke's motives, knowing how controlling she is, seems abit of a mini-LA syndrome to me. Not sure how she thinks she can win big races and run a team.

stagehopper

BikingBernie wrote:

From what I have seen Cooke hardly crackles with wit and intelligence either. Again, just look how Pendleton has spoken out in a very intelligent way about the poor treatment cyclists get in the UK, and has got her comments into the national press. In comparison the only 'campaigning' comments I have see Cooke make were in support of making the wearing of polystyrene hats compulsory when riding a bike! !

Cooke has often spoken eloquently on the poor treatment of cyclists. Similarly on the gender inequality in cycling. Just take this article:

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/n ... roes-13196

(you might enjoy the section on doping)

stagehopper

Kléber wrote:

It's all a bit harsh on Cooke, I think being an Olympic champ and World Champ is marketable. The trouble thought seems to be not just backing Cooke but paying for the whole team, you pay for near-anonymous riders and a support staff too when all a sponsor wants is Cooke.

This is the crux of it. It's about team sponsorship not personal sponsorship where she's hardly lacking and has been backed by Nike, SRAM etc for years (and she has used those as leverage to help equip Vision 1 e.g. getting personalised Nike cycling shoes you the younger British girls in the team, SRAM Red on their Focus bikes).