Sky budget a "myth"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/ja ... down-under?
Warning - If you've not seen the results the link contains them.
So, Brailsford says the Sky budget isn't anywhere near as big as people say and they've only got the 6'th biggest budget.
I was under the impression the £30m figure included start up costs. If that figure was accurate you'd need to spread it out over the 5 years of the sponsorship. Even just taking the £2m for Wiggins from Garmin and 800k for his salary you're nearly at 3m which would be a sizeable chunk of a PT budget
Warning - If you've not seen the results the link contains them.
So, Brailsford says the Sky budget isn't anywhere near as big as people say and they've only got the 6'th biggest budget.
I was under the impression the £30m figure included start up costs. If that figure was accurate you'd need to spread it out over the 5 years of the sponsorship. Even just taking the £2m for Wiggins from Garmin and 800k for his salary you're nearly at 3m which would be a sizeable chunk of a PT budget
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
0
Comments
-
The budget figures never did sound right - as has been noted at length on here they're hardly a star-packed team yet so wages wouldn't be that high and it's not as if they're flying around in private jets - think they took Easyjet to Valencia.
Where they might have spent more than some teams is on the "peripherals" - team buses etc as part of the start up. I think the bit that's hard to gauge is their "technology spend" - all these wind tunnels, space age materials, inner chimp trainers etc.0 -
Of course £10 is a myth, £20 a myth £65m a myth bcause the truth is that there is no budget. Brailsford is lucky enough to run a priceless venture.0
