Why are Radioshack sponsoring a team

iainf72

This is not a Lance baiting thread or anything.

Have a read of this blog

http://alphafound.wordpress.com/2010/01 ... ling-team/

Some pretty interesting stuff. I can believe just being associated with Lance makes good business sense but it doesn't look like the Shack are exploiting it?

It's the same with Sky - I really don't understand why they're sponsoring a team.

VinceEager

lance owns a majority stake in radioshack and their sponsership of the racing team is a way of reducing capital gains liability....

lance gets to fund the source of his primary revenue (sports pursuits) with a tax free income.
































(maybe - i sort of made this up).

mrushton

Why does anybody sponsor anything. Hopefully to raise awareness of the sponsor. When Fassa Bortolo sponsored a team, the company were a small Italian cement company. At the end, that company had 20% of the European market. Everytime a Sky rider appears on a rival channel, it's 'free' advertising for Sky on a rival channel

iainf72

According to the boys on the Real Peloton podcast some people inside Sky are a bit confused they're sponsoring a team. Sounds like they went after rights but it didn't work out.

I'm down with brand awareness but is there anyone in the UK who's not heard of Sky?

cougie

Its all good PR for Sky isnt it - look at their cycle ride events - maybe people get to associate SKY with good things rather than a capitalistic pig dog Murdoch venture ?

Theres all sorts of odd sponsorships going on - apparently the US postal service did have products that europeans could buy, and what about ONCE - the blind charity ?

I cant see that Sky messed up on their sponsoring - you dont go in for rights and come out with a pro team and a red face - its not a contract signed in a bar exactly is it ? Just because some people in Sky dont understand - doesnt mean it doesnt make sense to the relevant people who hooked it up ?


I did buy QuickStep flooring when it was a choice between them and someone else that I hadnt heard of - so I'm sure my purchase kept Museeuw and co on the road for some small amount of time. As flooring goes, er its good.

Ooh must dash - Simpsons are on....

disquieting_museeuws

cougie wrote:

Its all good PR for Sky isnt it - look at their cycle ride events - maybe people get to associate SKY with good things rather than a capitalistic pig dog Murdoch venture ?

I think that's probably it essentially; I think they've seen all the 30-50's with disposable income doing sportives as well as the large numbers of occasional cyclists who have some notion of linking fitness / outdoor activities with leisure time and therefore the spending of money (I think there are more bikes than cars in the UK). The awareness brought about by Lance and the British Olympic successes has added to the potential for cycling as a marketing locus. I think the efficient-but-dull ethos of Brailsford & British Cycling fits with Sky's own broadcasting style and is intended to appeal to the professional classes; I guess Sky are not just selling dishes to football fans these days but want the whole mainstream 'lifestyle' internet / mobile phone, etc. market as well. Plus there's the marketing to the rest of Europe via cycling.

Who knows - it would be fascinating to be a fly on the wall at a Sky marketing meeting!

Slapshot

A few years ago Sky had limited market in Europe due to the licensing of viewing cards but I know this has changed however their market share is very low. Could be they are pushing brand outside the UK.

andyp

Slapshot wrote:

A few years ago Sky had limited market in Europe due to the licensing of viewing cards but I know this has changed however their market share is very low. Could be they are pushing brand outside the UK.

Sky can't broadcast in the majority of countries in Europe as they don't have the rights to do so. As far as I'm aware the only European country other than the UK that they have a presence in is Italy.

You can get Sky broadcasts in Europe, assuming you have the right equipment, but your account must be registered to a UK address, i.e. you're not technically a subscriber in the country your receiving in.

I tend to agree with Iain, I don't understand what Sky are hoping to achieve by pouring such vast sums of money into cycling. By all accounts they were looking to invest in a sport and tennis was their original choice but they chose cycling. My hunch is that it's to do with their subscriber base. Without wanting to sound like an outrageous snob, I'm guessing that the demographic of their subscriber base is low to middle income homes. By choosing a sport like tennis or cycling maybe they are looking to attract more middle to high income subscribers? I don't know, it still perplexes me.

RichN95.

iainf72 wrote:

I'm down with brand awareness but is there anyone in the UK who's not heard of Sky?

Everyone's heard of Coca-Cola, but they spend over $1 billion on advertising a year, despite having only a handful of products. Why? I don't know, it's not my field of expertise.

I think Sky are interested in selling their broadcast platform (Sky+ HD), here and abroad, rather than their actual channels. I have the Sky channels, but via Virgin - I think they'd like to get to the likes of me.

And going back to the original post. Business Week rate Armstrong as no. 10 in the most marketable athletes in USA - so that's why RS are backing him.

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/10/01/0126_power_100/11.htm

Tusher

Sky covering Wimbledon (shudder)

Apparently, 3% of households in the UK so not own a television set, and this percentage is growing, slowly but steadily.

ratherbeintobago

As I understand it, a large chunk of the Sky budget will be coming from Sky Italia, where cycling is obviously bigger business.

There are many undesirable things about Rupert Murdoch, but he is [strike]the antichrist[/strike] no fool and there will be good reasons behind the basing of the team in the UK, Brailsford being one.

Andy

iainf72

RichN95 wrote:

Everyone's heard of Coca-Cola, but they spend over $1 billion on advertising a year, despite having only a handful of products. Why? I don't know, it's not my field of expertise.

I think Sky are interested in selling their broadcast platform (Sky+ HD), here and abroad, rather than their actual channels. I have the Sky channels, but via Virgin - I think they'd like to get to the likes of me.

Coca Cola have a repeat business product though. I've got Sky HD, pay my subs every month but they can't sell me anything additional really (aside from PPV content I suppose)

Maybe they're concerned about Free Sat?

If it's to get more market share in Italy that makes sense. But you'd think they'd want more of an Italian flavour to the team.

I'm sure there is a good solid business rational behind it but I just can't figure it out.

northernneil

disquieting_museeuws wrote:

cougie wrote:

Its all good PR for Sky isnt it - look at their cycle ride events - maybe people get to associate SKY with good things rather than a capitalistic pig dog Murdoch venture ?

I think that's probably it essentially; I think they've seen all the 30-50's with disposable income doing sportives as well as the large numbers of occasional cyclists who have some notion of linking fitness / outdoor activities with leisure time and therefore the spending of money (I think there are more bikes than cars in the UK). The awareness brought about by Lance and the British Olympic successes has added to the potential for cycling as a marketing locus. I think the efficient-but-dull ethos of Brailsford & British Cycling fits with Sky's own broadcasting style and is intended to appeal to the professional classes; I guess Sky are not just selling dishes to football fans these days but want the whole mainstream 'lifestyle' internet / mobile phone, etc. market as well. Plus there's the marketing to the rest of Europe via cycling.

Who knows - it would be fascinating to be a fly on the wall at a Sky marketing meeting!

I disagree with this, I would suggest the vast majority of 'leisure' cyclists wouldn't really be interested in pro-cycling. I have mates who cycle everyday to work and indeed I train with a guy who couldn't tell me the name of any other TDF winner other than Lance. Fishing is the uks biggest participation sport for 30-50 demographic and I would suggest sky could have got involved with that for a lot less money !!! This is why Murdoch is a billionaire though

Stuey01

andyp wrote:

Slapshot wrote:

A few years ago Sky had limited market in Europe due to the licensing of viewing cards but I know this has changed however their market share is very low. Could be they are pushing brand outside the UK.

Sky can't broadcast in the majority of countries in Europe as they don't have the rights to do so. As far as I'm aware the only European country other than the UK that they have a presence in is Italy.
.

They also have a presence in Germany, a friend of mine is transferring over there from the UK office.

wicked

In terms of sports sponsorship and the exposure level cycling is quite cheap. Sponsor a team in the tour alone and the viewing figures plus spectators is an awful lot of exposure imo.

cougie

Is fishing really as big as everyone says it is ? I must be moving in the wrong demographics - and i dont even see that many fishermen - and I run along canals and swim in lakes - I see far more runners/cyclists.

DavMartinR

Sky bought out the only PPV company in Germany last year.

Just wondering if its subtile advertising for the french and spanish public?
Before Sky try and push they're way in?

Is cycling the new golf. Wouldn't it be easier for a CEO to buy into cycling that golf?

Kléber

2012. Sky want their name on the BC kit for the Olympics, plus the image rights associated with some of the squad and the way to do this is to link up with BC. Note that Sky is not an ordinary pro team, the borderline between the state-funded national governing body and the private satellite company is relaxed, to say the least.