Rabobank Libor Scandal Real Reason For Exit

d87francis
d87francis Posts: 136
edited October 2012 in Pro race
Hi all,
it's been news for a little while that Rabobank were possibly implicated in the Libor fixing scandal, however, given their continued investigation over it in the Netherlands
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/idUSL6E8L22V720121002
and now a US investigation
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203897404578079413742864842.html
perhaps the Armstrong revelations were a timely excuse for them to pull out of sponsoring a team?

Given the £290 million it cost Barclays along with the loss of high street trade from poor reputation it's hard to imagine that this could not have been factor in the decision to pull their sponsorship from a sport they no longer saw as "clean or fair" with the pledge to fund the team for next year without their name to help mitigate PR.

Comments

  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    Nah.

    The USADA case is a handy smoke screen.....for the case which will be heard in a Dutch court soon about the Chicken. All of their dirt will be aired and it'll be unpleasant
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • inkyfingers
    inkyfingers Posts: 4,400
    Agree with Iain. Pro cycling has given Rabobank many years of good international exposure, now the tables might turn (Rasmussen and Barredo cases getting interesting) they have used the USADA case as a convenient excuse to run away.
    "I have a lovely photo of a Camargue horse but will not post it now" (Frenchfighter - July 2013)
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,463
    The sponsorship costs were loose change to Rabo. Barclays have managed to keep funding sponsorship of the Premier League amongst various other sporting deals despite their liabilities.
  • inkyfingers
    inkyfingers Posts: 4,400
    Pross wrote:
    The sponsorship costs were loose change to Rabo. Barclays have managed to keep funding sponsorship of the Premier League amongst various other sporting deals despite their liabilities.

    That's because there's no doping in football.
    "I have a lovely photo of a Camargue horse but will not post it now" (Frenchfighter - July 2013)
  • Anonymous
    Anonymous Posts: 79,667
    Or tennis. Look at the ATP Tour at the o2
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,696
    I reckon it was just a way out....Leipheimer at OPQS stylee. Did you notice that they ve employed Rolf Aldag? Despite him being a confessed doper? I reckon we ll hear about Rabbo sponsoring something else soon enough.
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • andyrac
    andyrac Posts: 1,197
    Pross wrote:
    The sponsorship costs were loose change to Rabo. Barclays have managed to keep funding sponsorship of the Premier League amongst various other sporting deals despite their liabilities.

    And a new indoor Arena in Brooklyn, New York....that won't be peanuts.
    All Road/ Gravel: tbcWinter: tbcMTB: tbcRoad: tbc"Look at the time...." "he's fallen like an old lady on a cruise ship..."
  • Wrath Rob
    Wrath Rob Posts: 2,918
    If that was the case, why will they still meet their contractual payments and just remove their branding, i.e. the white label team?

    Think you might be barking up the wrong tree.
    FCN3: Titanium Qoroz.
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    Wrath Rob wrote:
    If that was the case, why will they still meet their contractual payments and just remove their branding, i.e. the white label team?

    Think you might be barking up the wrong tree.


    Perhaps just to see the teams' riders and staff through the next 12 months, allowing them that period to find other sponsors, or other teams for 2014, rather than try to find spots elsewhere in Oct when rosters are already full for 2013? In the meantime they want their branding removed pronto because of the association.
  • Wrath Rob
    Wrath Rob Posts: 2,918
    Richmond Racer wrote:
    Wrath Rob wrote:
    If that was the case, why will they still meet their contractual payments and just remove their branding, i.e. the white label team?

    Think you might be barking up the wrong tree.
    Perhaps just to see the teams' riders and staff through the next 12 months, allowing them that period to find other sponsors, or other teams for 2014, rather than try to find spots elsewhere in Oct when rosters are already full for 2013? In the meantime they want their branding removed pronto because of the association.
    That's my point. Its not because of potential fines from a Libor scandal. If it was, they'd pull the entire plug to save the €5(?) million or what ever they pay.
    FCN3: Titanium Qoroz.
  • inkyfingers
    inkyfingers Posts: 4,400
    Wrath Rob wrote:
    Richmond Racer wrote:
    Wrath Rob wrote:
    If that was the case, why will they still meet their contractual payments and just remove their branding, i.e. the white label team?

    Think you might be barking up the wrong tree.
    Perhaps just to see the teams' riders and staff through the next 12 months, allowing them that period to find other sponsors, or other teams for 2014, rather than try to find spots elsewhere in Oct when rosters are already full for 2013? In the meantime they want their branding removed pronto because of the association.
    That's my point. Its not because of potential fines from a Libor scandal. If it was, they'd pull the entire plug to save the €5(?) million or what ever they pay.

    Depends what type of contractual commitments they have. If there riders,staff and suppliers who have multiple year contracts that include 2013 then they would probably still have to pay them so makes sense to honour those contracts and have a dignified, but still speedy exit.
    "I have a lovely photo of a Camargue horse but will not post it now" (Frenchfighter - July 2013)
  • fast as fupp
    fast as fupp Posts: 2,277
    inkyfingers wrote:
    Pross wrote:
    The sponsorship costs were loose change to Rabo. Barclays have managed to keep funding sponsorship of the Premier League amongst various other sporting deals despite their liabilities.

    That's because there's no doping in football.

    you are being ironic?
    'dont forget lads, one evertonian is worth twenty kopites'
  • inkyfingers
    inkyfingers Posts: 4,400
    fast as fupp wrote:
    inkyfingers wrote:
    Pross wrote:
    The sponsorship costs were loose change to Rabo. Barclays have managed to keep funding sponsorship of the Premier League amongst various other sporting deals despite their liabilities.

    That's because there's no doping in football.

    you are being ironic?

    Yes.
    "I have a lovely photo of a Camargue horse but will not post it now" (Frenchfighter - July 2013)
  • fidbod
    fidbod Posts: 317
    No chance that Rabobank potential involvement in the LIBOR scandal affected sponsorship of the bike team.
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    Maybe it's a political move to help add pressure to UCI.

    Sponsorship goes somewhere where a key person has a vested interest. Maybe that person who supports cycling is just trying to exert a little influence as financially there is no benefit for 12 months

Categories