Movistar have a small budget?

graeme_s-2

Ok, so even my reference admits he isn't certain, but according to Inrng Movistar have the smallest budget of all of the WT teams:

Inrng wrote:

These two teams are especially interesting as Sky are one of the biggest budget teams in the World Tour whilst I believe – no firm numbers available – that Movistar have the smallest budget.

http://inrng.com/2013/08/team-victory-rankings-august/

Forgetting about whether they actually have the outright smallest budget, it seems likely that Inrng is probably in the right ballpark (right velodrome?) and Movistar have one of the smallest budgets in the WT. This is very surprising to me. They have a major telecommunications sponsor and a roster of relatively big name riders. I didn't think they were necessarily in Sky or BMC territory budget-wise, but I thought they'd be not that far behind them and certainly a good way ahead of teams like Euskatel, Vaconsoleil or Argos-Shimano.

Anyone else surprised by this?

yorkshireraw

Yes does seem surprising esp. given the calibre of some of their riders. Depending on INRNG's info source, it could relate more to what Movistar publish as a budget / accounts and some 'creative' payment practices (image rights v salary etc.).

Either way they're certainly giving more bang for the euro-buck than BMC, but then so is every team probably!

Richmond Racer

Must admit, I find this pretty unlikely. Valverde is not exactly chirpy chirpy cheap cheap, and I cant imagine Costa is either. MOV also started up a new sports-science ''dept' late last year, which I'd imagine they've have struggled to do if they were living hand to mouth. budget-wise.

I'd put money on the soon-to-be-gone (sadly) Euskatel-Euskadi having the smallest budget.

Turfle

I'd be surprised if they're not much closer to the top once Rui Costa and Quintana get their new contracts (Visconti too maybe?).

You'd imagine the likes of Intxausti, Capecchi, Visconti cost a fair amount to bring over, but then much of rest of their roster is filled with late career doms, or young guys on first contracts. They're a very top heavy roster.

turnerjohn

clever accountancy I recon !

pomtarr

Interesting article from 2011, puts them mid-table in the $$$ stakes: http://cyclingtips.com.au/2011/11/moneyball/.

This is a more recent article, but the figures for Movistar are still for 2011: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-16/froome-s-bskyb-backed-cycling-team-nears-lead-in-pay-race.html

mike6

pomtarr wrote:

Interesting article from 2011, puts them mid-table in the $$$ stakes: http://cyclingtips.com.au/2011/11/moneyball/.

This is a more recent article, but the figures for Movistar are still for 2011: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-16/froome-s-bskyb-backed-cycling-team-nears-lead-in-pay-race.html

Some interesting quotes there. If they are quotes. BMC would seem to be getting poor value for money regarding race results. The owner might want to look at team management as an issue if the quote from Vaughters is to be believed regarding there recruitment process.

There again all the Quotes" may have been taken out of context.

graeme_s-2

pomtarr wrote:

This is a more recent article, but the figures for Movistar are still for 2011: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-16/froome-s-bskyb-backed-cycling-team-nears-lead-in-pay-race.html

I wonder if that's what Inrng has based his statement on? They're bottom of the WT teams in that list, but it doesn't include all WT teams and it's comparing figures from different years.

wombly_knees

They didn't have Valverde on their payroll in 2011, or Quintana or even Cobo. They were a bit shit that year, iirc.

Richmond Racer

Quintana's up for a significant pay increase to stay at MOV, according to this

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/quintan ... ar-in-2014


And seems that Valverde's paid over/close to 2m euros


That '11 figure looks well-under the mark