Alonso team

The_Boy

Full complement of WT teams atm, but not sure if any/how many of those places are up for grabs at the end of this year - hence my question about the duration of WT status.

RoadPainter

RichN95 wrote:

RoadPainter wrote:

DeadCalm wrote:

People have been bemoaning the dearth of decent sponsors attracted to the sport. How can you expect a company to stump up the kind of money that Emirates are being asked to invest when there is no guarantee as to what races the team will be able to ride?

But companies seem happy to sponsor football clubs that could get relegated from the Premier League. I realise cycling doesn't have sponsors battering down the door, but surely similar view applies.

In football the contract will have clauses to cover relegation. The sponsor will also know what league the team will be in from the beginning. And it's not the primary source of income. If cycling is going to persist on a business model wholly reliant on sponsorship money then they have to make sure that investors know what they are buying and not treat it like a lucky dip.

Really they should be getting guarantees and signing agreements with ASO rather than UCI.

Whether the teams depend partly or wholly on the sponsor surely doesn't affect whether the sponsor gets involved. I'm sure teams fighting against relegation get new sponsors for following seasons, when league is unknown.

Last point makes a lot of sense - if Alonso did a deal with ASO to get one of the wildcard TdF spots if not WorldTour, then everyone would be happy, wouldn't they?

I've never been a big fan of Alonso, and can't help feeling this is a bit of brand positioning from him.

Anonymous

Sponsor wants coverage shocker?

The_Boy

coriordan wrote:

Sponsor wants coverage shocker?

Team owner wants preferential treatment because his sponsor is talking beaucoup dollars shock.

RichN95.

RoadPainter wrote:

Whether the teams depend partly or wholly on the sponsor surely doesn't affect whether the sponsor gets involved. I'm sure teams fighting against relegation get new sponsors for following seasons, when league is unknown.

No, but it greatly effects the flexibility of the deals that the club offers. A year's sponsorship for a relegation zone Premiership team is about £1-2 million, set against a wage bill of around £40-50 million. So, as it is not a major portion of their income, they can offer relegation clauses without jeopardising the existance of the club. It can exist without that sponsor - so they can afford to lose them if the sponsor isn't getting what is promised.

This not the case with cycling where, more often than not, no sponsor means no team. A team can't get into races without the riders, but it can't get the riders until it gets the sponsor, and the sponsor won't commit until it has assurances about the races.

RoadPainter

Presumably a sponsor would likely commit if Tour was guaranteed. Therefore, as you said, Alonso should speak to ASO - if he actually gives one

Anonymous

There is also the risk as mentioned earlier where riders race to get WT points to make them more valuable to teams who need the points to get their WT status. I'm sure this had a detrimental effect to racing / the riders in general (someone said a while ago...sorry cant remember what it was).

RichN95.

Here's how I would do it with licences.

There would be sixteen Standard World Tour licences. Fourteen of those would be given to the top fourteen teams in the World Rankings (all riders counting not just top five) - regardless of who is on their roster for the next year (as long as the money is in place). The other two would be chosen from the 15th & 16th ranked teams and the top four Pro Conti teams based on the following year's roster - much as it is now.

Then there would be special Start-Up licences for big new teams which have a guaranteed substantial long term investment in place (e.g. a minimum 10 million a year for four years). They get a guaranteed World Tour licence for their first two years. If everything is in place then they get their licence on August 1st. There could be up to as many as four of these at any one time (but unlikely to be more than two).

Numbers can be varied if need be. (I'd also like one rider less per team per race and one extra team - but that's a different matter).

Party Weirdo

Trouble with smaller teams to allow an extra one (or two) is that unless you get riders to bunk in with OPQS and Sky, you still need the additional accommodation and infrastructure that limits the number of teams currently.

RichN95.

Party Weirdo wrote:

Trouble with smaller teams to allow an extra one (or two) is that unless you get riders to bunk in with OPQS and Sky, you still need the additional accommodation and infrastructure that limits the number of teams currently.

It's easy to find room. On the Tour there's 5000 people that need accommodation - one extra team isn't that many people.

The number of teams is limited by the maximum of 200 riders

But anyway that's really a different discussion

frenchfighter

Giro Stage 18:


http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/alonso- ... m-for-2015

Cassini and Bettini

mm1

Gianni Motta with Alonso? Still looking pretty fit.

richiegwy

Sorry to ressurect this but has the Alonso team gone off the radar completely? Wasn't he supposed to make an announcemeent during the tour? Time is running out for him.

Art Vandelay

The rumours were he was in talks to take over Giant-Shimano's licence. He's been negotiating with a top level UAE based company to take the headline sponsor slot but without having this in place plans have stalled. Meanwhile Giant -Shimano have suggested they are close to sorting out their headline sponsor (along with Giant).