Cookson said...

Le Commentateur

One of the nice things about watching the tour by the roadside is the mix of people you encounter. My guess is the average French family wouldn't be bothered to pay to watch and so any pay-to-view zone of l'Alpe or other famous ramp would be even more "non-French mamil" than already.

In other news... Didi "The Devil" Senff, the ultimate freeloader spectator at le Tour, hangs up his trident.

ugo.santalucia

RichN95 wrote:

There aren't just two financial scenarios available - perpetual instability or grotesque decadence. There quite a bit of middle ground that could be occupied.

OK, let's put it in another way... can you give me an example of a sport that you reckon has the right amount and kind of money/funding and is not a grotesque farse?

Paul 8v

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

There aren't just two financial scenarios available - perpetual instability or grotesque decadence. There quite a bit of middle ground that could be occupied.

OK, let's put it in another way... can you give me an example of a sport that you reckon has the right amount and kind of money/funding and is not a grotesque farse?

F1?

ugo.santalucia

NBA and NFL are better ran then most sports, but there isn't much left in terms of drama and I am not even sure they are to be seen as sport or entertainment... it's a bit like going to the cinema I would say... you sit down, you eat the pop corn, you sip your cola, you cheer with the big finger, you go for a wee... you get the last tense minute... you win, you lose, you go home. Everybody is happy and friendly, there are 80 games in a season so losing or winning doesn't really matter, everybody in the crowd has a big job, a wife with silicone breasts, a house and two kids... it's freaking boring TBH...

dish_dash

ugo.santalucia wrote:

NBA and NFL are better ran then most sports, but there isn't much left in terms of drama and I am not even sure they are to be seen as sport or entertainment... it's a bit like going to the cinema I would say... you sit down, you eat the pop corn, you sip your cola, you cheer with the big finger, you go for a wee... you get the last tense minute... you win, you lose, you go home. Everybody is happy and friendly, there are 80 games in a season so losing or winning doesn't really matter, everybody in the crowd has a big job, a wife with silicone breasts, a house and two kids... it's freaking boring TBH...

Don't forget the long-term head injuries, steroids, the dog fighting, wife battering and racism...

RichN95.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

There aren't just two financial scenarios available - perpetual instability or grotesque decadence. There quite a bit of middle ground that could be occupied.

OK, let's put it in another way... can you give me an example of a sport that you reckon has the right amount and kind of money/funding and is not a grotesque farse?

Rugby Union seems to operate fairly well. Tennis and golf are both well run for both men and women (but not good examples if you object to people actually making money). And German football.

The_Boy

RichN95 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

There aren't just two financial scenarios available - perpetual instability or grotesque decadence. There quite a bit of middle ground that could be occupied.

OK, let's put it in another way... can you give me an example of a sport that you reckon has the right amount and kind of money/funding and is not a grotesque farse?

Rugby Union seems to operate fairly well. Tennis and golf are both well run for both men and women (but not good examples if you object to people actually making money). And German football.

Rugby Union is and it isn't. Depends where or what is being discussed really. For a start its dying on its arse in some countries where it was a major force, the club game in France is immensely rich but relies on the sort of rich benefactors you have elsewhere described as unsustainable.

Not sure German football will remain to be well run - it has to compete with the the English, Spanish and laterly French leagues where normal rules don't apply. I'm not sure FFP will do much to help.

ETA: >obligatory 'Golf isn't a sport' comment.<

The_Boy

andyp wrote:

ThomThom wrote:

There isn't any revenue to share.

There is some, ASO earn a lot from TV rights and sponsorship deals, but none of that makes it's way, directly, to the teams.

They also subsidise a hell of a lot of races that generate fuck all money.

thomthom

andyp wrote:

ThomThom wrote:

There isn't any revenue to share.

There is some, ASO earn a lot from TV rights and sponsorship deals, but none of that makes it's way, directly, to the teams.

There could be more if someone managed to create a unified calendar of the best races, akin to the World Tour today, and then package that up and sell the TV rights for the entire series. But ASO and RCS, who own most of the races, would need convincing of the benefits of this, namely it would need to make them more money than the current arrangements.

http://inrng.com/2014/01/problem-revenue-sharing/

fleshtuxedo

ugo.santalucia wrote:

a wife with silicone breasts

You're saying Cookson has one eye on our wives' breasts?

ugo.santalucia

RichN95 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

There aren't just two financial scenarios available - perpetual instability or grotesque decadence. There quite a bit of middle ground that could be occupied.

OK, let's put it in another way... can you give me an example of a sport that you reckon has the right amount and kind of money/funding and is not a grotesque farse?

Rugby Union seems to operate fairly well. Tennis and golf are both well run for both men and women (but not good examples if you object to people actually making money). And German football.

Sports for Etonians...
Letting golf out, which isn't a sport... both tennis and rugby have been denying doping... basically they cover up the fact there is widespread use... hardly anyone ever gets caught... it's a bit of a joke really... if they had to run a biologic passport tomorrow, that'll be the end of both

gpreeves

RichN95 wrote:

Rugby Union seems to operate fairly well. Tennis and golf are both well run for both men and women (but not good examples if you object to people actually making money). And German football.

I'm not sure many London (i.e High Wycombe/Coventry) Wasps would agree with you on that point. I'd argue that a side being forced to move to a stadium 80 miles away isn't indicative of a well-run sport. Similarly, something isn't quite right when players have to choose between being eligible to represent their country or earning more money by playing abroad.

Having said that, I agree with you on principle - cycling does need to work out a more sustainable business model, although I'm not convinced that roadside charging is the way to do this.

mm1

gpreeves wrote:

cycling does need to work out a more sustainable business model, although I'm not convinced that roadside charging is the way to do this.

JV agrees with you (see part 3 of his interview on www.incycletv ). The uniqueness of cycling accounts for some of the difficulties with the sustainability of the business model. Unlike stadium based sports, there is no captive audience / support, though locations visited by the event may profit there is also a cost (policing etc) and crucially there is no direct return to the sport. It is difficult to see how the short term nature of team sponsorship can be addressed, though isn't this the same for other sports? The short term nature of WT licenses seems to be problematic and, as JV argues, the insecurity of not knowing that there will be a sponsor next year, or whether the team will get into the WT inevitably is a factor in doping and other unprofessional behaviour - which in turn make it harder to maintain coverage and attract / retain sponsorship.

DeVlaeminck

Well of course a team owner wants more money to go to cycling teams. The funding model for cycling can't be that unsustainable though, the sport is after all still going and seems to be in reasonably good health, riders earn more than they ever have and fans still turn out in large numbers. Seems to me that this is a case of starting from a false premise that there is a problem that requires a solution. Of course anything can be improved but there is no desperate need for change, least of all a change that if pursued would risk changing the character of big races in exchange for short term cash.

There are supposed to be over 500,000 people on Alpe D'Huez at some stage finishes, surely there is a way of making money out of providing services for those people other than a crude charge for watching the race.

Pross

RichN95 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

There aren't just two financial scenarios available - perpetual instability or grotesque decadence. There quite a bit of middle ground that could be occupied.

OK, let's put it in another way... can you give me an example of a sport that you reckon has the right amount and kind of money/funding and is not a grotesque farse?

Rugby Union seems to operate fairly well. Tennis and golf are both well run for both men and women (but not good examples if you object to people actually making money). And German football.

You live in Wales and think rugby is a reasonably well run sport? :shock: Historic clubs sent back to playing an amateur version of the game (albeit with semi-pro players) to make way for regions who get less support than the single clubs they replaced. Pro teams unable to afford to keep international players in the country. Constant bickering about money. A governing body who only cares about filling the Millennium Stadium on international days. A complete lack of interest in grass root development. Use of PEDs rife at lower levels and probably right to the top as testing is almost non-existent. All good apart from that though.

RichN95.

Pross wrote:

You live in Wales and think rugby is a reasonably well run sport? :shock: Historic clubs sent back to playing an amateur version of the game (albeit with semi-pro players) to make way for regions who get less support than the single clubs they replaced. Pro teams unable to afford to keep international players in the country. Constant bickering about money. A governing body who only cares about filling the Millennium Stadium on international days. A complete lack of interest in grass root development. Use of PEDs rife at lower levels and probably right to the top as testing is almost non-existent. All good apart from that though.

I did originally exclude the WRU from that, but I didn't want to complicate things so I deleted it. I agree that they are imbecilles. They've got a shirt sponsorship deal were they're basically paying Admiral.

tailwindhome

I can foresee issues if routes start to be determined by what can be closed off to the public and made ticket only.

RichN95.

TailWindHome wrote:

I can foresee issues if routes start to be determined by what can be closed off to the public and made ticket only.

Grand Tour routes are already largely decided by cash.

RichN95.

For all this talk of tickets, the big revenue stream that is being neglected is Sportifs (or is it Sportives?).
There are two or three attached to World Tour races - but really almost all of them should have one. The new Velothon 1.1 race in Wales next year may not interest many, but the Sportif sold out in no time - 15,000 people - and that's a race with absolutely no history and unlikely to gain much.

ugo.santalucia

RichN95 wrote:

For all this talk of tickets, the big revenue stream that is being neglected is Sportifs (or is it Sportives?).
There are two or three attached to World Tour races - but really almost all of them should have one. The new Velothon 1.1 race in Wales next year may not interest many, but the Sportif sold out in no time - 15,000 people - and that's a race with absolutely no history and unlikely to gain much.

Pretty much all the classics have a Sportive attached...: MS,RVV, PR, GW, the minor cobbled races and all the Ardennes classics... then there is the Dolomiti Stars at the Giro and the Etape du Tour... I don't see much room for growth in that respect TBH

deejay

andyp wrote:

There could be more if someone managed to create a unified calendar of the best races, akin to the World Tour today, and then package that up and sell the TV rights for the entire series. But ASO and RCS, who own most of the races, would need convincing of the benefits of this, namely it would need to make them more money than the current arrangements.

Sorry andy, but this is a bit personnel.
You must be related to McQuaid because that is exactly what he was trying to achieve with his Globalisation programe after his earlier failed attempt, that caused the TDF to be run under French rules.

frenchfighter

The sport has been around for over a hundred years. All this talk of impending doom is nonsense.

ugo.santalucia

frenchfighter wrote:

The sport has been around for over a hundred years. All this talk of impending doom is nonsense.

+1

iainf72

deejay wrote:

You must be related to McQuaid because that is exactly what he was trying to achieve with his Globalisation programe after his earlier failed attempt, that caused the TDF to be run under French rules.

Just because McQuaid wanted to do it doesn't mean it was the wrong idea.

tailwindhome

Madiot on the same themes

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/madiot- ... ling-world

deejay

iainf72 wrote:

deejay wrote:

You must be related to McQuaid because that is exactly what he was trying to achieve with his Globalisation programe after his earlier failed attempt, that caused the TDF to be run under French rules.

Just because McQuaid wanted to do it doesn't mean it was the wrong idea.

But, Can you Justify why anything about that view is a Correct idea.

Madiot is basically right but he forgot Holland (whose only problem is their Terrain) and that the "International Language" for Airline Pilots is English. (unless they are in Charles de Gaulle Airspace, when they can talk French also)

I've been to the TDF (and other races) for several decades (but not this one) and noted the convoys of Police or Gendarmerie making their way to or from that days stage and that "Cost" must be very high.
The French could easily start making a charge on some parts of the course but it would have to cover the administration costs also. You have to admit that their Road Closures for cycle races is very effective (developed for 100 years) and the rest of the World now attempt to match their standards to "Seal" a road off.
Oh, (bye the bye) I gave up going to the TDF because of those Mobile Homes clogging the roads and some Texan riding his Bicycle.
It is a different experience these days (just look at the photo's on another thread) and no longer to my taste, so I can see that charging for access to certain parts could happen, if only to limit the Morons that Parade the mountains these days.

ugo.santalucia

deejay wrote:

if only to limit the Morons that Parade the mountains these days.

Are morons less likely to pay? I would have thought they are more keen to pay, if they are true morons...

jimmythecuckoo

haha. Agree with that.

And idiot and his money part quickly.

Brailsford Bad

ugo.santalucia wrote:

That he welcomes initiatives to charge the public to view races... such as ticketing the Alpe d'Huez and such...

In principle I don't have a huge problem with the Tour charging 3-5 Euro to go up the Alpe, but it is the first step to a mass commercialisation... so that you need to book one year in advance and buy into an ASO branded package holiday to get to see a bit of action, well, that would be the end of cycling as we know it and not something I'd look forward to...

It would be a death knell to viewing cycling live and at a time when cycling needs more punters watching it not less, it would be shooting itself in the foot if it starts 'charging' to watch. Its also the slippery slide to SkyTV eventually taking it over, then 3 years on it becomes its own SKY TV CYCLING CHANNEL which you then need to pay extra for. Its an absolute joke that SKY make you pay for SkySports, then have the audacity to create a 5th SkySports channel that you have to pay extra to see the same European football matches you could get on standard SkySports 1 or 2 last year. They did this years ago with the boxing, it was all free on Skysports then before you know it its Pay-Per-View.
This would happen to cycling, first you're charged to to sit on a hill to watch then its snapped up by SKY TV and you're charged to watch the race and it becomes the only way to watch the race because watching it live is now £50 a pop.

How can it be marshalled anyway? I know when i went to see Stage 3 of the TDF in Essex along Epping Forest it was mobbed, there's no way they could have a Blakey style ticket inspector going up and down asking to see your viewing ticket.

Im a fan of Cookson, but he's wrong on this score. Brian, stick to lowering the bike weight limit to 4kgs, allowing disc brakes, pushing the tech boundaries and making the actual filming of the race better than rubbish like this.

deejay

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

haha. Agree with that.

And idiot and his money part quickly.

I too thought the comment was appropriate and that you both agree about the Morons are on the mountains no matter what. :roll: