Team Sky to end in 2019
Comments
-
A piece by Tom Fordyce showing again that he's the BBC's Philip Hammond compared to Dan Roan's Boris Johnson
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/46556327Twitter: @RichN950 -
Already posted up thread luvie0
-
Maybe we can get ANC and Halfords to step in?
Take it full circle.0 -
I was surprised when i read that SKY are to stop sponsoring the team but you can be sure that SDB will find a Topdog sponsor for the team.ademort
Chinarello, record and Mavic Cosmic Sl
Gazelle Vuelta , veloce
Giant Defy 4
Mirage Columbus SL
Batavus Ventura0 -
-
My feeling is that they wont be able to replace Sky - a few years ago yes but the amount of negativity around the team even if undeserved has to make it a less attractive proposition. Ultimately sponsors are after positive exposure not just winning bike races - Sky seem able to guarantee the latter but not the former.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0
-
ademort wrote:I was surprised when i read that SKY are to stop sponsoring the team but you can be sure that SDB will find a Topdog sponsor for the team.
Felt F70 05 (Turbo)
Marin Palisades Trail 91 and 06
Scott CR1 SL 12
Cannondale Synapse Adventure 15 & 16 Di2
Scott Foil 180 -
0
-
Vino'sGhost wrote:
It took you 3 days to come up with that (Or more likely steal it from someone else)?"Unfortunately these days a lot of people don’t understand the real quality of a bike" Ernesto Colnago0 -
gsk82 wrote:Vino'sGhost wrote:
It took you 3 days to come up with that (Or more likely steal it from someone else)?
No, about thirty seconds thought it was quite apt.
It’s a reference to the not very dodgy at all Wiggins
Did you get it?0 -
What you gonna do with your time in 2020 VG?0
-
According to the BBC, Mike Ashley is confident of selling Newcastle for £300m early in 2019.0
-
orraloon wrote:What you gonna do with your time in 2020 VG?
No idea, ive got a busy 2019 though.
Road bike 20 ten
Road bike 55 ten
some sprtives Tour of wessex and the welsh one
some epic gravel events in the us
finsih up with Hill climbs and Cross0 -
Vino'sGhost wrote:Cycling's economics are illogical. Most teams are either the product of a millionaire's vanity or a hard-nosed corporate push. They don't have a ground or stadium to sell on to the next prospective owner nor any slice of the sport's television revenues.
It will make it harder for Brailsford to replicate the same level of funding his team have enjoyed over the past eight years. Sky plc wanted a slice of the golden Olympic glow that washed over terrestrial television. They got it, they worked it, they moved on.
This is a good observation in my opinion. Personally I will be glad to see them go, they were attracting (causing ?) a nastiness and devisive element in the sport on a significant scale - not to mention frustration abut GT wins.
They've had their day as Team Sky and it will be refreshing to see how the sport changes with the riders / management of Sky on a more level financial footing.0 -
Shipley wrote:Vino'sGhost wrote:Cycling's economics are illogical. Most teams are either the product of a millionaire's vanity or a hard-nosed corporate push. They don't have a ground or stadium to sell on to the next prospective owner nor any slice of the sport's television revenues.
It will make it harder for Brailsford to replicate the same level of funding his team have enjoyed over the past eight years. Sky plc wanted a slice of the golden Olympic glow that washed over terrestrial television. They got it, they worked it, they moved on.
This is a good observation in my opinion. Personally I will be glad to see them go, they were attracting (causing ?) a nastiness and devisive element in the sport on a significant scale - not to mention frustration abut GT wins.
They've had their day as Team Sky and it will be refreshing to see how the sport changes with the riders / management of Sky on a more level financial footing.
Yup, you are right. Always good news when a sport's biggest sponsor pulls out.
This year, without Sky, there would have been two GT winners, not three.
So I look forward to this new fantasy cycling where every team gets to win a GT."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Shipley wrote:Vino'sGhost wrote:Cycling's economics are illogical. Most teams are either the product of a millionaire's vanity or a hard-nosed corporate push. They don't have a ground or stadium to sell on to the next prospective owner nor any slice of the sport's television revenues.
It will make it harder for Brailsford to replicate the same level of funding his team have enjoyed over the past eight years. Sky plc wanted a slice of the golden Olympic glow that washed over terrestrial television. They got it, they worked it, they moved on.
This is a good observation in my opinion. Personally I will be glad to see them go, they were attracting (causing ?) a nastiness and devisive element in the sport on a significant scale - not to mention frustration abut GT wins.
They've had their day as Team Sky and it will be refreshing to see how the sport changes with the riders / management of Sky on a more level financial footing.
Me too, looking forward to them leaving and us getting our sport back. No doping, no motors, full transparency, no mountain trains, exciting racing, all teams having the same money.Scott Addict 2011
Giant TCR 20120 -
Vino'sGhost wrote:
Road bike 20 ten
Road bike 55 ten
What do these mean? Genuinley interested.0 -
Shipley wrote:Vino'sGhost wrote:Cycling's economics are illogical. Most teams are either the product of a millionaire's vanity or a hard-nosed corporate push. They don't have a ground or stadium to sell on to the next prospective owner nor any slice of the sport's television revenues.
It will make it harder for Brailsford to replicate the same level of funding his team have enjoyed over the past eight years. Sky plc wanted a slice of the golden Olympic glow that washed over terrestrial television. They got it, they worked it, they moved on.
This is a good observation in my opinion. Personally I will be glad to see them go, they were attracting (causing ?) a nastiness and devisive element in the sport on a significant scale - not to mention frustration abut GT wins.
They've had their day as Team Sky and it will be refreshing to see how the sport changes with the riders / management of Sky on a more level financial footing.
I think you're confusing the team existing with the team being successful (and then only really at the Tour) causing 'nastiness'. The riders they target (mainly Froome) will still be around and they still won't have the French success they are desperate for. Yes, I'm sure it's great for the sport to have a major multi-national sponsor pulling out at a time when teams are struggling to find anyone to put in money. With a bit of luck soon every team will be sponsored by an authoritarian state with questionable human rights. Maybe Saudi Arabia could take over from Sky, I'm sure many people would less of an issue with that.0 -
DeVlaeminck wrote:My feeling is that they wont be able to replace Sky - a few years ago yes but the amount of negativity around the team even if undeserved has to make it a less attractive proposition. Ultimately sponsors are after positive exposure not just winning bike races - Sky seem able to guarantee the latter but not the former.
I'm convinced much of the negative exposure in the British media (which is where most has started) is due to the title sponsor though and if, for example, someone cuddly like Branson took over much of it would go away.0 -
Pross wrote:I'm convinced much of the negative exposure in the British media (which is where most has started) is due to the title sponsor though and if, for example, someone cuddly like Branson took over much of it would go away.
I assume this is written with longue firmly in cheek?0 -
inseine wrote:Pross wrote:I'm convinced much of the negative exposure in the British media (which is where most has started) is due to the title sponsor though and if, for example, someone cuddly like Branson took over much of it would go away.
I assume this is written with longue firmly in cheek?
No - I think he is right, albeit I dont think such a high percentage of the negativity is from this, but a good chunk is.
Sky as a brand is slightly toxic - As well as their founder/ex-owner being unliked as a figure, the brand is seen as a bully who has taken football away from free to air and distorted the game with their money, the same with Formula 1 and they threaten lots of other sports and free to air stuff. They are seen to be almost racketeering with the fees they charge and not to care about their customers. They survive all of this because they are so dominant and have a monopoly on certain aspects but they are not generally liked in the UK.
So I think this makes people pre-disposed to see the cycling team in a negative light based on brand perception.
Also we dont seem to like success in the UK and always knock people down who are doing well.
Obviously, added to that is the fact that some of the stuff the team has done has been dubious and controversial, but as suggested if the brand and key figures in the team were more liked then they would get an easier ride in general.0 -
apreading wrote:inseine wrote:Pross wrote:I'm convinced much of the negative exposure in the British media (which is where most has started) is due to the title sponsor though and if, for example, someone cuddly like Branson took over much of it would go away.
I assume this is written with longue firmly in cheek?
No - I think he is right, albeit I dont think such a high percentage of the negativity is from this, but a good chunk is.
I meant in respect of Branson being 'cuddly'. He's been in the news for hiding his money offshore and for Virgin health sueing the NHS. and don't even mention Virgin trains.0 -
Ah - OK, I read it that you were querying the other part of the statement.
However, I do think Branson is able to weather alot more criticism than others and come through it with less of a tarnished image. I dont know why but there is something about him that the nation has embraced that it does not in lots of others. I think if he did some of the stuff Mike Ashley does then he wouldnt get half as much stick.0 -
Blazing Saddles wrote:Shipley wrote:Vino'sGhost wrote:Cycling's economics are illogical. Most teams are either the product of a millionaire's vanity or a hard-nosed corporate push. They don't have a ground or stadium to sell on to the next prospective owner nor any slice of the sport's television revenues.
It will make it harder for Brailsford to replicate the same level of funding his team have enjoyed over the past eight years. Sky plc wanted a slice of the golden Olympic glow that washed over terrestrial television. They got it, they worked it, they moved on.
This is a good observation in my opinion. Personally I will be glad to see them go, they were attracting (causing ?) a nastiness and devisive element in the sport on a significant scale - not to mention frustration abut GT wins.
They've had their day as Team Sky and it will be refreshing to see how the sport changes with the riders / management of Sky on a more level financial footing.
Yup, you are right. Always good news when a sport's biggest sponsor pulls out.
This year, without Sky, there would have been two GT winners, not three.
So I look forward to this new fantasy cycling where every team gets to win a GT.
Without Sky there would have been 3 GT winners, except 2 would not have been Sky. The writing was on the wall as soon as Comcast took over and nature takes it course in the commercial world. Surely you cannot have expected it to continue ad infinitum ?
The world moves on, professional cycling will continue and hopefully a ‘level playing field’ will introduce more excitement and less predictability which in turn will attract more sponsors.0 -
It is a level playing field.
It is unpredictable except for the TdF which has always been a one horse race.0 -
Quick step are the worst thing for predictability in the sport right now.Shipley wrote:The world moves on, professional cycling will continue and hopefully a ‘level playing field’ will introduce more excitement and less predictability which in turn will attract more sponsors.
The tour has always been dominated by one team/rider.0 -
bobmcstuff wrote:Quick step are the worst thing for predictability in the sport right now.
The tour has always been dominated by one team/rider.
Au contraire......they are a well disciplined and very motivated ‘team’ in every sense of the word. Even with a modest budget, and the uncertainty of a 2019 sponsor, they demonstrated collective focus resulting in an impressive number of ‘snatch’ wins.
Next year sees the departure of Gaviria and Terpstra which will hit them so let’s see how they respond.
Nice to have some unpredictability in the sport again.0 -
bobmcstuff wrote:
Quick step are the worst thing for predictability in the sport right now.Shipley wrote:The world moves on, professional cycling will continue and hopefully a ‘level playing field’ will introduce more excitement and less predictability which in turn will attract more sponsors.
The tour has always been dominated by one team/rider.
Sorry, quick step are predictable?
In what way?*
*Jokes about Het Volk/Nieuwslbad will not be tolerated.0 -
I assume we're taking 'predictable' to mean 'wins a lot of hard races'Napoleon, don't be jealous that I've been chatting online with babes all day. Besides, we both know that I'm training to be a cage fighter.0
