Team SKY to be known as Team Ineos.
Comments
-
-
awavey wrote:I did quite like their navy fade top this year
I think this year's top is one of the nicest the team have had but is ruined, as have their previous jerseys, by the hideous blue line down the back.
Will be interesting to see what the new top is like, assuming team Ineos design their own jersey.
I do feel sorry for supporters who have just bought the new sky kit though. The prices of team jerseys today are crazy, even if the quality is good, and to find out so soon that by May it will be out of date is pretty harsh.0 -
ChippyK wrote:Alejandrosdog wrote:This is great news, an opportunity for sky / ineos to continue at the highest level.
Opportunity to get some cheap Sky branded Castelli kit too.
Delivered in a Jiffy bag with no packing slip.
0 -
Alejandrosdog wrote:ChippyK wrote:Alejandrosdog wrote:This is great news, an opportunity for sky / ineos to continue at the highest level.
Opportunity to get some cheap Sky branded Castelli kit too.
Delivered in a Jiffy bag with no packing slip.
No idea what you are on about, I never ordered it and sent it back. I must have put a Rapha returns label because they never got it back0 -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/47633074
For someone with a business degree Vaughters seems to have no clue about actual business. He keeps mentioning a NFL style salary cap. That only works since the can pool the multi billion dollar tv deals. You can’t do that in cycling as the like of ASO need the tv money to actually run the race.
Maybe he should be asking the question of how one team can get a big money sponsor/ownership deal while others struggle to get a basic sponsorship. Could it be the ones that can’t aren’t running themselves like a business?
And I’m sick tired of the ‘sky’ dominance idea nobody seems to care when quickstep win all the cobbled classics and near enough every sprint stage they are more dominant than sky but no one cares since they are an old school team0 -
gsk82 wrote:Sky isn't a team sponsor, they owned the team. I would guess that Ineos have agreed to buy/takeover the company immediately. Maybe they only wanted it if they could have it now and have full control.
according to their filed accounts they were, Sky, along with 21st Century fox were named as title sponsors and the teams primary revenue sources,whilst the team company is, or should that be was now I guess, recognised as a subsidiary of Sky who held the majority ownership, with 21st Century Fox taking the minority ownership, who are both noted in the press release as having agreed to the sale to INEOS who now take complete ownership.
the fact the practicalities of the transfer have yet to be discussed with the UCI,youd think theyd have sounded them out first, might suggest this has all come together very quickly, but maybe we are getting ahead of ourselves in what this actually means will visibly happen come May 1st.0 -
neonriver wrote:Maybe he should be asking the question of how one team can get a big money sponsor/ownership deal while others struggle to get a basic sponsorship. Could it be the ones that can’t aren’t running themselves like a business?
its not just Vaughters though his point does sound a bit of a bleat, but its across all levels of cycling, Brailsford seems to be the exception, rather than the norm, as the problem is theres little to no revenue income cycling teams earn just by being successful and most businesses agree their sponsorship run on return of investment, so a sponsor putting in any amount into cycling, is not going to get a fraction of the exposure the same amount of money pushed in other ways elsewhere, be that sport or anything, could get,or share in the profit of being successful, so the numbers dont stack up for them.
its a bit like the way football in the UK has increasingly got over the past 20 years, Sky, arguably...I know its a loose link but bear with me
distorted the market with the premier league tv rights deals over successive years,so Premier league clubs, and increasingly ones with money no object owners/sponsors, have tipped the balance so far in their favour because they can just outspend their near rivals let alone clubs in lower leagues trying to get to the premier league. So alot of clubs cant find sponsors, or good cash rich sponsors, or good cash rich owners and its just become a gigantic money pit with ever increasing numbers of debt, and clubs literally about to go bust because they cant get the amounts of money they need just to stand still anymore. If Ratcliffe was keen on buying Chelsea,but they werent for selling, theres at least another 90 clubs in the football league I guarantee who would walk over broken glass if he or any other big money sponsor/owner ever showed any interest in spending their money on them instead. 0 -
Have to say, and this is a failing of my own understanding and ignorance, but I can’t get my head around the cognitive dissonance about being a fully signed up Brexiteer, complete with enormous donantions, and wanting to personally get involved in one of the most “European” sports around.
I can just about square it in my mind if I view super rich support of Brexit as a reaction to EU efforts to clamp down on shady tax avoidance, but that innately feels overly conspiratorial.0 -
neonriver wrote:
And I’m sick tired of the ‘sky’ dominance idea nobody seems to care when quickstep win all the cobbled classics and near enough every sprint stage they are more dominant than sky but no one cares since they are an old school team
It’s *how* it’s done.
If it was all Froome in cross winds and looking like a frog on a skateboard no one would mind...0 -
ChippyK wrote:Alejandrosdog wrote:ChippyK wrote:Alejandrosdog wrote:This is great news, an opportunity for sky / ineos to continue at the highest level.
Opportunity to get some cheap Sky branded Castelli kit too.
Delivered in a Jiffy bag with no packing slip.
No idea what you are on about, I never ordered it and sent it back. I must have put a Rapha returns label because they never got it back
Ring them up and ask them to make some paperwork up then. If they can’t manage that I’m not sure they’re a company you or your mates should use any more.
How are you feeling today?0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:neonriver wrote:
And I’m sick tired of the ‘sky’ dominance idea nobody seems to care when quickstep win all the cobbled classics and near enough every sprint stage they are more dominant than sky but no one cares since they are an old school team
It’s *how* it’s done.
If it was all Froome in cross winds and looking like a frog on a skateboard no one would mind...
Or the fact that most people only care about the Tour de France? Doubt Le Samyn registered on most peoples radar.0 -
4 things to know about Ratcliffe (according to L'equipe)
He's the richest Brit
He sponsors an Americas cup boat
He's pro Brexit and moved his tax affairs out of the country
His companies are some of the worlds largest producers of plastic and he's destroying the environment0 -
I can see it now: A Het Nieuwsblad headline bemoaning Deceuninck - Quick Step's dominance of the eve of the Ronde.
The BBC has an agenda for everything these days.
The top cycling team saved, so time to wheel out the old money equals dominance chestnut, again. If only it were that simple.
Public funded indoctrination is OK though."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
inseine wrote:4 things to know about Ratcliffe (according to L'equipe)
He's the richest Brit
He sponsors an Americas cup boat
He's pro Brexit and moved his tax affairs out of the country
His companies are some of the worlds largest producers of plastic and he's destroying the environment
What’s wrong with any of that bar the destroying the environment which is no more true of him than you0 -
I didn't actually comment on whether I thought it was correct or not. It's interesting how it's being presented to the French before it's even in place, giving the level of distrust of the current set up. They are not so concerned about the company Sky, so this just adds to reasons for them not to like the team.Alejandrosdog wrote:inseine wrote:4 things to know about Ratcliffe (according to L'equipe)
He's the richest Brit
He sponsors an Americas cup boat
He's pro Brexit and moved his tax affairs out of the country
His companies are some of the worlds largest producers of plastic and he's destroying the environment
What’s wrong with any of that bar the destroying the environment which is no more true of him than you0 -
neonriver wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/47633074
For someone with a business degree Vaughters seems to have no clue about actual business. He keeps mentioning a NFL style salary cap. That only works since the can pool the multi billion dollar tv deals. You can’t do that in cycling as the like of ASO need the tv money to actually run the race.
Maybe he should be asking the question of how one team can get a big money sponsor/ownership deal while others struggle to get a basic sponsorship. Could it be the ones that can’t aren’t running themselves like a business?
And I’m sick tired of the ‘sky’ dominance idea nobody seems to care when quickstep win all the cobbled classics and near enough every sprint stage they are more dominant than sky but no one cares since they are an old school team
Regarding Quickstep, they're not actually as dominant as you might expect. They've won 4 of the last 25 Monuments, with many of their wins in semi-classics or chippers. Sky have won 8 of the last 24 GTs.0 -
phreak wrote:neonriver wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/47633074
For someone with a business degree Vaughters seems to have no clue about actual business. He keeps mentioning a NFL style salary cap. That only works since the can pool the multi billion dollar tv deals. You can’t do that in cycling as the like of ASO need the tv money to actually run the race.
Maybe he should be asking the question of how one team can get a big money sponsor/ownership deal while others struggle to get a basic sponsorship. Could it be the ones that can’t aren’t running themselves like a business?
And I’m sick tired of the ‘sky’ dominance idea nobody seems to care when quickstep win all the cobbled classics and near enough every sprint stage they are more dominant than sky but no one cares since they are an old school team
Regarding Quickstep, they're not actually as dominant as you might expect. They've won 4 of the last 25 Monuments, with many of their wins in semi-classics or chippers. Sky have won 8 of the last 24 GTs.
Dominance isn't just about winning certain races though. It's about the whole season and all races.
Currently, Deceuninck - Quick Step are the number 1 ranked team on every list. Sky are second on every list.
On CQ, just for this season results so far, Astana are first, DQS second and Sky down in 4th."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
I think he has a business head which takes him where the money is -so relocating to Monaco, moving the Company HQ to Switzerland and his own views. No doubting that business head - if you haven't seen it, his project with BMW is a great example. He wants backing from the UK Govt for a car project. But if they dont want to he can take it anywhere else.0
-
inseine wrote:4 things to know about Ratcliffe (according to L'equipe)
He's the richest Brit
He sponsors an Americas cup boat
He's pro Brexit and moved his tax affairs out of the country
His companies are some of the worlds largest producers of plastic and he's destroying the environment
whereas France are one of the leading if not THE leading designer/constructors of Nuclear power stations and provide/have provided residence for numerous African (billionaire) despots.0 -
Blazing Saddles wrote:phreak wrote:neonriver wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/47633074
For someone with a business degree Vaughters seems to have no clue about actual business. He keeps mentioning a NFL style salary cap. That only works since the can pool the multi billion dollar tv deals. You can’t do that in cycling as the like of ASO need the tv money to actually run the race.
Maybe he should be asking the question of how one team can get a big money sponsor/ownership deal while others struggle to get a basic sponsorship. Could it be the ones that can’t aren’t running themselves like a business?
And I’m sick tired of the ‘sky’ dominance idea nobody seems to care when quickstep win all the cobbled classics and near enough every sprint stage they are more dominant than sky but no one cares since they are an old school team
Regarding Quickstep, they're not actually as dominant as you might expect. They've won 4 of the last 25 Monuments, with many of their wins in semi-classics or chippers. Sky have won 8 of the last 24 GTs.
Dominance isn't just about winning certain races though. It's about the whole season and all races.
Currently, Deceuninck - Quick Step are the number 1 ranked team on every list. Sky are second on every list.
On CQ, just for this season results so far, Astana are first, DQS second and Sky down in 4th.
Oh for sure, I'm just saying that winning tends to happen with the best riders as opposed to the best teams. Nibali alone has won 3 monuments in the same period Quickstep collectively won 4, and for pretty much the entirety of cycling history, the team with the dominant riders of their generation tend to win the most. US Postal, Banesto, La Vie Clare, Molteni et al all tended to dominate their era by virtue of having the best rider/s.0 -
... which are actually vastly more environmentally friendly than pretty much every other form of electricity generation.amrushton wrote:France are one of the leading if not THE leading designer/constructors of Nuclear power stations0 -
bompington wrote:
... which are actually vastly more environmentally friendly than pretty much every other form of electricity generation.amrushton wrote:France are one of the leading if not THE leading designer/constructors of Nuclear power stations
until they go pop or when you have to deal with all the toxic waste then I'd suggest they're a bit less friendly than solar, for example.0 -
I can assure you the French are equally unhappy about these things. It's not the government ministers who will be shouting abuse at the side of the road in July.amrushton wrote:inseine wrote:4 things to know about Ratcliffe (according to L'equipe)
He's the richest Brit
He sponsors an Americas cup boat
He's pro Brexit and moved his tax affairs out of the country
His companies are some of the worlds largest producers of plastic and he's destroying the environment
whereas France are one of the leading if not THE leading designer/constructors of Nuclear power stations and provide/have provided residence for numerous African (billionaire) despots.0 -
He's a 'Regulations Brexiter' - in that he believes that overly restrictive EU regulations stifle his company's competitiveness in the global market.Rick Chasey wrote:Have to say, and this is a failing of my own understanding and ignorance, but I can’t get my head around the cognitive dissonance about being a fully signed up Brexiteer, complete with enormous donantions, and wanting to personally get involved in one of the most “European” sports around.
I can just about square it in my mind if I view super rich support of Brexit as a reaction to EU efforts to clamp down on shady tax avoidance, but that innately feels overly conspiratorial.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
He's a 'Regulations Brexiter' - in that he believes that overly restrictive EU regulations stifle his company's competitiveness in the global market.Rick Chasey wrote:Have to say, and this is a failing of my own understanding and ignorance, but I can’t get my head around the cognitive dissonance about being a fully signed up Brexiteer, complete with enormous donantions, and wanting to personally get involved in one of the most “European” sports around.
I can just about square it in my mind if I view super rich support of Brexit as a reaction to EU efforts to clamp down on shady tax avoidance, but that innately feels overly conspiratorial.
Yes that smells rather like my second paragraph...0 -
inseine wrote:bompington wrote:
... which are actually vastly more environmentally friendly than pretty much every other form of electricity generation.amrushton wrote:France are one of the leading if not THE leading designer/constructors of Nuclear power stations
until they go pop or when you have to deal with all the toxic waste then I'd suggest they're a bit less friendly than solar, for example.
0 -
It's regulations within his industry that he objects to, not the tax ones.Rick Chasey wrote:RichN95 wrote:
He's a 'Regulations Brexiter' - in that he believes that overly restrictive EU regulations stifle his company's competitiveness in the global market.Rick Chasey wrote:Have to say, and this is a failing of my own understanding and ignorance, but I can’t get my head around the cognitive dissonance about being a fully signed up Brexiteer, complete with enormous donantions, and wanting to personally get involved in one of the most “European” sports around.
I can just about square it in my mind if I view super rich support of Brexit as a reaction to EU efforts to clamp down on shady tax avoidance, but that innately feels overly conspiratorial.
Yes that smells rather like my second paragraph...Twitter: @RichN950 -
over simplified in the extreme. Solar not on the list, or wind. No mention of the toxic waste eitherbompington wrote:inseine wrote:bompington wrote:
... which are actually vastly more environmentally friendly than pretty much every other form of electricity generation.amrushton wrote:France are one of the leading if not THE leading designer/constructors of Nuclear power stations
until they go pop or when you have to deal with all the toxic waste then I'd suggest they're a bit less friendly than solar, for example.0 -
OK then: note in particular the number of man days lost for solar and wind vs nuclear:inseine wrote:over simplified in the extreme. Solar not on the list, or wind. No mention of the toxic waste either
... and don't forget all the toxic waste from the manufacture of solar panels and the mining of the materials.0
