British Cycling and HSBC (and diversity in cycling)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

coffeejo

Ælfrēd
Location
West Somerset
British Cycling has announced that HSBC UK is to become its new lead partner for the next eight years commencing from January 1.

The two will work across the sport from participation at grassroots level and major organised cycling events through to the highest level of performance with the Great Britain Cycling Team.

"This is a huge moment for cycling in Great Britain," British Cycling chief executive Ian Drake said.

"Working together with HSBC UK, we will provide the encouragement and opportunities to make cycling the most popular activity and sport of choice in Great Britain.

"We want to help transform an increasingly inactive and unhealthy nation through cycling."

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2016-09-18/british-cycling-signs-hsbc-deal/
 

S-Express

Guest
New kit for the academy riders - awesome :smile:
 

brommers

Years beyond my wisdom
Location
Clacton-on-Sea
So they'll have HSBC's money, but not Sky's knowledge and expertise at the top level. I think that elite cyclists will suffer from this.
 

rich p

ridiculous old lush
Location
Brighton
Wasn't that the dopey one in Scooby Doo?
 

oldroadman

Veteran
Location
Ubique
So it looks lie this to me. Sky keep their pro team - nothing to do with the BC sponsorship - for as long as they think it's a business proposition. Sky stop with BC (at the end of 2016?). HSBCUK (they have rebranded the UK retail bank and separated it from the investment division, I have read somewhere) will sponsor BC for 8 years. No conflict so far as I can see. BC and Sky pro team are separated anyway, despite the impression some people have tat they are one and the same, which they are not. The marketing people at BC must have worked their backsides off to pull in a sponsor at this level, a job well done I think. Who would have thought going back in time that a "little" sport in Britain would end up having it's governing body sponsored by what is probably the biggest back in the world? Quite a result. No doubt there will be some "knockers" somewhere, who will want to cry sell out or something similar. They are unimportant, what is important is the rise and rise of the sport into the mainstream, and backing by a huge multinational can only help that.
 

S-Express

Guest
The marketing people at BC must have worked their backsides off to pull in a sponsor at this level

Who is to say that they were not in discussion with several other major potential sponsors, before agreeing terms with HSBC? My guess is that other organisations would have been interested in taking over from Sky.
 

oldroadman

Veteran
Location
Ubique
Who is to say that they were not in discussion with several other major potential sponsors, before agreeing terms with HSBC? My guess is that other organisations would have been interested in taking over from Sky.
There probably were, at least anyone would hope so, and the reference to the work would include ALL the work with ALL the prospects of course. From past experience, the hardest bit is getting over the line with one of them, the old 80/20 rule. Nothing settled until the papers are signed. I guess the only thing closed to BC would have been another media organisation.
 

S-Express

Guest
I guess the only thing closed to BC would have been another media organisation.

I don't see why, really. Once Sky's contract ends, so does BC's obligation. Another media organisation (I can't think of a suitable one, offhand) would have been fair game.
 

oldroadman

Veteran
Location
Ubique
I don't see why, really. Once Sky's contract ends, so does BC's obligation. Another media organisation (I can't think of a suitable one, offhand) would have been fair game.
You have clearly never worked in the marketing area, with all it's contract tie ins and even in that arena, a simple bit of common courtesy. When a big deal like this ends on friendly terms (which it appears to be the case with BC/Sky) you don't spit in their face by going to, for example, Virgin Media. For one the reputation of BC as a reliable and professional partner would be down the tube, for two no big player would be interested in any organisation that operated in such an unprofessional way.
Hence BC have moved sectors (a good commercial move which enhances reputation) and got themselves a deal with another very big player.
Still I guess you can't please all the people all the time.
 

S-Express

Guest
You have clearly never worked in the marketing area, with all it's contract tie ins and even in that arena, a simple bit of common courtesy.

Oh, man - I've been in marketing for 30 years. Been there, done that, seen it all. Anyway, this is not about marketing, it's about contract law. I would be very surprised if BC's lawyers would have been daft enough to sign a contract containing what amounts to a restrictive covenant. Such a covenant would ring massive alarm bells for any half-decent corporate lawyer.

Either the contract ends - in which case Sky has no further claim on BC - or it doesn't. I would have no issue with replacing Sky with Virgin (for example). If Sky has an issue with it, then simply extend the contract.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom