British Cycling and HSBC (and diversity in cycling)

[coffeejo]

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]

New kit for the academy riders - awesome

 

[raleighnut]

So what will they call the 'Skyride's

 

[Hill Wimp]

Shanghi rides i expect.

 

[SWSteve]

So will they become the Hong-Kong Shanghai Bicycling Company?

 

[brommers]

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.

 

[S-Express]

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.

What knowledge and expertise are you thinking of?? Sky puts up the money - it doesn't provide the coaching or rider development. It's called 'sponsorship'.

 

[SWSteve]

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.

BSKYB Ltd sponsor British Cycling, as well as Tour Racing Ltd. now HSBC will sponsor BC.

 

[rich p]

Shanghi

Wasn't that the dopey one in Scooby Doo?

 

[oldroadman]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.