British Cycling's New Sponsor

[Dogtrousers]

But vegetarians don't consume meat.

Every cyclist, and everyone on this forum, is reliant on crude oil.

So what?

Does that somehow make BC less of a bunch of clowns?

 

[figbat]

It's perfectly possible to get dresssed, use medicines, eat a healthy diet and even light a house at night without oil.
(and have rideable roads).

I suggest you and @Tom... see this as an opportunity to educate yourselves! No need to thank us. x

Of course it is possible, but for most these things are done without thought to the supply chain. You have to go way out of your way to live a modern life whilst avoiding hydrocarbons. I notice, for example, you are using the internet...

 

[Tom...]

So what?

Does that somehow make BC less of a bunch of clowns?

No, but that wasn't your question.

 

[figbat]

So what?

Does that somehow make BC less of a bunch of clowns?

There's a good point. Whilst I may be playing devil's advocate apparently in support of oil companies, what I do think is that the optics of this sponsorship are not great, which is obvious from the reaction it has elicited.

 

[Dogtrousers]

No, but that wasn't your question.

It was indeed 100% my point.

The issue is that BC have gone beyond their remit as the governing body for cycling sport and have moved into campaigning for active transport. To take sponsorship from a petrol wholesaler undermines their position on this. If BC are going to set themselves up as campaigners they need to keep their house in order - or else risk looking like a bunch of clowns.

It's an entirely different business to the sponsorship of professional teams. They are all dodgy, and I accept that. Hell, my favourite team are sponsored by an online gambling organisation - which is borderline immoral in my book. Doesn't stop me following them.

 

[Tom...]

It was indeed 100% my point.

The issue is that BC have gone beyond their remit as the governing body for cycling sport and have moved into campaigning for active transport. To take sponsorship from a petrol wholesaler undermines their position on this. If BC are going to set themselves up as campaigners they need to keep their house in order - or else risk looking like a bunch of clowns.

It's an entirely different business to the sponsorship of professional teams. They are all dodgy, and I accept that. Hell, my favourite team are sponsored by an online gambling organisation - which is borderline immoral in my book. Doesn't stop me following them.

I appreciate your standpoint, but Shell are far from a petrol wholesaler, and ultimately sponsorship is all about money - of which they have plenty.

 

[figbat]

To take sponsorship from a petrol wholesaler undermines their position on this.

But this isn't what Shell are. I have no affiliation to Shell but I do work in the industry. Petrol sales are a small part of what they (and other integrated oil/energy companies) do and Shell are one of the majors that is stepping up to the energy transition. But, as said above, the fuel for that transition - right now - has to be majority hydrocarbon. But it is shifting.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I appreciate your standpoint, but Shell are far from a petrol wholesaler, and ultimately sponsorship is all about money - of which they have plenty.

Sorry. Petrol retailer.

blimey, that's a bit cheap. Sorry about the old picture

 

[Tom...]

Apologies, Shell are far from a petrol retailer.

 

[figbat]

Sorry. Petrol retailer.
View attachment 664292

Still not what they are. It is the most publicly visible of their business activities, but it is still small beans. BTW, how old is that image?!

 

[Dogtrousers]

Still not what they are. It is the most publicly visible of their business activities, but it is still small beans. BTW, how old is that image?!

Exactly. And sponsorship is all about public perception.

Which is why an organisation that campaigns for active travel undermines their message and appears to be a bit clueless if they align themselves with an organisation whose most publicly visible activity is petrol sales.

(The image is very old. 84p a litre! Remember that? It was just the first one of a zillion that popped up when I searched for "Shell petrol station")

 

[matticus]

Matticus, I suggest it's yourself that requires educating.

I'm all ears!

Lets start with clothes . I'm a bear of little brain, so please start slow.

 

[Tom...]

I'm all ears!

Lets start with clothes . I'm a bear of little brain, so please start slow.

I didn't mention clothes?

But since you asked so nicely, two thirds of all clothing is manufactured from fossil fuels. Not to mention the use of fossil fuels in the manufacturing process, transportation and distribution of them. Or the fossil fuels used to produce the packaging, or to produce the clothes hangers, or to power the warehouses they're stored in, or to power the shops they're sold from. I could go on and on, but like I said, probably best you educate yourself.

 

[figbat]

I'm all ears!

Lets start with clothes . I'm a bear of little brain, so please start slow.

Pretty much any synthetic fibre will have its roots in petrochemicals, including Lycra®. Natural fibres will have been farmed, processed and distributed using fossil fuel and chemicals derived from oil.

 

[icowden]

They must be doing their upmost to diversify away from fossil fuels and linking with cycling perhaps is not a bad move.

This. Shell has now rebranded as an energy company not an oil company. They know that oil is problematic and that selling oil is going to become less and less commercially viable.

Of course, we could say that Shell should stop immediately. But there is still an oil market, and multinational companies don't just stop. That would affect millions of employees, country economies etc. Thus Shell's only commercial option is to expand into renewables whilst reducing fossil fuel provision and sale.

Of course they want to "greenwash" and make themselves look better by sponsoring greener transport and initiatives, but what's the alternative?