Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
The logo is on the jersey and the team renamed from UAE Abu Dhabi when the airline started sponsoring.
I assumed they were just fiddling with the name to keep Carlton on his toes.
The logo is on the jersey and the team renamed from UAE Abu Dhabi when the airline started sponsoring.
This is probably wrong, but here's a breakdown of main (team name level) sponsors at World Tour level
Most popular is the construction industry with 6 sponsors: Bora (Kitchens), Wanty (civil engineers), Deceuninck (Windows), Soudal (adhesives and gloopy stuff), Hansgrohe (bathrooms), Quick-Step (flooring)
Then we have 4 sponsors that are places. None of which I have an urge to visit. Astana, UAE, Bahrain, AlUla (Saudi Resort)
Four from Finance/Insurance: Cofidis, Arkea, AG2R, Groupama
Three from the automotive industry: Jayco, Citroen, Grenadiers
Two each from gambling and supermarkets:
Gambling: FDJ (lottery), Circus (online gambling)
Supermarket: Jumbo, Intermarche
That leaves one each from the remainder:
Bicycles (Trek)
Coffee (Segafredo)
Education (EF Education)
Facilities management (Samsic)
Nutrition (DSM)
Petrochemicals (Ineos)
Shampoo (Alpecin)
Shipping (Easypost)
Software (Visma)
Telco (Movistar)
Airline (Emirates) added on advice from @mjr
You might want to point out errors, or argue with classifications - eg are Soudal and Alpecin both actually petrochemicals?. Feel free to do your own breakdown.
So which cyclist has best represented their sponsor?
I'm going for Marcel Kittel and his splendid Alpecin quiff
Peter Sagan gets comedy points for advertising kitchen extractors with the unforgettable line "I'm loooving this coooking revolooootion"
Of course this is just number of sponsors, not €€€. No one imagines that Ineos and Uno-X put in the same, or comparable, amounts of money. But they are both counted under "petrochemicals"
It really doesn't matter how much they put in. It is the name that is seen by the public, regardless of whether they put in £10K or £10 million.
I think the management of the various teams might disagree with that.
Oh no, we've just lost our title sponsor. Still, no need to worry, the local butcher has offered us free sausages if we advertise them, and it's the thought that counts.
The management would yes. But I thought the point of this thread was about the visibility of "unsuitable" sponsors, and that is down to what the public sees, not what management get.
Yes, you often see Uno-X stations on the routes of races in those countries, but unless you drive there more than I think, Uno-X at the moment probably don't care whether a random person in England knows what they do, as long as people in Norway and Denmark do. Whereas Ineos would probably like you to consider buying their horrible runny hand sanitiser instead of others, like you to think nicely of businesses who display it in their washrooms, and really want you to listen when Sirjim speaks out on politics or feel sorry for him when he's criticised in the press. Their rosters reflect this targetting a bit, as well as the marketing of their teams.Even then, the amount of cash will strongly influence to the amount of exposure. For example, before doing this research I was well aware of who Ineos are and what their business is, but I didn't have a clue about Uno-X.
You can bet that if Uno-X put in the same amount of cash that Ineos does I wouldn't be so clueless.
By the way, in case you're wondering: Uno-X is a chain of unmanned fuel stations throughout Norway and Denmark. It is operated as the low-cost section of YX Energi. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uno-X )
And local butcher might get their name in small text under the bottom bracket competing against petrochemical giant with names blazoned over shirts, vans, flags, etc.I think the management of the various teams might disagree with that.
Oh no, we've just lost our title sponsor. Still, no need to worry, the local butcher has offered us free sausages if we advertise them, and it's the thought that counts.