Yolande de Villiers sanctioned for anti-doping rule violation

[Edgar]

where is the synergy between a Life insurance product and cycling? that sponsorship deal was likely due to someone convincing an snr exec that it was a good idea. Only sponsored 4 (?) riders. big sponsor? hmmmm

 

The value of the sponsorship was substantial and it had a very high profile. An Epic Tale. Gave a certain James Reid an opportunity to race XCO. You don't know how else may have benefited down the line. Potentially effected Nedbanks future decisions regarding team and event support. 

 

Cycling didn;t really fit with their strategy did it. An easy out. Low investment and if it turns south just pull the plug. Hardly a major sponsor

 

Then why have they entered into Trail Running Sponsorship? Oxpecker over the past weekend. Do you know the value? The also provided a lot of event support. 

 

 

Were already looking for a way out since the sponsorship was due to that team and nota blanket wide cycling initiative. Nedbank has pulled out of events as well and not due to doping but rather due value for money of sponsoring cycling event and teams not being part of their strategy any longer.

 

Do you know this as a fact and can say without question the continued doping infractions and general poor behavior at events they were involved with had absolutely nothing to do with them exiting the sport?

 

 

Hard to measure the relevance of that question. In my opinion doping is not a deterent. there are opportunities to cheat in all sports yet sponsors provide backing in all.

 

With it being such a public part of the sport, due to the stance taken by the authorities and the popularity of Armstrong it is a relevant question. Doping is certainly a deterrent is supporting cycling. Why do so many sponsors and teams now have an internal doping policy and immediate exit clause  for sponsors? 

[Skubarra]

Name a sponsor that has left the sport but wasn't already in process of leaving when a rider carrying their name got bust.

 

I think you have a good point in that the impact of doping on sponsorships is exaggerated.

 

But when you went for the "name just one example, ever" line of argument you opened yourself for a good hiding...

[Gen]

where is the synergy between a Life insurance product and cycling? that sponsorship deal was likely due to someone convincing an snr exec that it was a good idea. Only sponsored 4 (?) riders. big sponsor? hmmmm

 

Cycling didn;t really fit with their strategy did it. An easy out. Low investment and if it turns south just pull the plug. HArdly a major sponsor

 

 

Were already looking for a way out since the sponsorship was due to that team and nota blanket wide cycling initiative. Nedbank has pulled out of events as well and not due to doping but rather due value for money of sponsoring cycling event and teams not being part of their strategy any longer.

 

 

 

Hard to measure the relevance of that question. In my opinion doping is not a deterent. there are opportunities to cheat in all sports yet sponsors provide backing in all.

Is disagree with your statement regarding Nedbank

 

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/nedbank-ends-team-sponsorship-after-david-george-doping-positive/

 

 

"Nedbank’s decision was made all the more difficult given the immediate impact it has on riders Kevin Evans and James Reid who have represented Team 360Life and their sport commendably. This decision is in no way a reflection on either rider, but purely a consequence of recent events.

 

"Nedbank will continue to remunerate Kevin and James to the end of their contract periods, to ensure that they are not financially impacted by this decision."

 

The company also stated that David George's salary would be donated to the South African Institute of Drug-Free Sport.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Gen

[Tumbleweed]

Neotel... Nolan Hoffman. 30 + people as well as an exciting academy out of a job overnight because of one mans poor decision making.

Mmmmm...there were murmurings that Nolan doped to ride through an injury because he was told the sponsorship would be pulled if he took time off to heal. True or not, Neotel was looking for an excuse to pull out. The company originally said it would continue to support the academy.

[raptor-22]

Well where is the synergy between:

 

Vodacom and rugby

Land Rover and the stormers

UPS and Ferrari F1 team

SAP / Boeing and Ernie Els

 

I think the "synergy" is a nice to have, the real value lies in airtime gained for brand...and if that airtime is negative well then they pull their sponsorship.

 

 

Vodacom and Rugby:

 

how many people at a rugby match and watching on telly. How many people texting each other and gouding each other during said rugby match?

 

Stormers and Land Rover:

 

Land Rover wants people to think they're tough, just like the Stormers. But we all know better.... Still they think the synergy is there

 

UPS and Ferrari:

Ferrari fast car

UPS fast courier........duh

 

SAP, Boeing and Ernie Els

 

Cool calm always gets there. unflappable

Manages resources very ell in complex situations...

 

 

synergy is very clear.

 

 

What's Life insurance got to do with 4 peophol cyclists at the southern tip of Africa. Only the Tjommie factor.

Itec and cycling   huh.

 

 

As for corporate risk evaluation I can well imagine that some companies will look at the risk and say no way. In the same way that some Oil companies do not sponsor motorsport (directly) or some car manufacturers don't participate in motorsport. Each company weighs the risk and decides yay or nay.

But for any human powered sport the risking of a doping positive is just as high or higher than for cycling therefore its not a deterent, just imagined to be a deterent by anti doping evangelists.

People get caught doping for curling FCS!. Olympics are coming up. Take note, now listen carefully

[TheJ]

Mmmmm...there were murmurings that Nolan doped to ride through an injury because he was told the sponsorship would be pulled if he took time off to heal. True or not, Neotel was looking for an excuse to pull out. The company originally said it would continue to support the academy.

 

And taxi drivers drive like douches because the taxi owners pressure them to get certain numbers, and not because the taxi drivers are assholes themselves.

[raptor-22]

And taxi drivers drive like douches because the taxi owners pressure them to get certain numbers, and not because the taxi drivers are assholes themselves.

 

 

 

are suicide bombers not proof that good people can be recruited to do bad things?

Edited June 6, 2016 by raptor-22

[Gen]

Vodacom and Rugby:

 

how many people at a rugby match and watching on telly. How many people texting each other and gouding each other during said rugby match?

 

Stormers and Land Rover:

 

Land Rover wants people to think they're tough, just like the Stormers. But we all know better.... Still they think the synergy is there

 

UPS and Ferrari:

Ferrari fast car

UPS fast courier........duh

 

SAP, Boeing and Ernie Els

 

Cool calm always gets there. unflappable

Manages resources very ell in complex situations...

 

 

synergy is very clear.

 

 

What's Life insurance got to do with 4 peophol cyclists at the southern tip of Africa. Only the Tjommie factor.

Itec and cycling huh.

 

 

As for corporate risk evaluation I can well imagine that some companies will look at the risk and say no way. In the same way that some Oil companies do not sponsor motorsport (directly) or some car manufacturers don't participate in motorsport. Each company weighs the risk and decides yay or nay.

But for any human powered sport the risking of a doping positive is just as high or higher than for cycling therefore its not a deterent, just imagined to be a deterent by anti doping evangelists.

People get caught doping for curling FCS!. Olympics are coming up. Take note, now listen carefully

If you say so..

 

 

IMO it's all about putting a famous face on a product. .. than the synergy

 

Viagra - Pele

Adidas - Messi

NIKE - Ronaldo

 

 

Added.. if you are big enough they won't even care how many scandals you are involved with.. NIKE - Tiger Woods

[BDF]

 Take note, now listen carefully

Seven hundred and eight hundred and..."Listen carefully"

Seven hundred and ....

[raptor-22]

sure in most cases its about a famous face.

Just look at cosmetics.

 

 

I would hardly call the 360life guys famous........unless you live under a rock.

Can't even recognize them without their helmets.

Infamous on the little tip of Africa they most certainly are.

If they came to 10 years ago and asked for sponsorship I'd be "Saaaaay Whaaaaat?!" <insert comedian face>

 

SA cyclists are not famous enough to even be considered brand ambassadors. Did anyone buy a Scott because they saw Kevin Evans on it or did they rather buy it cos of Nino Schurter and Jenny Rissveds.....?

[rouxtjie]

Vodacom and Rugby:

 

how many people at a rugby match and watching on telly. How many people texting each other and gouding each other during said rugby match?

 

Stormers and Land Rover:

 

Land Rover wants people to think they're tough, just like the Stormers. But we all know better.... Still they think the synergy is there

 

UPS and Ferrari:

Ferrari fast car

UPS fast courier........duh

 

SAP, Boeing and Ernie Els

 

Cool calm always gets there. unflappable

Manages resources very ell in complex situations...

 

 

synergy is very clear.

 

 

What's Life insurance got to do with 4 peophol cyclists at the southern tip of Africa. Only the Tjommie factor.

Itec and cycling   huh.

 

 

As for corporate risk evaluation I can well imagine that some companies will look at the risk and say no way. In the same way that some Oil companies do not sponsor motorsport (directly) or some car manufacturers don't participate in motorsport. Each company weighs the risk and decides yay or nay.

But for any human powered sport the risking of a doping positive is just as high or higher than for cycling therefore its not a deterent, just imagined to be a deterent by anti doping evangelists.

People get caught doping for curling FCS!. Olympics are coming up. Take note, now listen carefully

waaahaaa...

 

Now you just making it up....but while we at it...Life insurers want to promote healthy living, and mtb'ing is well healthy, if you dont dope..

 

This is easy man

[BDF]

Vodacom and Rugby:

 

how many people at a rugby match and watching on telly. How many people texting each other and gouding each other during said rugby match?

 

Stormers and Land Rover:

 

Land Rover wants people to think they're tough, just like the Stormers. But we all know better.... Still they think the synergy is there

 

UPS and Ferrari:

Ferrari fast car

UPS fast courier........duh

 

SAP, Boeing and Ernie Els

 

Cool calm always gets there. unflappable

Manages resources very ell in complex situations...

 

 

synergy is very clear.

 

 

What's Life insurance got to do with 4 peophol cyclists at the southern tip of Africa. Only the Tjommie factor.

Itec and cycling   huh.

 

 

As for corporate risk evaluation I can well imagine that some companies will look at the risk and say no way. In the same way that some Oil companies do not sponsor motorsport (directly) or some car manufacturers don't participate in motorsport. Each company weighs the risk and decides yay or nay.

But for any human powered sport the risking of a doping positive is just as high or higher than for cycling therefore its not a deterent, just imagined to be a deterent by anti doping evangelists.

People get caught doping for curling FCS!. Olympics are coming up. Take note, now listen carefully

There is a difference between synergy (1 + 1 = 3) and brands associating themselves with a sport or sporting personalities. Sponsorships are generally supposed to be a form of advertising where there is exposure for the brand in the media and enhancement of that exposure by having a famous person or team excelling while resplendent in their branding.

[raptor-22]

life insurance  and high risk sports.....

 

 

 

Wow , thought only discovery owned that space.

Edited June 6, 2016 by raptor-22

[raptor-22]

There is a difference between synergy (1 + 1 = 3) and brands associating themselves with a sport or sporting personalities. Sponsorships are generally supposed to be a form of advertising where there is exposure for the brand in the media and enhancement of that exposure by having a famous person or team excelling while resplendent in their branding.

 

 

indeed and in the major cycling markets I'd say there's truth in this.

 

Locally I don't believe it holds true. I believe a lot of the sponsorship comes from passionate individuals who just want to see someone wearing their brand in their favourite discipline (i.e. the tjommie tjiommie system).

 

And despite doping, I they are passionate enough about the sport they will continue to support even if not under the same brand.

Edited June 6, 2016 by raptor-22

[Gen]

Best brand ambassador I have seen lately. . Has gotto be Chris Hemsworth and Tag Heuer. . I was in JHB the other day and I nearly crashed my car when I saw that huge add. Good heavens.. I would buy my hubby a tag Heuer if I was guaranteed he would turn into that if he put it on.

[BDF]

life insurance  and high risk sports.....

 

 

 

Wow , thought only discovery owned that space.

Maybe they should develop a policy that pays out if one is bust doping and loses one's income as a result. They could call it Bust-Cover or something like that.