Decathlon-Ag2r Mondiale Team Budget

2024 was a bumper year for the Decathlon-Ag2r La Mondiale team. Sports retailer Decathlon joined as title sponsor: out went the brown shorts and in came new kit including bikes. The team had a roaring start to the season but fell short in the Tour de France and then finished with a podium at the Vuelta thanks to Ben O’Connor and finished sixth on the UCI rankings. Now we can see the budget for the year.

2024
The entity behind the team is France Cyclisme SAS, during the year it changed legal status a SARL to a SAS company, the difference is too small to matter for a sports blog. These are the published accounts for the year ending 31 December 2024.

Le budget

The headline budget from the cropped screengrab is €31.1 million, up €6.4 million on the previous year.

Year-by-year

As one of the rare teams to consistently publish accounts we can track the numbers annually. 2024 saw the budget leap and we’ll explore why in a moment (for sticklers: the chart uses the net number of €31.340 million which differs from the headline number cited above as this works better for comparison over the years).

The wage bill

The budget might have jumped by €6.4 million but this is not down to a corresponding increase in wages. As you can see the salary bill for 2024 was €13.7 million, up from €11.8 million the previous year. But we can go back to the 2022 accounts to see the salary bill was €12.3 million that year so these costs have not soared. Notes to the accounts show the team has gone from 71 employees in 2022 to 102 in 2024.

As ever for French teams there payroll taxes to pay, here amounting to 35% of the wage bill. Other teams don’t pay this, either because they’re in different jurisdictions with lighter taxes or they don’t have the same regulations that require French teams to take on riders as full-time employees. It’s a real headwind for French teams as recruiting a rider at the market or net rate comes with a mark-up on top or using these numbers it costs €18.5 million to hire €13.7 million’s worth of riders.

What is the wage bill? It’s complicated as there are salaries and also other expenses. A footnote to the accounts shows the UCI bank guarantee of €3.9 million. Normally this is 25% of the gross salary for the team so multiply this by four and we get a total of €16 million. There’s no guide to the differences so one guess is at the start of the year the forecast gross wage bill was €16 million but by the end of the year with bonuses paid out it climbed to €18.5 million but again that’s speculating.

Costs
There are “other purchases and external charges” of €11 million and these are not specified. These are so hefty you’d think them linked to wages as these make up the bulk of every outfit’s costs, typically paying riders uses up 70-80% of a team’s budget… but there’s no mention of this so we’re left in the dark.

Actual “purchases of raw materials and other supplies” is listed as €625k so here think of fuel, food, training camp hotels and such like but it’s not broken down into details.

All this meant the team ran a loss of €846k for the year which goes on the books for 2025.

Internal issues
For all the success on the road it was a fraught time inside the team HQ. The squad was founded by Vincent Lavenu but he was ejected during the course of the year. Earlier in 2022 he’d been forced to sell his stake in the team to Ag2r La Mondiale as a condition of the insurer continuing to sponsor the team and now as a mere employee his contract was terminated.

The accounts show €847,000 put aside for “litigation” but this is towards the general reorganisation of the team with the junior and U23 development teams being brought into the team and reorganisation costs associated with this. The team used to work with a club in Chambéry as its feeder team but now has its own in-house squads and with these added costs and staff on the books.

These provisions are only ones, marking an end to the long saga with Factor and Merckx bikes that loyal readers might remember for the claims of missing payments.

There is also a €300,000 transfer payment to another team. Which rider, which team? It is not stated but we can wager it’s for Johannes Staune-Mittet’s move from Visma-LAB with the Norwegian switching teams by breaking his contract early and both teams agreeing to settle this.

À fonds la forme
Decathlon joined as a title sponsor. Sales managers were purring from all the talk of how the team’s new Van Rysel RCR Pro bike was a factor in the success and anecdotally sales of the bike thrived. How much did this cost? Well Decathlon paid as a title sponsor but the accounts include a separate mention of the company’s bike brand Van Rysel

Here you can see €3.5 million for the bike and clothing supplier. That’s a lot for World Tour bike sponsorship although the going rate is seven figures this days. Notes in the account show some of the €3.5 million is also for 2025.

Balance sheet
Teams often have tiny balance sheets because they hold few assets, just a fleet of vehicles – which can be leased sometimes – and some tools from laptops to tools. But this team has more with €21.3 million of assets and liabilities. It’s mainly down to unpaid debts like the social security payments on the wage bill, unpaid as in the team simply had not made the payment at the time of the accounts so the impending sum is sitting there, as opposed to anything overdue. Similarly on 31 December 2024 the team was waiting for suppliers to bill them for €4.8 million in total.

In terms of assets the vehicle fleet is valued at €2.3 million, IT products at €0.4 million and €0.6m on unspecified plant and layouts.

Conclusion
As ever this is one of the rare teams to publish a full set of accounts. Every year estimates for World Tour team budgets appear online, often during the Tour de France, but they always seem to the numbers wrong for the teams that publish accounts so the figures for those that don’t must be even more off.

This team’s longevity lets us compare year after year. It’s only one dataset rather than the story of every team but illustrates how budgets have jumped. Here the team budget has doubled in this decade alone while qualitatively the team has stayed as a mid-table squad. Looking into the 2024 accounts the increase is only partly explained by soaring rider wages, there are other internal factors like taking on board development teams to expand the workforce and putting money aside for litigation risks.

Teams are meant to break even so the annual loss of €846k is significant but given Decathlon are satisfied and now CMA-CGM is joining, with talk of the budget going to €40 million this sum isn’t existential in the way recurring losses on this scale torpedoed the Intermarché team.

76 thoughts on “Decathlon-Ag2r Mondiale Team Budget”

    • But would it be any better?

      As we can see here the cost of running a mid-table World Tour team has doubled in the space of a few years without getting twice as a exciting, or twice as many races, or twice as many people enjoying it all. It’s good for the riders as wages are the big gains here and with this has come longer contracts. But we’re also seeing more sponsors buy into this, literally in the case of Decathlon which has bought the team and will be splitting share ownership with co-sponsor CMA-CGM soon.

      • Genuine question: is a lot of the money going on more support staff and training camps? There was a time, not so long ago, when teams turned up at races without a team-bus and with only a few mechanics and soigneurs. Teams have large entourages now, no only a bus but a cook (and mobile van), trainers, dietricians, doctors, pr-people etc. The article above suggested 31 more support staff in just two years.

        • Yes is the short answer which explains why the vehicle fleet is valued at over €2 million. Longer answer is that more staff here to 100 is partly incorporating the U23 and junior teams into the business.

          As much as the new bike was the media-friendly story behind the team’s success in 2024, one reason was behind-the-scenes improvements in logistics software which meant kit turned up in the right places and managers at races could spend more time on tactics rather than counting spare wheels etc.

    • *Most* football teams in Europe?
      I don’t have all the figures but I’m far from sure about over 30m/yr being “a tiny fraction” for *the majority* of football teams.
      You should restrict that to top divisions and a selected choice of European countries, and it might not be enough to make it a correct estimate.
      It’s of course a petty fraction of the budget of the richest football teams across the continent, and I must suppose that’s even more true for Premiere League, but most Serie A teams manage a 60m to 120m budget, while in La Liga most budgets sit in the 50m to 100m range. Is that much more than 30m? Yep, it is! Yet, is 30m just “a tiny fraction” of 50m, or let’s even push to 120m? In my views of budgets, a fraction, yes, but not exactly a tiny one. That’s what most teams are working with in the richest European sport, at the top level in two of its most relevant countries.
      Surely, I’ll heartily agree that it’s a “tiny fraction” when compared to Real, Barça (both around 1b), or even Atlético Madrid at half of the former, as Inter, Milan and Juventus

      (in Italy, as a curiosity, you also have Roma and Napoli around 300m, the rest of rich teams is below 240, whereas in Spain barring the big three no team gets even close to 200m).

      And, very important, the above obviously includes TV rights and riders market, two elements which for cycling teams simply don’t apply, the former as it’s not team-related, the latter as it’s not developed as such (football teams get a lot and also pay a lot, of course, but all that inflates the magnitude of the overall budget anyway, especially in favour of smaller teams whose “real”, so to say, economic impact is probably way smaller; with “real” I simply mean here “related to other parts of the general economic system, not self-referential, internally managed or circular”).

      • I think this is a quite specific Western mindset. More eyeballs, more money, always grow the sport (product). It’s about money and greed. For example, no one in here in Ireland cares if Hurling is played more in South America. There is a base and revenue already in place.

  2. Thanks for the interesting post.

    It’s a good thing that the riders are getting wages to help in post-career (not just the biggest stars on the teams), but how will the team face up to the ongoing juggernaut of UAE?

    Double the cost for the same result does not seem a good return but now there’s a whole bunch of very well funded teams so a lot will depend on, I think, good management.

    • Double the cost is a lot, yes, but it’s not for the same result.
      Partly it’s a case of the price of having to keep up with the rocketing budget increases across the WT but it’s also true that they have become a much better quality team.
      There was a season or two where they were little more than Bardet and a bunch of guys who strived manfully to support him in his biggest ambitions but weren’t up to the task. Those two years of budget decreases in 2019-20 saw a dropoff in results and rankings. The Decathlon years have seen them become unquestionably the best team in France, not insignificant in itself in that country, as well as ranking 6th and 7th with the UCI, essentially the top of the middle tier of teams with sights set on breaking through to become one of the top teams.

  3. They have apparently spent over €2million to lure Kooij from Visma-LAB with a lead out. That sounds like a good deal for Kooij, who may get a TdF start which he wouldn’t at Visma, but does that guarantee big wins for his new team? With Merlier, Philipsen, De Lie, Magnier and Milan, he’s one of the top sprinters but not as yet the best. Brennan could be in that company in 2026 too with more versatility.

    Maybe he’ll win Milan-San Remo and prove this doubter wrong.

    • I gather the plan with Kooij is for quick headline results rather than a long term project, he should be able to get a Tour sprint win and if not then more during the season which will help – if he does French cup races then good luck to Penhoët, Tesson, Coquard and others – and he’s there to soak up pressure and expectations while younger riders can try to get experience in the background.

      • IR talks of quick headline results but PCS shows a three year contract to 2028 which contradicts that somewhat. Was that duration needed to lure him? As IR says he could clean up in French Cup races, in Boycott’s term a flat track bully, but what about the WT races? From 2027 onwards, his team might be more interested in supporting Seixas who, if French dreams come true, will be the new Blaireau.

        • Yes, it’s not like he’s got to get results by March. It’s just hiring him is a relatively quick way to get results and once this three year horizon has passed the team will look different and the plan at least is to go on to more.

          But remember if they budget reaches €40 million, it’s €30 million in spending terms and so comparable with many teams rather than super team league.

      • I am guessing IR is correct that they want someone getting results at the Tour (and elsewhere) while they wait for Seixas to mature: they want some results immediately. But they also likely anticipate Kooj will be getting results 3-4 years down the road (if he stays).

          • Don’t you think that Decathlon would further raise their investiment, had they in-home the next French potential TDF winner? It’s quite a big company and “sport” plus “French” might mean more for them than for, say, Movistar’s new management.

            And the good thing is that even at such a level, even in such a historical moment, still much might eventually go down to a a good deal of human factor. In this specific case, I mean.

          • And CMA-CGM would surely be willing to put in some more money if Seixas was winning the Tour. In fact, there current motivation to fund the team seems to be due to Seixas’ realistic potential to win the Tour.

          • I was thinking more UAE, Red Bull, etc. than Movistar, gabriele.

            I hope you’re right, John. I always prefer seeing good riders on different teams

          • Was it going to end up as monetary arm wrestling, Red Bull hasn’t the muscle of Decathlon. I named Movistar precisely as a sponsor with a bigger financial potential but not as willing to invest, especially after the big change in the company (we’re speaking of sponsors, not teams, just to be clear).
            UAE of course would be able to, if they wanted, as many national sponsors, but in that case there are also different dynamics.

    • Unless Kooij suffers excessively the move away from Visma, we’re speaking of a 24 yo with nearly 50 career pro wins already, despite having been kept under a healthy regime of gradual pro racing during his first 2-3 seasons. If you check his 41 victories after turning 21 yo, *barring three they’re all at .Pro (21) or WT (17!) level*

      (including “fake” WT races, of course, but also very serious races which are underrated as .Pro)

      If he can thrive away from Visma, he looks no bluff whatsoever. What’s also true is that for now he looks more of a stage man rather than a one-day machine, which indeed isn’t ideal for Decathlon’s general organisation, but it seems a detail which can be worked out, or anyway be compatible with this phase of Seixas’ career.

      I’d already rate him above Merlier, barring his full QS metamorphose in the last couple of seasons. De Lie’s got more talent but he’s also way less consistent, Magnier also looks excellent but it’s not a finished product either. The sprinting field’s got more talent than it had had in several recent years, yet exact results will depend very much on the evolution of these athletes (and mutually so), as only Philipsen is a totally established and known quantity (in that he should at least keep his standard of the last 5 years, although maybe not hitting again the heights of 2023 and 2024). So in that fast moving space Kooij looks a relatively safe bet for the intended ends.

  4. There seems to be an acceptance in the comments that the team are much better now than before. I’m not sure this is the case. They used to have Bardet to get a podium place in the Tour, he was at one stage about as close to a rival as Froome had. They also had Naesen for visibility in the classics and Vuillermoz for occasional stage wins and goldfish impressions. Now they have Gall to bob around the top 10 in Grand Tours, Armirail to be on TV for 3 or 4 hours and Lapeira to do something similar. Cosnefroy has been quiet lately and is leaving anyway. I’m not sure thats a vast improvement really. Not that I am knocking them, they do a decent job and I suppose have at least treaded water while other French teams have all but drowned.

    It’s probably a fairly sad fact that they’ll potentially do a good job developing Seixas and looking after his best interests, only to be rewarded with him taking off for a big pay cheque as soon as he looks like fulfilling his potential.

    • My understanding of the economics of cycling is that 50 percent of the money comes from the Tour de France, and 50 percent of that money comes from winning it. If you have the Tour winner (or are in the fight for the win), then you generate an enormous amount of value.

      Each generation a new rider emerges to dominate the Tour, and the money is found to fund his team. Teams have not had Tour winners over multiple generations in the past, they end up getting replaced by the team of the new winner. If Seixas proves to be in the fight for victory, then the money will flow into his team. I think Decathlon are betting on this outcome.

      • In Decathlon’s case, overall exposure during the season across multiple European markets can be a factor as well. Although they offer high-performing bikes and helmets (both considered quite fast based on aero tests by Cyclingnews), they sell a lot of entry- and mid-level products. So while the Tour de France is crucial for many teams, for a corporation like Decathlon—which sells not only €5,000+ bikes but primarily FMCG items—the year-end sales figures likely matter most. That increase in sales can come not just from the three-week slot in July, but also from the team’s results, visibility, and marketing throughout the entire season and across all European markets.

      • The percentages vary, for many teams the Tour is 70-80% of their annual visibility in the media. It can depend what the sponsor is in the sport for, are they there to reach a mass audience, to generate VIP moments or other things.

        Ambition and success here are working well already and it’s attracted shipping company CMA-CGM which is a big business in search of publicity. We’ve seen something similar in women’s cycling with FDJ-Suez where the jersey is full of other top level sponsors.

        • I knew i came across CMA-CGM somewhere… Shipping! With their non existent track record of ontime performance they’re in dire need of some positive marketing. Great to see them choose cycling for visibility. No doubt parttly in a attempt at green washing one of the biggest CO2 emitting industries worldwide. Maybe worth an article exploring what they’re hoping to gain from the partnership, IR?

      • I’m not very convinced, the above looks like a truism of sort while not actually mirroring the situation of cycling across decades… even the most recent ones. Yet – as things has been changing deeply in the last 4 or 5 years – I can not exclude that it will become an effective prophecy of sort from now on.

        However, the economic environment of cycling teams is extremely diverse, both in a given moment and across time, so it’s very hard to generalise about motives and sustainability or duration of a team as a specific economic project.
        QS lasted many seasons with no credible TDF contender and they looked under major distress precisely when they had found on. EF goes on season after season with sparse if any serious “contending” in TDF’s GC (unless one considers such Urán’s bid in 2017 ROTFL). Two top teams this season, and both historical ones in a sense, like Astana or Trek haven’t had a serious TDF contender for 10-15 years now. Movistar has been surviving for decades with a *potential* winner… every 10 or even 20 years! Alpecin thrives without a TDF core focus, Bahrain’s been around for nearly a decade without a hint of any TDF strong bid, Israel looked self-sustaining, too, then Jayco, Lotto etc. etc. etc. Heck, UAE itself before Pogi has endured a quarter of a century with Cunego and Meintjes as their most prominent TDF bets ^___^

        • I don’t think we disagree. There are always a ton of teams which don’t aspire to win the Tour and have no serious Tour candidate. But the biggest budget teams will have a Tour candidate (there are normally only 2-3 candidates, at most, each year). My comment is that the money follows the candidate, rather than the candidate follows the money. Having the (potential) Tour winner is what allows the team to generate the serious money. If a team no longer has the candidate, the budget fades towards the mid-pack (Ineos, Astana, Movistar recently). And this explains the turnover in the teams winning the Tour through the years.

          • Yes, I guess I misunderstood the concept of “being replaced”, that is, while you were meaning “as the receiving end of a money flow”, I took it… in a more radical sense.

            Even so (and agreeing with the more general idea of having a TDF potential winner as a strong mony magnet), I think that several exceptions can be found, Lidl-Trek being presently a notable one, same for Red Bull. Same idea but opposite flow for Jumbo-Visma which saw the money slip away right when they had the TDF winner, and although it’s true that it happened for reasons not strictly related to cycling, yet they still couldn’t find as easily a strong replacement for Jumbo.

            In the recent past, Cadel Evans is an interesting case study as a consistent TDF candidate (and eventual winner) who didn’t look to be attractin’ huge flows of money to his teams.

          • I agree with your point about Cadel Evans being an interesting case. I don’t remember too well those years, but I have the impression that Evans was over 30 by the time he was getting podium results at the Tour in 2008-2009. And nobody really thought he could win it, at least not enough to put up a lot of money to support him. Most people were betting on Contador or the Schleck brothers as the “big GC riders”. Even after he won it in 2011, most thought there was little hope he could repeat it (he was already 34), and believed his best days were behind him. Maybe my impression is wrong.

          • Evans was a second-line favourite in 2006, the sort of “surprise winner who’s not such a surprise, as at least he’s in the list of potential suprise winners!”.
            But that was eventually a peculiar year because expectations were turned over at the very last minute by the effects of Operación Puerto.
            His status rapidly grew, as in 2007 he already appeared among the “top-3-favs” lists of several experts, although the general consensus mainly focussed on Vinokourov, Klöden and Leipheimer. Those who excluded Klöden considering that he’d be back to a support role for Vino, or excluded Levi as they couldn’t see him as a winning figure, tended to insert there Evans’ bid, whose limits were considered precisely lack of team support in gregari or TTs.
            It’s worth noting that the general opinion was that the Astana or Discovery athletes were the favourites as they raced for the richest teams, not as they could be deemed as radically superior to the rest.
            That’s a good exception, or variant, to the general idea you suggest above.
            A team may have become the top one as they have had one of the best candidates for a TDF win, hence attracting money, superdomestiques etc., but there’s also the option of such a legacy going on in subsequent years and being taken advantage (or not) by different athletes who, without any overwhelming TDF fav status, just ride the wave of the economic-political status quo. Geraint Thomas anyone…
            This ain’t be working all the times, either, just check Banesto not being on the very forefront (nor thereabouts) right after Indurain retired, despite having more than decent riders (if they had had the opportune push) like Olano or El Chava.
            Back to Cadel Evans, in 2008 and in 2009 was clearly among the very favourites for the final victory, probably even the top fav, according to most people both within the environment and beyond (NYT had him along with Contador… and Lance!).
            In 2010 after the BMC switch he was indeed back to “wildcard” consideration, but what’s manifest is that he and/or his team didn’t capitalise on his status when it was generally perceived as such.

            (we shouldn’t forget that he was also a top favourites – and actually bound to win, had it been a straightforward race – at the 2007 Vuelta)

          • Evans didn’t start competing on the road until he was 23 or 24. Given his outsider status he made good progress to rise near the top … but then he ran into Contador.
            After his surprise defeat to Sastre the wheels started to fall off but recovered and got the job done in 2011 when he was running out of road. The remarkable thing about that was that he did it almost single handedly on a weak team.
            For someone who started late in the sport with essentially no backers he achieved a lot

        • To be fair, EF (as EF Education) have had a number of GT podiums. Hugh Carthy in the Vuelta in ’20, Carapaz in the Giro this year. And they’re usually picking up a few GT stages each season too. They usually do have an ‘aspiring’ GC contender most seasons.

          • I would say that currently there are only two riders who are serious contenders to win the Tour. And that these are the only two riders that can generate serious amounts of money to support their ambitions. They get the vast majority of the the media coverage (e.g. they get eyeballs on them during the Tour, and newspaper reports etc).

            The others, they might be able to podium (or they might be completely invisible). They do not generate sponsor money in anywhere near the same way. They get only minor coverage in the media (they are rather “niche”, and followed by the keen fans rather than large number of casual fans who tune in to the Tour).

            If you looked at media reviews, you might be surprised how lopsided the coverage actually is. The Tour de France massively dominates media coverage of the cycling calendar; and one-or-two riders dominate the coverage of the Tour. And hence how valuable it is to have the one-or-two riders who dominate the media coverage. Everyone else is a minor character (in terms of media coverage).

          • @Paul J
            The debate was exclusively about TDF, as also specified above re: EF.

            @John
            What you say isn’t of course true in several European countries which still represent a decent share of cycling supposedly global interest, namely Italy, Belgium, Spain… and France.
            Different races may enter the media limelight, and different athletes, too (essentially, national ones). The former is true especially for Italy and Belgium, the latter for those four countries. In Italy the Giro very often still gets more media impact than the TDF, both on generalist and specialised media. I don’t have much first hand experience, but I suspect that Classics in Belgium can be quite big on media, same for athletes who surely didn’t build their fame on the TDF.
            Then there are other interesting combinations, like, dunno, just to cite a very recent one, Lipowitz, whom – for a number of reasons (sponsor push, nationality, young gun) got some decent media attention in several countries despite not being even close to any option of final victory.
            A little further back Girmay also had his broad moments of glory during his best TDF.
            And more examples could be made.
            Your observation is way more valid when you only take into account the most minimal unit of exposure, the newsfeed bit, which is also where the TDF builds up its most impressive difference over the rest of the cycling world.
            But although extremely important in terms of big figures (ya know, the sort of peculiar data which supposedly allow the TDF to say they’re the ahem “most watched” event after the FIFA Worlds and the Olympics), that’s just a tiny facet of the gigantic and complex concept of media exposure which companies buy into when deciding to invest in cycling, including all sort of smaller impacts at higher intensities and every variant in-between.

          • @John
            Another easy example: Pinot.
            His media value hit hugely above his sporting weight, which was excellent, indeed, but probably just once close to “being a TDF candidate”, and barely so.

            (besides, failing in that case was probably nearly as media effective as succeding! – of course… not true, because had he actually won the impact would have been monstre, way superior to any “normal” recent win, but the above approximation or hyperbole is all the same telling, I think).

          • Only three one-day-classics generate much coverage: Milan-San-Remo, Tour of Flanders, Paris-Roubaix. The two other grand tours also get a decent amount of coverage. The Giro is the race with the second largest value after the Tour. The one week stage races get very little coverage (the Dauphine this year got some as a prelude to the Tour, with Pogi v. Jonas). The finances of cycling are quite peculiar, and very skewed to a small number of races.

            You are correct in that an Italian rider can get good coverage in the Italian media from the Giro. And the Belgian classics riders in the Belgian media from the cobbled classics. Teams in Italy, Spain and Belgium can put together a decent (e.g. mid-tier) budget to race their home races. Alpecin and before then Quickstep have done this really well.

            Vaughters, at EDF is interesting: he knows what funds his team (admittedly likely more skewed to the Tour than some other teams). He was saying that one good stage from Healy in the Tour was worth more to the team than Carapaz in the whole Giro. He said his sponsors valued winning Liege at zero (he has a funny story from when he told his sponsors about winning that race).

            For the discussion about Seixas. My original point is that if Seixas looks like he will win the Tour, then a lot of money will follow for his team. And these sponsors won’t much care what he does is the Ploay Classic.

          • @John, but what are your sources about “media coverage”?
            They look quite similar to what I know as “aggregated global tv audience figures” but the two aspect don’t always overlap, even less so nowadays. To cite just a single example, Strade Bianche is a race which gets a way greater media coverage, even in generalist media and especially in “alternative” forms (say, a photo gallery without much further content), than it currently gets tv eyeballs. But there are many other examples, of course.

            Italian, Spanish, French and Belgian riders get more coverage in their respective countries not only through some given national races but in terms of specific attention directed to them through different channels, irrespective of what do they race, or even if they race at all; which, as a whole, may generate on turn a snowball effect through other countries. Evenepoel’s case is quite significant. I’d bet he’s got a bigger media impact and coverage than, say, Vingegaard although until now only the latter is a serious rival for Pogi at the TDF. When I went checking who were seen as the TDF favs by the *international* English-speaking press in the 2nd half of the 10s, I was shocked seeing Cunego there (by then, most Italians believed he’d better give up for good any GC in GTs). But that was just a consequence of a media impact way superior to his own sporting profile – and such a media impact had reached international effects merely prompted by domestic attention.

            Even the distribution of TV viewers show huge difference among national structures. A someway “silly” example: the “most/least watched TDF stages” may vary wildly from country to country. So, in a scenery where many markets aren’t actually as global as we’d maybe think, the aggregate world data might not even be the most adequate tool for investors’ decisions.

          • What proportion of media coverage is Pogacar v. Lipowitz? Does Lipowitz get:
            (a) about the same coverage?
            (b) half the ocoverage?
            (c) 10 percent?
            (d) 1 percent?
            (e) less than 1 percent?
            The answer to this tells you how valuable these riders are. And how valuable (fighting for) the win is rather than coming third.

    • @Richard S, I guess we’ll see, but it seems like Decathlon is willing to put up the funds. It would be nice if they could match the investment with others as a promising French team.

  5. I would argue that although for now we’re talking about “potential,” it’s looking really good for 2026 and maybe exceptionally good for 2027. Their incoming transfers make them immediately competitive for GT stage wins, and their classics project appears to be moving forward toward a very competitive position. Riccitello may be limited, but he has already shown that he is a very high-level climber and not a joke in a TT. Kooij has shown that he can win if given the opportunity, and I think he’ll have good support in 2026. If Seixas continues with his progression, I would expect Decathlon-insert-acronym-here to be consistently in the discussion for top fives and podiums at a lot of different types of races.

  6. Regarding Decathlon’s sponsorship, I’m wondering about the availability of their equipment in physical Decathlon stores across Europe. For example, in Poland they don’t have their RCR-F helmets in stock—they’re only available online. The same goes for the team replica kits. Usually, only one set is presented on a display, but you can’t check the fit or buy it; you have to order online.

    • I tried the Decathlon website in France for the helmet and it wasn’t available in most stores either unless ordered for delivery… but it does exist in some.

      Some of the bike kit is a departure from the store’s business model where it offers very low entry level items rather than items meant to last a lifetime. And now it’s selling €9k bikes.

  7. It’s really exciting to see AG2R-Deca coming through with a strong French prospect.

    Something that constantly surprises me is how quickly teams/sponsorship mobilise around an uber-talent and you’re suddenly out of the ‘Banesto era’ into the ‘Discovery era’ into the ‘Sky era’ and most recently it feels like Jumbo barely even had their moment before being usurped by UAE.

    Firmly expect either Red Bull or Decathlon to be pushing UAE for the top table in less time than we imagine.

    France winning the TDF would be good for everyone in cycling also.
    I’ll be rooting for that Sexy Ass when the time comes.

      • I once had a friend with the same surname, and his nickname was indeed “Sexy Ass.” Nobody could figure out how to pronounce it, much like the current debate around young Paul. My friend chose the more Portuguese-sounding “say-shas” rather than what I’m told is how Paul pronounces it (“sex ass”). Anyway, I could think of a lot worse nicknames than Sexy Ass!

  9. Good read, feels like budgets that felt unaffordable just a few years ago look average.

    Also did I hallucinate or they supposed to be having a women’s team?

    • I think a women’s team is coming for 2027, if not 2028. It takes planning as they need to start in the transfer market maybe 18 months or more in order to identify riders and get agreements with them. Or how to secure Célia Gery, Marion Bunel or Eglantine Rayer.

      The team did look before at this with the idea of taking over a small existing team and then building on this which would have been another route in but the plans fell apart.

      • Pity they didn’t try working with the Ceratizit team management (an existing WTW, not a small team) given the sponsor’s withdrawal at season end was known a number of months in advance of the transfer period and the team was looking pretty safe on the technical ranking.

        Building a team will be much more work.

  10. It’s an intriguing development. Decathlon is among several teams that have significantly increased their budgets, yet overall interest in professional cycling appears to be stagnant.

    The global audience for the Tour is declining, and in many countries, fewer companies are willing to sponsor pro teams. German radio highlighted the struggle for funding among non-WT teams (Germany lacks a single Proteam but , I beleive, has 7-8 at the CT level), with resources becoming scarce. Even with Remco on the roster, QS couldn’t secure enough Belgian funding to create a proper Tour team for him. Visma also seems to face challenges, hinting at potential seismic changes ahead. On the other hand, teams like Uno-X, with their strong Norwegian-Danish identity, present a different approach to maintaining interest.

    UAE is the only team with seemingly unlimited resources, but very few—probably not even the UAE themselves—would want a repeat of ’25. I believe ’26 will be the year when some financial fundamentals are challenged and potentially start to shift.

    • Is that not more of a commentary on global economics than the popularity of professional road cycling? Money is concentrated in different places now, and its not the former industrial areas of western europe that have traditionally backed professional cycling teams. Unless you’ve got despot backing you’re going to struggle. That doesn’t necessarily mean Johann sat in his house in Gent is any less interested in cycling.

    • Why do you say UAE would probably not want a repeat of ’25? As far as I can make out, utter dominance is what despots – whether sportswashing, Arab or otherwise – live for. If you wanted to make a bet right now that they won’t be gunning for 100 wins next year then I’d happily snap your hand off.

      • I have absolutely no illusions about the UAE’s sportwashing scheme, but I believe even they would want to maintain or, ideally, strengthen the competitive landscape to sustain interest.

    • The two aspects are related.
      As I had been writing before, it’s the risk of bubbles, especially in a capitalist environment where often a bubble doesn’t mean increase in biodiversity through a broader spreading of resources but concentration and higher barriers.
      No wins, no impact on racing, no visibility.
      Competing for each and every objective among the vast variety offered by pro cycling races have become incredibly more expensive in very little time. If the pay for exposure rate was excellent 20 years ago, meaning both good returns *and* wide access for many potential sponsors, now the sheer number of companies which might be interested in the investment has been reduced by high costs, plus doubts on return.
      But the change in scale is also a change in attitude. Decathlon, Lidl or RedBull can’t have the same expectations as Lampre, Liquigas or Fassa Bortolo.

      Cycling saw the bubble as on opportunity for financial growth of some with no compensation mechanism, not to speak of middle to long term vision.

      The big organisers used the resources to strengthen their local market without any sort of shared, overall perspective, which in France was further prompted by the nationalist approach within the UCI. Local public grew while global one stayed steady (TDF), or local public kept decent volumes while international one shrank more or less brutally (Giro, Vuelta, Spring Classics). The Giro turnover went up, way bigger sponsoring and hosting fees, but Italian viewers are albeit slowly declining and international ones are reduced to niche.

      The big companies forced unprecedented level of top-down control in the market which pushed competitors like Campagnolo nearly out of the board, as many other specialised manufacturers of components. The result was often negative uniformity in several forms (Specialized not allowing to choose a different size for components like stem and/or handlebar and the frame, but also the nearly disappearing of Belgian drop or rim brakes or top level alu wheels etc.).

      Now as always the cycle went on, the wheel is spinning, and we’re left wondering if it makes sense to watch a four men show or to buy oligopoly bikes which might be great for some (esp. pro level athletes) but which for many or most are simply less adequate, less functional, less effective than what was available 10 years ago at half the price.

      Diversity… simply works better. If smaller scale productive capitalism was indeed able to foster it, moloch-like financial capitalism on gargantual scale looks prone to walk the opposite path – at least in cycling (but I’d dare to say that it’s more of a general thing).

      • Off on a tangent: but what are we talking about when we are talking about a “Belgian drop” above? (Certainly not chocolate or a Brian Eno song…)

        • Handlebar drop about 145 mm, deeper than what we currently find on the market, useful to go hard hands down, as in sprinting or attacking violently, because they grant much more clearance when out of the saddle. I suppose Pogi ain’t need ’em while the rest are too busy just surviving, let alone “attacking violently”. Jokes apart, it’s not as I thought they were “better” (though I personally prefer them ^___^), just that I liked having a few different options available when setting up a bike. Now I think only Deda has an alu version, carbon are extint. Buying tips are welcome if you know about others 😀

      • I’ll agree with your points. But you can add the Tour to the list of events with shrinking audiences. I saw the link with not insignificant across-the-board viewer shrinkage this year and the sponsor consultant in the radio show I referred to, said that overall German viewership fell 2% this year. Despite Lipowitz.

        So the sport has a general problem and I think it will hit quite a few WT teams soon.

        • To be fair to Florian Lipowitz, the German TDF audience figures were significantly worse before last week, with an estimated drop of around 6-7%. So even though we all knew he was never in play for the win, the sheer fact that we had a German close to the podium pulled back quite a few viewers. Don’t underestimate the pull of a local riding well.. 🙂

        • A 2% drop in avg. viewership is “steady” rather than shrinking. TV audience can show way more radical variation in the short term, so that figure as such says very little especially in a market which hasn’t been very significant TV-wise for the TDF in, how long now? Decades? So it’s more about looking at 5-year rolling trends, which anyway I suspect might not be amazing all the same.

          As I said, the trend in *national* (French) audience in the 20s is clearly on the up. (for now).

          • You’re absolutely right, but the 2% drop is still, as Anton pointed out, following a surge in viewers credited to Lipo.

            You could argue that Germany has never been the most cycling-obsessed country (and you’d be right), but it still supports my point. Professional cycling is dealing with a shrinking audience and declining global interest. While a handful of WorldTour teams are going all-in on investments, it’s hard to see how this won’t negatively affect the other teams—and the sport as a whole.

        • Sources other than “I maybe heard it on the radio?
          I have other numbers, for instance, they talk abou increse…

          https://www.dwdl.de/zahlenzentrale/103161/tour_de_france_biegt_mit_spitzenquoten_auf_die_zielgerade/
          “Two days before the end of the Tour de France, Florian Lipowitz is almost certain of third place in the overall standings – much to the delight of ARD, which has noticed a noticeable increase in audience interest due to the German rider’s success in the past few days. This was also evident on Friday: with 1.51 million viewers, the three-hour live broadcast in the afternoon achieved a strong market share of 16.3 percent.

          Last but not least, what is still remarkable is the success with the young audience: an average of 270,000 viewers between the ages of 14 and 49 drove the market share here to an impressive 17.9 percent, after Das Erste had even achieved more than 19 percent the day before. But the Tour de France is not only impressive on the first: Eurosport 1 reached a further 300,000 fans on Friday parallel to the ARD broadcast. In the target group, the broadcast scored with a strong 4.0 percent market share, well above the station average.”

  11. Thanks for a interesting post as always.

    Uno X budget numbers are available here – https://www.proff.no/regnskap/uno-x-mobility-cycling-as/oslo/idrettslag-og-klubber/IF6L4GM10O5 (use google translate to get it in english).

    It shows their rise and the cost of becoming a WT team. In 2020 their budget was 52 million NOK or 4.4 million euro, with 10 million NOK/0.85 million euro in salary costs.. In 2024 the same numbers were 268 million NOK/22.9 million euro and 100 million NOK/8.5 million euro.

    • Wow! Five-fold and ten-fold increases respectively. Thank you very much for the link. Who knew Magnus Cort’s porn-star moustache could be as expensive as it is ridiculous? 🤪

  12. Gent-Wevelgem to change name in 2026 for first time since 1934 to:

    In Flanders Fields – from Middelkerke to Wevelgem

    Great, catchy name. You can see why they decided to destroy the historical name of this race.

    • I suspect that whoever chose the “In Flanders Fields” didn’t know enough of the significance? (Or it’s just crass!)
      Possibly an unfamiliarity with english, like the “Ladies’ Tour” ….😂

      • One may well find it crass, but:

        “Since 2015, the event is named Gent–Wevelgem – In Flanders Fields, after the iconic war poem by John McCrae. Organizers wanted to commemorate the 100th anniversary of World War I, as the Westhoek region was at the heart of the war and is home to several Commonwealth war graves.”

      • I wish they’d give all the war stuff during that race a rest too. It’s got nothing to do with cycling, was over a hundred years ago and there have been dozens of wars since. It is crass, and it reeks of them using the war to boost the race’s popularity (which it doesn’t need anyway).
        I also agree that calling them ‘ladies’ races is not only sexist but sounds as ridiculous as calling the other races the gentlemen’s race. If they don’t know how it sounds in English, then they should ask a native speaker – or, better still, not have the race name in English.

Comments are closed.