Forum menu
My personal 2p (not The Voice of STW, I’m actually supposed to be off sick today!)… I’m not sure that there are many/any corporate sponsors with the kind of cash that BC will need who would pass an ethics test. Corporate sponsors are always going to be problematic, though there are certainly degrees. Cycle racing has plenty of questionable sponsors though, so it’s not really a huge surprise that this should get the OK at a corporate level.
I’ve long since thought the Cycling UK does more to further the interests of ‘active travel’ type cycling, the normalisation of riding bikes, and defending/increasing the rights of access that is so important to mountain bikers. It’s them that are pursuing points of principle and policy through the courts to further the interests of people on bikes. But, if you want to do the ‘sport’ side of things at a certain level, BC is your only option. I wonder how badly BC needs all those memberships of non-racers, but I can’t really see them reneging on the deal now it’s done. I don’t see how race organisers, clubs etc can dis-affiliate without losing access to points/support/insurance etc?
They may have just inadvertently killed grassroots racing in the UK.
It seems like quite a lot of grassroots racing in the UK has been happening in spite of BC for a while (see Jason’s column in Issue 125!). I hope it doesn’t kill it off, but maybe finds some other way to make it happen?
You don't really need to not drive to see that this feels a bit "off". I mean I sometimes have to take medicine and I eat pretty regularly but I'm more than aware that Pharma and Agri businesses have a pretty poor track record for both pollution and unethical business practices, and i'd want neither anywhere near anything that needed sponsorship. You can't help but feel Shell have got the better deal from this, you can only hope the money is good, eh?
Coming hot off the heels of "Queenie ride-gate", you'd have hoped they'd be less cloth eared. However, It's their business, I don't race and I'm not (and am unlikely to be now) a member.
British Cycling have gone and done a Truss, cue drop in popularity and membership before a statement is released regarding a U turn.
I think Matt's put it very well. It's the shades of grey/green and sense checking where the line is that feels so wide of the mark here. Of course there'll be the black/white obtuse brigade that will come up with the "well how do you lot drive if you don't buy fuel" comments in the same way that they also love to criticise the vegan diet not being free of sin and consequence. No sponsor (or diet) will be beyond reproach - just some are a shade or ten less preferential. But for me this Shell deal is just a stark indication that the 'shadometer' at British Cycling is blind to anything other than the commercial priorities of running an expensive competitive sport infrastructure.
Absolutely staggered by this, not happy in the extreme. But as my MTB coaching and leadership tickets are through them I don’t have an option to not be a member unless I take my badges again through another provider, which would cost me a fortune. Shame on British Cycling for even thinking about this as an appropriate partnership in this day and age.
the british cycling is a joke 8 year with crap what bellends they are and they off they want is the money and run away the plaent needs more help then some shit like some of the people who are top in british cycling do not know what they are doing for me i wood love to race but do the bc bike race in bc do any one agree with me on that.
I wonder how badly BC needs all those memberships of non-racers
My suspicion would be that BC does need them more than they need BC, but maybe only in a numerical way?
Contrast to the FA can claim to represent grass roots football, but their budget is nowhere near the premier leagues. Which means the FA gets access to government, council and wider sponsorship opportunities as well as influence in government.
Do BC need to be able to say "we have a X-million active members" to get a seat at the table otherwise they lose it to CUK?
Whether Shell are looking at this as being a shirt sponsor or whether they have wider plans HSBC/Sky doing the Go-Ride stuff for example.
the british cycling is a joke 8 year with crap what bellends they are and they off they want is the money and run away the plaent needs more help then some shit like some of the people who are top in british cycling do not know what they are doing for me i wood love to race but do the bc bike race in bc do any one agree with me on that.
Those are mostly words.
I know that this looks bad, but really - most of you move yourselves around using oil, and pretty much everything you buy, eat or drink was delivered and/or made with oil at some point. So, sad as it is, we all depend on oil companies. There's no point demonising them.
You should compare oil companies against each other. Which ones are greener than others?
Maybe Shell were prepared to throw far more money at BC (which is a sports body after all) than any other company, and if you want your sport promoted you do need money, don't you?
If BC are happy, then I'm happy.
I'm off to put a couple of gallon of Shell V-Power in the 'ol Carrera Vulcan and get me some of that Helix Ultra sports drink down me gizzard.
And I'll be cycling around the Niger Delta for me holidays, too. If I don't die of toxic oil poisoning, like the locals do.
Molgrips +1 too.
If you want to stop oil companies being oil companies, stop buying oil.
"I know that this looks bad, but really – most of you move yourselves around using oil, and pretty much everything you buy, eat or drink was delivered and/or made with oil at some point. So, sad as it is, we all depend on oil companies. There’s no point demonising them.
You should compare oil companies against each other. Which ones are greener than others?
Maybe Shell were prepared to throw far more money at BC (which is a sports body after all) than any other company, and if you want your sport promoted you do need money, don’t you?"
Its utterly at odds with this.
Does the BC pr team also work for Liz truss? How tone deaf do you have to be to think that this won't back fire on you.
Why not? It's a mutually agreeable agreement.
I'll accept the environmental moan from anyone here not using the petrochemical industry in any way. Other wise stop being a hypocrit.
I don't see that BC has a role of advocacy. Their role is to promote cycle sport.
Moaning and campaigningis the role of CUK who are loosing members to BC because they have lost the plot and care koreabout campaigning than their original brief, touring.
Molgrips+1billion.
If all oil companies had a moral epiphany tomorrow and stopped production forthwith, we would all be dead in a month. No food, water, power, sanitation, drugs etc.
I'm just going to leave this here in the hope that some folks might read it:
https://cognitive-liberty.online/tu-quoque-fallacy-appeal-to-hypocrisy/
If you want to stop oil companies being oil companies, stop buying oil.
I also have concerns about the agricultural industry.
Should I stop eating as well?
I'm tickled at the thought of an organisation so risk averse it won't sanction Enduro races getting into bed with a corporation whose business plan is basically "Cause irreversible man-made climate change, throw up hands, profit". If anyone hasn't seen it then the Joe Lycett versus Shell documentary is excellent viewing: https://www.channel4.com/programmes/joe-lycett-vs-the-oil-giant
It's no worse than ineos sponsoring a cycling team and mercedes F1 though is it?
Until you all give up cars, electric gas, plastic etc no one has the moral high ground
Plus if oil and gas were mega cheap right now I doubt anyone would give a toss
The main problem with oil companies is not so much that they produce hydrocarbons. As others have said, we need them.
It's the years of lies, followed by a lot of, 'OK, we promise to tell the truth from now on!' followed by years of lies, followed by 'OK, we promise to tell the truth from now on!', followed by years of lies...
BC is just helping them with their current round of lies and should just **** off and die, as far as I'm concerned.
And this is said as someone who spent 15 years in offshore drilling. I can tell you that if you knew even a tiny fraction of the shit they get up to even in a supposedly safe and regulated place like the North Sea you wouldn't be painting them as our quirky misunderstood friend.
These companies are scum.
Nobody moaned about having a deal with HSBC with all of their suspect money laundering scandals/involvement in people losing their homes during 2008.
They absolutely did, on a thread just like this
I also have concerns about the agricultural industry.
Should I stop eating as well?
Do you have a problem with food production in general?
If so then yes absolutely.
Alternatively if you're being melodramatic to make a point and don't think starvation is the only alternative to the worst aspects of agribusiness, just cut out the bad bits and go vegan and locally sourced organic foods.
It’s no worse than ineos sponsoring a cycling team and mercedes F1 though is it?
That has no relevance to this discussion. Neither does all the other 'whataboutery' that's being bandied about.
Although, to play devil's advocate, perhaps it IS worse, after all...
BC is, for want of a better term, am umbrella organisation that many folk have to subscribe to - and hence implicitly endorse - if they want to keep racing. The same cannot be said of Ineos and Mercedes...
Double posted...
The fuss about HSBC is part of the reason that this is so shocking (but not surprising).
And to answer a few comments above:
- they won't U-turn
- this was clearly tied up before Royalfuneralgate anyway
- this makes absolutely clear that anything they do apart from sport is purely window dressing
Alternatively if you’re being melodramatic to make a point and don’t think starvation is the only alternative to the worst aspects of agribusiness, just cut out the bad bits and go vegan and locally sourced organic foods.
OK, how do I ensure that I don't use hydrocarbons, either directly on indirectly.
Oh yeah, that's right. I can't. The use of hydrocarbons is so interwoven with the fabric of our society that you use hydrocarbons or you die.
So what you're saying is that if I'm alive then my argument is invalid because Iam a hypocrite. Good to know.
Personally, I don't blame the oil companies. It would be like getting angry at the flu virus that was coursing through your system. Oil companies are just behaving the way they are always going to behave.
What allows them to behave like this is organisations like BC that act as a spokesperson for their lies and helps them greenwash their actions.
BC and others like it are the problem.
If all oil companies had a moral epiphany tomorrow and stopped production forthwith, we would all be dead in a month. No food, water, power, sanitation, drugs etc.
Do you not think it's just a bit inappropriate for the UK body responsible for the most efficient and eco means of transport to be sponsored by a company spending millions lobbying to maintain the status quo and destroy the planet through fossil fuels? Not even a little bit?
We are supposed to be transitioning away from fossil fuels not providing cover for companies diametrically opposed to that transition.
(Cough) greenwashing, next they’ll be punting shell broadband and all the rest with the BC membership e mails.
Gave up my BC when they stopped the young ones earning points at BMX
OK, how do I ensure that I don’t use hydrocarbons, either directly on indirectly.
Oh yeah, that’s right. I can’t. The use of hydrocarbons is so interwoven with the fabric of our society that you use hydrocarbons or you die.
No, you're just being daft.
Yes an infinitesimally small amount of hydrocarbons goes into making medical products or some such worthy cause. But back in the real world you probably use more every time you fill your car up than a lifetimes supply of paracetamol, cannulas wiring insulation, etc, etc. Sure your food will still have arrived at the supermarket in a truck, but it's probably less CO2 in a year than a single trip to a trail center with a bike in the car.
Stop bleating "but what can I do?" and just do it.
No, you’re just being daft.
I'm not the one (or one of the ones) who started bleating that people who *gasp* use hydrocarbons are complaining that an oil company is now sponsoring BC.
It was you guys who decided to create this impossible barrier to clear before you're even allowed to say anything.
Sorry, but if you're going to introduce ridiculous arguments then you should expect things to get a bit stupid.
And by the way, the majority of hydrocarbons aren't burned in personal vehicles so unless pixies steal the rest I think you'll find that you're using hydrocarbons in pretty much every facet of your life.
That has no relevance to this discussion
Sure ineos are saintly white & the grenadiers have nowt to do with British Cycling 😆
Cycling tips nails them to the mast...
I don’t see that BC has a role of advocacy. Their role is to promote cycle sport.
Moaning and campaigningis the role of CUK who are loosing members to BC because they have lost the plot and care koreabout campaigning than their original brief, touring.
I'll accept your first and second sentences but the rest? Source please.
I've never seen a thread moaning about CUK, I have seen plenty with folk saying they're going to ditch BC or switch to CUK.
This is like free gym membership from Imperial Tobacco.
https://twitter.com/BritishCycling/status/1579449650553069568
It's probably fair to say, I don't think the replies to their announcement on Twitter are what they were hoping for if I'm honest
If you want to stop oil companies being oil companies, stop buying oil.
Is a fair point.
I'm trying to drive far fewer miles, and ride locally much more and commute by bike as often as I can.
I'm buying fewer clothes of higher quality, and more natural materials (shoosh you about chemicals and cotton). I wear everything until it's in holes.
I've insulated my house.
I buy mainly UK or local fresh products, albeit from a large supermarket. I've not used carrier bags in years.
I am trying to wean myself off the worst of the damaging things I can, and the excessive bits I perhaps did before.
However, I'll still go back and say, within shades of green/grey, an oil company sponsorship is pretty black. It's so far out of step.
These companies need to be in a place where they know that the time is up. That they are selling something we're addicted to, that the world's downfall is connected to.
For years Shell and others have actively campaigned, undermined, de-invested and generally got in the way of efficiency, reduction and a migration away from thier product.
Thier motivation is profit. Not the global good.
I'm disappointed that BC think this is in anyway a good thing, short of the filthy money.
An aside - our organisation actuality saw other funders step forward after we decided to end our hypocritical partnerships. Our income rose, and we won work with organisations that would not have worked with us under the partnership we had before.
And I'll be clear. Exxon paid half my salary for 6 years as part of a project I ran for them and my current employer. We were doing 'environmental good' in local schools. £5k at a time, £70k a year. In the last year we worked with them, they earned that £70k in 28 seconds and made 16% profit.... They have no intention of doing good, they are doing good business by good marketing.
It was you guys who decided to create this impossible barrier to clear before you’re even allowed to say anything.
Conversely, I think you're setting that bar incredibly low.
If you don't race or need the British Cycling race licence, but still want insurance + legal advice, both for individual and groups (incl event insurance), worth considering Cycling UK. Nice thing is they're actually trying to increase off-road access too so bit of a win win.
Also can get 50% off subscribing to Singletrack too 🙂
I can’t take part in the poll. There’s no option for ‘a member because my quals are dependant on it but majorly pissed off by this announcement’
How can this help accelerate their path to Net Zero? That’s baffling me.
Of all the hundreds of companies they could partner with, ones who actually benefit from people cycling, they chose one of the few companies that benefits from people taking the car.
As @stwhannah says up there ^^, there are not [i] hundreds of companies[/i] all lining up to sponsor BC, in fact it's very difficult to find someone with the financial clout they need willing to commit to 4 year deals never mind 8. All the ones that have that sort of money (Sky, HSBC, Shell) are dodgy in one way or another, none of them got their billions by being nice and fluffy.
Basically at that level it's Finance (banks, maybe a couple of insurance companies), oil (Ineos, anyone?!), tobacco and alcohol (neither of which are allowed in sports sponsorship any more) and maybe a conglomerate like Unilever or similar.
And then the challenge is finding one that actually wants to give BC tens of millions of ££ a year.
It's literally a couple of dozen companies at most. I can see why they've gone down that route, no matter how tone deaf it might appear on.the outside. Put it this way, that money feeds through into grassroots sport. Without it, there won't be the kids races, the basic coaching courses, Commissaire training, race equipment etc. The boring unglamorous stuff.
And you've got to admit that cycling as a sport (rather than as a means of transport) is not exactly green; the history of cycle sport is littered with car sponsors and oil companies.
I'd be interested to see the Venn Diagram of people on here condemning BC for the partnership vs those who post about how they drive their Audi 200 miles to a trail centre or their Transporter thousands of miles through Europe or take a flight to Spain for a week of riding.
So, sad as it is, we all depend on oil companies. There’s no point demonising them.
Recognising a necessary evil doesn't mean you have to prostitute yourself.
I'll also add: the move by Shell and others now to 'green' energy is 20 years behind when they could/should have done.
Put it this way, that money feeds through into grassroots sport. Without it, there won’t be the kids races, the basic coaching courses, Commissaire training, race equipment etc. The boring unglamorous stuff.
My experience of BC is they actually get in the way of grassroots sport, utility biking and health and well-being.
Thier only reason for being involved at grassroots is to have a funnel of a few hundred riders to whittle down into a couple of Olympians.
I’ll also add: the move by Shell and others now to ‘green’ energy is 20 years behind when they could/should have done.
I don't think they've been complicit in the murder of any Nigerian activists recently, so it's not all bad.