I really liked Tab Clear…

I really liked Tab Clear…

So did I. I reckon if they hadn’t pushed it so hard and loud as coke* it would probably have done very well. I suspect Lewis’ (and others) stint as sponsored contribution will suffer from the same fate.

*see also Pepsi Crystal, though given the origins/ingredients of coke I’m not sure that naming it “Pepsi crystal” was such a good marketing decision, that said, since right I imagine it would have ensured a lot of repeat custom.

Oh my god, now someone’s been offended by a derogatory term for porn. Only on STW.

Just as an aside, it’s pretty derogatory to refer to porn as ‘grot’. I know it’s only lighthearted, but it’s not very inclusive, and pretty derisory of sex workers.
You may choose to be dismissive of those who chose to work in the sex industry (though I suspect the vast majority of you consume their content, even if you give out a holier than thou veneer), but while not the ‘cleanest’ industry (in more ways than one), there are a great many people who choose to be there, choose to make their money that way, and are doing so very much within the law.
Perhaps be a little less judgemental, going forward eh?

Settle down Quagmire…

Oh my god, now someone’s been offended by a derogatory term for porn. Only on STW.

The forum that never fails to exceed expectations…

Oh my god, now someone’s been offended by a derogatory term for porn. Only on STW.

Everyone’s got something to grumble about.

Everyone’s got something to grumble about.

I see what you did there 🙂

It didn’t tell me why I should care. Or did I miss that bit?

you don’t have to care. it’s your decision if you decide to care, or not.

Oh my god, now someone’s been offended by a derogatory term for porn. Only on STW.

I think you (purposefully) missed my point…

Sponsorship is simply a form of marketing, no need to be so dismissive about it FFS.

But in this case it’s veering into PR stunt territory.

it’s a very niche form of marketing which doesn’t tell the observer anything about the product or company being promoted, and provides the marketeer with no meaningful way to measure its return!  So it’s always about intangible PR.  I guess whether it’s a stunt probably depends on if you are doing something that gets you talked about.   Frankly if you are not then it’s pretty pointless sponsorship unless it’s the type of sponsorship I sometimes see where a random, seemingly irrelevant industry is sponsoring an individual or small team.  Often it turns out there is a personal connection and there’s some clever accounting going on to pretend that it’s legitimate sponsorship not tax avoidance.

Get used to seeing OnlyFans sponsor more aspects of our sport

Why? I have read the article.

there’s some clever accounting going on to pretend that it’s legitimate sponsorship not tax avoidance.

How does a company avoid tax by sponsoring someone/something?
Or rather, how do they end up with more money than they would have, if they didn’t sponsor anyone.

How does a company avoid tax by sponsoring

It’s a deductible so reduces the amount you pay tax on.

you don’t have to care. it’s your decision if you decide to care, or not.

Sorry, I didn’t mean that in an emotional sense, I meant in the sense of ‘tell me why it’s relevant to me as a mountain biker and a user of this site’. Poor choice of words on my part. For context, Trash Free Trails is much more obviously on point.

But then maybe there are lots of people out there who are genuinely concerned about OnlyFans threatening to take over ‘more aspects’ of mountain biking and view it as a real ‘thing’?

‘tell me why it’s relevant to me as a mountain biker and a user of this site’.

A mountain biker has signed a deal with a new sponsor. You expect them to report it if it was a bike brand, no? This is a brand from outside the bike industry, which is good, as it shows MTB is marketable, and others are willing to invest in it. It also highlights other potential revenue streams for riders and ways to consume MTB media for customers/fans. There is some controversy/sniggering here as this brand has a reputation for providing a platform for pornography (other names for it are available)

Playboy had an MTB team at one point, not sure they did particularly well though.

Just because you aren’t interested in it doesn’t mean it isn’t newsworthy.

Playboy had an MTB team

They’ve also had a motorbike GPteam too. There wasn’t a great deal of uproar.

There wasn’t a great deal of uproar.

Have you seen a pirelli calendar or a moto GP podium presentation from back then? Playboy could very easily have been a bit high brow!

Have you seen a pirelli calendar or a moto GP podium presentation from back then? Playboy could very easily have been a bit high brow!

I’m not as politically correct as most on here… i still see nothing wrong with either 🙂

But that’s a whole can of worms to open.

Have you seen a pirelli calendar

…

I’m not as politically correct as most on here…

There’s a few on here that would be just as offended by the unfairness of February having less days dedicated to it than other months as they are by the pictures.

it’s a very niche form of marketing which doesn’t tell the observer anything about the product or company being promoted, and provides the marketeer with no meaningful way to measure its return!

It’s not that different to adverts on billboards or the side of buses, in fact you might argue it can be more targeted even when it’s non-native (firms from outside the industry).

I work in marketing myself and we don’t have meaningful ways to measure return on a lot of what we do TBH.

I would guess that Red Bull can measure some value in sponsoring so many athletes though, otherwise it’s a bloody big punt.

BC revoked affiliation for the Porn Pedallers Cycling Club, which was associated with/sponsored by Television X.

A mountain biker has signed a deal with a new sponsor. You expect them to report it if it was a bike brand, no? This is a brand from outside the bike industry, which is good, as it shows MTB is marketable, and others are willing to invest in it. It also highlights other potential revenue streams for riders and ways to consume MTB media for customers/fans. There is some controversy/sniggering here as this brand has a reputation for providing a platform for pornography (other names for it are available)

Playboy had an MTB team at one point, not sure they did particularly well though.

Just because you aren’t interested in it doesn’t mean it isn’t newsworthy.

I’m not talking about ‘me’ as an individual, I’m talking about whether it has a genuine news value. Maybe it does and I’m wrong, but my gut feeling is that most people outside the industry and the bike media tribe don’t really give a stuff, not least because mostly people have no idea who Lewis Buchanan – is that his name? – is. I guess in 12 months time when OnlyFans has ‘sponsored more aspects of our sport’, whatever that means, I’ll hold up my hands and say that I was wrong. Trash Free Trails on the other hand, has an immediate and important relevance. Anyway, it’s all subjective.

I think you (purposefully) missed my point…

I guess everyone did. Was it that the word “grot” is offensive to those who shag for money on camera? whereas “porn” is fine?
If it ain’t that, you may need to explain yourself betterer.
If it is that, then you is weird 😆

Maybe it does and I’m wrong, but my gut feeling is that most people outside the industry and the bike media tribe don’t really give a stuff, not least because mostly people have no idea who Lewis Buchanan – is that his name? – is. I

That’s more indicacative of where you are with MTBing/biking, rather than society as a whole though ?

Playboy had an MTB team at one point

And F1 cars looked like giant fag packets, ah those were the days, eh lads?

Without prejudice of the applicable law, no brand of tobacco, spirits, pornographic products or any other products that might damage the image of the UCI or the sport of cycling in general shall be associated directly or indirectly with a licence-holder, a UCI team or a national or international cycling competition.

That’s nipped that in the bud then. Good, I say.
I’m glad that our kids don’t have ciggie advertising forced down their throats.
I’m even more glad that my daughter can get onto a podium through her bike riding skills alone and not as a shallow adornment.

It’s a deductible so reduces the amount you pay tax on.

That bit I get, but the implication is that by reducing your tax bill in this way, you somehow end up with more profit than before.
I don’t understand the taxation system and rates that make this possible, surely involving a greater than 100% partial tax rate.

Orput it another way:

If I own a website where I take a cut of transactions taking place on it, and it nets me £10 million a year.
It costs me £5million in servers and staffing.
Do I take my £5million profit, pay 20% tax and have £4million for coke, hookers etc.

Or do I spend that £5 million on my favourite bike racer, moto2 team and UFC fighter to put my logo on their helmet…

Leaving me with no £1million tax bill, but £0 in the C&H fund?

Neglecting the benefit of advertising on next years profit, how have I benefitted?

You’ve not given money to the government, which is enough for some.

Also, it’s assumed that the money you have spent on advertising will also give you a return in future. Spending it on tax doesn’t give you anything you can put on a balance sheet later.

Neglecting the benefit of advertising on next years profit, how have I benefitted?

More people are aware of your brand, some will of them will therefore use your products/services where they had previously been unaware of them and therefore this will generate revenue. It’s exactly the same model that any non direct marketing uses – let’s say Kellogs sponsor Sam Pilgrim to wear a shirt promoting their new Bacon Bakes(*) breakfast bar. Kellogs have no way of knowing whether your susbequent purchase of 100 boxes of Bacon Bakes is due to seeing them advertised on the side of a bus, seeing it on TV or seeing it on Sam Pilgrim’s bike riding content, they just know that they are increasing the awareness of Bacon Bakes. By using sponsorship as well as traditional advertising they are broadening their reach and there’s some argument to say that carefully selected sponsorship allows better focus on your intended demographic so if for isntance you had a product that might mainly appeal to 20-30s males with disposable income you’d align your sponsorship with things that also appeal to that demographic. MTB – tick, Lawn Bowls – not so much.

(* – sorry, as far as I know nobody makes a tasty and nutritious bacon related breakfast bar, though obviously they should)

You’ve not given money to the government, which is enough for some.

until the athletes pay tax on their income. although some will of course be to their professional expenses.

More people are aware of your brand, some will of them will therefore use your products/services where they had previously been unaware of them and therefore this will generate revenue. It’s exactly the same model that any non direct marketing uses – let’s say Kellogs sponsor Sam Pilgrim to wear a shirt promoting their new Bacon Bakes(*) breakfast bar. Kellogs have no way of knowing whether your susbequent purchase of 100 boxes of Bacon Bakes is due to seeing them advertised on the side of a bus, seeing it on TV or seeing it on Sam Pilgrim’s bike riding content, they just know that they are increasing the awareness of Bacon Bakes.

So… advertising.
If that made my business grow, by having a £5 million advertising budget (but a 2023 profit of zero), so be it.

I’m not sure I’d be framing that as “tax avoidance”, to me that implies I’ve discovered some loophole that nets me more money by virtue of avoiding giving some to the government.

For example – being a limited company of one, paying yourself minimum wage and taking a company car and dividends is a tax avoidance concept I understand (although can’t remember if its legal or not this year)

For example – being a limited company of one, paying yourself minimum wage and taking a company car and dividends is a tax avoidance concept I understand

Not avoidance as it’s perfectly legal.*

In the same way as it’s perfectly legal to save money for retirement using a tax efficient wrapper (pension or ISA) as opposed to just saving using something else eg buying shares and paying capital gains on them etc outside of any wrapper.

* The difference is due to the anomalies of our tax system which tax income and dividends at different rates. HMG could fix that overnight if they wished to.

Tax avoidance is perfectly legal. That’s just avoiding paying too much tax.

It’s tax evasion that’s the illegal one. That’s not paying tax that you absolutely should be paying.

Sorry, I didn’t mean that in an emotional sense, I meant in the sense of ‘tell me why it’s relevant to me as a mountain biker and a user of this site’.

right, got you. not all news articles are of interest to all people, i guess.

It’s tax evasion that’s the illegal one. That’s not paying tax that you absolutely should be paying.

Ah just tell them your not paying tax on it because it’s not yours, it’s your dad’s.

How does a company avoid tax by sponsoring someone/something?
Or rather, how do they end up with more money than they would have, if they didn’t sponsor anyone.

go to any small motorsport event, formula ford, hill climbs, kart racing, mx (I suspect it also happens in MTB, CX etc too but I don’t know for sure) and you will see lots of “bizzare” sponsorships.  A plumbers in a small part of Fife sponsoring a team who only race once a year in Scotland.  A specialist B2B laboratory testing firm sponsoring a junior karting team, etc. when you dig a little deeper either one of the directors races at the weekend or one of their kids does.  Effectively they could take 10k out personally, pay tax on it and then spend it on kit/travel etc or they can put it through the company as “sponsorship” to avoid income tax.

i know if one football team who only have someone on the squad because his dads firm is the team kit sponsor – he’s effectively buying his son a game, but if you or I wanted to do that we would have to “donate” from the earnings we have already paid tax on.

even at the professional team sports level – where companies sponsor boxes and take their clients or friends to dinner and the game it’s often a way to for the directors to get luxury access to their preferred team without paying tax!