Can Tour Compete in Today's Crowded Sports Schedule? Infantino Sets New High in Carbon Footprint; Lessons from MLB Labor Discussions; Sport and Climate Change; Sports in the Mainstream Media ...

Key Takeaways:

● The Tour Goes Up Against the World Cup

● New Highs in Sporting Carbon Footprint?

● Lessons for Baseball’s Labor Discussions

● High Temperatures Impact Endurance Sports

● New IOC Fund Will Provide Financial Help to Olympic Athletes

● Sports Updates in the Mainstream Media

The upcoming 2026 Tour de France may prove to be a pivotal edition for the sport’s business future – and it could potentially shape the future of ASO, the UCI, and its stakeholder WorldTour teams. For at least two decades now, the Tour has been the overwhelming center of the sport – the singular event of pro cycling. It commands the lion’s share of pro cycling’s overall audience and sponsorship attention, while the rest of the season seems to stumble along in its slipstream. Sponsorship attention, in particular, seems to be tied almost exclusively to participation and performance in the Tour. While viewership in core European countries has been stable, the audience in many other markets has declined over the past few years, and this year, cycling’s marquee event faces a unique challenge: the fact that it will overlap throughout almost its entirety with the massively-popular FIFA World Cup tournament, ending July 19. The Wimbledon Tennis tournament also occurs during the first part of the Tour. Although actual broadcast times may not directly overlap significantly, there is a limit to how many hours a day fans can sit in front of their TV and watch sports. This intersection of major sports events could exacerbate the challenges already faced by cycling.

Observers – and the UCI in particular – should pay close attention to the audience and viewership patterns of this year’s Tour, first of all assuming it is even available to its non-core markets via live broadcast from a reliable legitimate TV or online provider. How is it presented visually through the camera lens; what types of data analysis and displays are available? How are the stories and personal narratives related by the presenters? And who are the presenters – men and women who’ve raced in the past eras, clean or “suspicious” ex-riders, or professional journalists? Who are the key advertisers, and are their ads merely on repeat during the network commercial breaks; which ones are prominently displayed on rotating banners; and which ones infiltrate web browser ad panels and spam mail? Most significantly, does the total package keep today’s audience engaged, or will many simply tune out and watch a five-minute highlight clip on YouTube?

These could be existential questions for the sport, and the early “answers” should be closely parsed. When the UCI, earlier this year, polled its stakeholders for suggestions on steering the sport in the future, these were precisely the endpoints in its reform crosshairs: how to make the sport more appealing, engaging, and inclusive – to both fans and new participants. The UCI claimed it received just 54 submittals for reform ideas, which seemed very slim, given that there are over 200 constituent national governing bodies, more than 200 pro teams, and numerous media and analytical websites with strong interest and viewpoints. It is thus critical that the sport’s ultimate authority listen to as wide a range of inputs and empirical viewership and participation data as possible – and not fall into the trap of looking inward or listening to its own advice. A sport that fails to change faces the same stressors and fate befalling businesses that fail to adapt to their markets. We hope to see incremental positive steps during this pivotal Tour, and we hope it sets the stage for further innovation and progress in the sport in the near future.

A salary cap for pro cycling has been a popular topic as of late, but ongoing negotiations in Major League Baseball should give the sport pause in consideration of the complexities. The most recent set of proposals by the league to the MLBPA (players association) made waves regarding maximum contract years for players changing teams and players who re-sign with their current team. It also set hard spending ceilings and salary floors. As a result, the package was largely rejected by the powerful union, which seeks to maximize and preserve the earning potential of its members. This posturing by both sides will likely lead to a new collective bargaining agreement. However, this highlights the simultaneously antagonistic and collaborative process inherent in such negotiations: the league represents the economic interests of all the teams, regardless of market size, but the union represents the labor which drives the competitive product. Thus it will be instructive for cycling to watch as the CBA is worked out this summer: can a cap work without direct athlete votes? Can it work as teams rotate in and out of the tiers as sponsors, licenses, and even the teams themselves lack guarantees and stability? Should a cap be reached, it’s bound to become a sports business case study.

The current record-breaking European heat wave is reminding us that outdoor sports and cycling will not escape the gradual impacts of climate change. Last week, ultra cyclist Lael Wilcox abandoned her attempt to break the around the world record due to high temperatures in France. In addition, the Belgian national TT championships were shortened by half due to the heat. Meanwhile, in the United States, the SBT GRVL race in Colorado was nearly canceled because of dangerously high smoke pollution from a nearby wildfire. With temperatures getting warmer every year, it’s only a matter of time before the Tour de France (and Tour de France Femmes Avec Zwift) will have to confront this challenge. There are already some calling for these events to move to a month that typically has cooler weather. We can imagine a time when July and August are essentially off limits in much of the world for endurance sports events because of the danger presented by higher temperatures and extreme weather swings.

The Western States 100 ultra marathon running race took place last weekend and performed exceptionally well as a live broadcast niche endurance sport. The event showcased a showdown of sorts between star athletes Kilian Jornet and Jim Walmsley, but was ultimately won by Vincent Bouillard in an astounding record time just over 13 hours, 46 minutes, while the women’s race was won by Jennifer Lichter in a record time a little over 15 hours, 28 minutes. What is more important is the audience: broadcast as a livestream over YouTube, the Western States held a consistent 25K to 35K concurrent viewer metric over the course of two live segments, and with repeat views, the streams has garnered nearly 800K total views. As a niche endurance sport like cycling – and particularly in reference to the gravel genre – this ultra marathon broadcast performance bodes well for future growth and market expansion. Trail running is a fast growing sporting segment with an ever-growing market cap, so what elements of its journey can cycling’s event organizers, governance stewards, and athletes apply to help us sustain similar fan and market engagement metrics?

At The Outer Line, we like to keep track of what the major mainstream media sites are saying, if anything, about sports and about cycling in particular. Recently, there have been two interesting developments in this regard. Vanity Fair, the esteemed American magazine founded in 1859 that typically covers culture, politics, fashion and Hollywood, recently published a “global sports issue” in anticipation of the upcoming World Cup festivities. Feature articles included interviews with key soccer and tennis stars, as well as the current sports investment hysteria, and why so many billionaires are attracted to sports investments. Our favorite – an article covering the recent Enhanced Games, which we have discussed several times over the last year – was entitled “Dope Opera.” Elsewhere, we also noted that the venerable academic and political governance journal Foreign Policy published an interview covering the history of the Tour de France a couple of years ago, and its relationship with the well-known Dreyfus affair and the accusations of antisemitism which divided France in the late 1800s (thanks to Jonathan Kaplan’s “Riding With” newsletter for uncovering the existence of this article).

The International Olympic Committee pulled a 180-degree turn last week when former basketball star and IOC member Pau Gasol announced that a $140 million fund was being established to pay every eligible athlete a $10,000 “stipend” – a relatively small sum geared to help offset the costs of training to compete at the Olympics Games. But, don’t call it “prize money” – a rejection point in IOC President Kirsty Coventry’s presentation the week prior. There have been broader pushes to reward medalists and to compensate athletes for their Name, Likeness, and Image when they appear in Olympic competitions. Prize money payments have been adopted in some Olympic corners, such as World Athletics rewarding its Olympic gold medalists with $50,000 prizes independently of the IOC, but this is an anomaly. By and large, Olympic athletes have to find their own sponsors or benefactors, or apply for scholarships or stipends in order to devote full time attention to their sport. While $10,000 will undoubtedly be valuable to many athletes around the world, it is a rounding error in the total Olympic revenue cycle. More critically, it seriously undervalues the actual impact of the athletes’ contributions to the competitive product and viewership. Still, the “Olympic Solidarity Fund” that this new stipend appears to be part of is no small feat and a progressive IOC policy success: it provides nearly $650M in the current Olympic cycles to support athletes from underfunded nations, as well as team, coach, and travel costs.

We have recently made a number of comparative observations between the environmental impact and carbon footprint of cycling, vis-à-vis other major sports. Our general conclusion has been that, although it is important to keep these impacts in mind and work to minimize them, cycling generally has a tiny carbon footprint relative to most other major sports. Now we have a new entrant in the contest, in the form of FIFA boss Gianni Infantino. As reported by Sporting Intelligence, during just the group stage of the World Cup, Infantino has logged more than 50,000 kilometers of travel in a private jet, popping back and forth to hob-knob and create photo opportunities with a wide range of politicians, former star players, other celebrities, and various FIFA regional officials – many of whom are controversially suspected or openly accused of various forms of corruption. Infantino often attended two matches a day, as he criss-crossed the continent, accumulating frequent flyer miles but simultaneously logging vast fuel, airport landing logistics, and carbon credit costs. The report suggested that there have been both internal FIFA and external investigations alleging ethical violations and questioning Infantino’s links to various billionaires and Russian oligarchs. But the fans don’t seem to care and have largely embraced the tournament, as national pride and favorite players soak in the TV limelight; the World Cup thus far has been an overwhelming success, and Fox TV seems to be a major winner, having picked up the broadcast rights early at a bargain price. At this time, the new “hydration break” advertising opportunities are projected to bring in more than $300 million in ad revenue by themselves – on top of already record high billions projected from global media rights, cornerstone sponsorships, and stratospheric ticket prices.