Discovery in disarray.... ?

[limerickman]

Per cyclingnews, Hoste's pay increase (not total pay, but the increase from 2006) is reportedly 200K euros under Hoste's new contract.

As of May 11, Bruyneel had already said publicly and in cyclingnews he was not matching other teams' offers for Hoste. Whether Hoste presented Bruyneel with a right of first refusal on the number he was going to pick does not mean that Bruyneel wanted that ROFR. Host may have gratuitously offered Bruyneel the ROF.

I provided the very clear May 11 quote from Bruyneel above that he was not matching. That's pretty convincing, rather than undisclosed information sources speculating about this or that.

If you were Bruyneel and you wanted to retain Hoste, wouldn't you try not to **** him off by not publicly stating that you wouldn't match?

What you provided at the 11th of May 2006, was a quote from a website.
It was old news, my dear.

I told you after RVV (early April 2006) that Hoste was going to leave DC.
I also told you why Hoste was leaving DC at RVV.
I suggested that given what transpired at RVV and the backbiting that went on, that Hoste would be better off leaving DC.
I told you all of this before you came back with your quote at 11th May.

We know for past issues that what DC say publicly and what actually transpires tend to be different to a smaller or larger extent.

If you want to discount what my source in the peloton said - fine.
That's your choice.

But.
I will refer to the posts that I made after RVV where I told you what would transpire regarding Hoste. I said at the time that Hoste is better off out of DC.
And what I told you back then, has now transpired.

Bruyneel is trying to put the best complexion on this entire affair.

 

[limerickman]

-- Saying he wouldn't match would only encourage other teams to offer to Hoste, and increase the chances Hoste would leave. Because the other teams would be assuaged that Hoste was not just using their offers as bargaining chips to increase DC's offer, but actually had a strong likelihood of leaving.

-- Saying he wouldn't match would only reduce his future credibility in future contract negotiations with other DC riders, if he ended up later caving in and matching. By saying publicly he wouldn't match, Bruyneel also continued to set his precedent of not matching (except he matched Landis' financial offer from Phonak, but, after talking with Landis, felt Landis wanted to leave) riders who wanted to leave. That is why, in his May 11 statement, Bruyneel mentioned all the people he had not matched for: Heras, Leipheimer, Hamilton, Boonen. He wanted to signal that he had a long policy of not matching. Basic negotiations tactic over time, with respect to establishing the credibility of one's asserted positions.

Bruyneel went to DC and obtained more funding over the weekend of 13th May 2006.
He sought more funding because Hoste gave DC the right of first refusal on one of the three offers received from three teams bidding for him.

Bruyneel asked Hoste to consider DC's renewed offer.
The renewed offer was an increase in salary, bonus.
But it was tied in to conditions over an above what was previously agreed.

Hoste went back to his manager and authorised his manager to speak with the other three bids and formally notified Bruyneel that he (Hoste) was not interested in extending his contract during the middle of last week.

This week Hoste announced his leaving DC.

 

[musette]

My point was not when rumors started emerging that Hoste would leave DC, but the fact that Bruyneel publicly stated (on cyclingnews on May 11) that he would not match any other team's offer for Hoste. That suggests that, at that time, Bruyneel had decided not to match, contrary to the reports of last ditch Bruyneel attempts to keep Hoste, because, as I explained, Bruyneel would have no incentive to state he would not match on May 11 unless he had already decided not to match.

That report of L just doesn't add up: Bruyneel doesn't need authorization from DC to give Hoste the pay increase, because the budget for 2007 is not used up (since certain riders have not been extended and in view of many other factors).

That report also doesn't explain why Bruyneel would publicly state he wasn't matching offers on May 11. What incentive does he have to pursue Host by matching an offer after that?

Also, as Bruyneel stated, he thought Hoste's other offers were over-paying him and his policy is not to pay above market for a rider.

Finally, if Bruyneel had really tried to match Hoste's offer, he would be publicly making a false statement that he had not matched on thepaceline. That would seem quite disingenous if the facts were as stated in the purported report from an unspecified source inside the peloton.

 

[limerickman]

My point was not when rumors started emerging that Hoste would leave DC, but the fact that Bruyneel publicly stated (on cyclingnews on May 11) that he would not match any other team's offer for Hoste. That suggests that, at that time, Bruyneel had decided not to match, contrary to the reports of last ditch Bruyneel attempts to keep Hoste, because, as I explained, Bruyneel would have no incentive to state he would not match on May 11 unless he had already decided not to match.

OK - You believe what you want to believe, Musette.

This is really pointless.

 

[musette]

Bruyneel went to DC and obtained more funding over the weekend of 13th May 2006.

In addition to my arguments above making the purported reports by an unnamed peloton members (always convenient, that!) less likely, I note that Bruyneel has a lot of budget for 2007:

-- After LA's retirement in 2005, Bruyneel recruited very cheaply and did not bring on any "big names". Gusev was likely not that expensive, and he was probably the most expensive of all of Bruyneel's recruits for 2006. T Lowe and G van Goolen are probably riding at close to minimum wage.

-- Bruyneel will probably shed a few riders at the end of 2006: almost surely Roger Hammond; unless Beltran does better in Giro or Vuelta, he may go (he will say he goes by retirement); Bruyneel might even boot (or very significantly reduce the salary of) Ace, absent a meaningful showing in the Tour (Bruyneel has already said that, if TD continues to do well in the Giro, TD will be the DC team leader for the Vuelta). Max van H is not immune from shedding, unless he comes up with one or two ProTour wins.

-- And it is possible that Chechu may retire, or at most will only ride for 2007 (Ace too, if not shed by Bruyneel). Note Chechu and Ace were among the higher paid domestiques in the LA era. In fact, I suspect that, on the team now, only Hincapie and Il Falco are higher paid than Chechu and Ace.

-- J Braj and Tommy D are not going to ask for wage increases. They want to remain under Bruyneel tutelage (and, in Tommy D's case, keep on having LA informally mentor him).

-- Il Falco probably won't ask for a salary increase, because his 2006 Giro performance probably won't justify it even if he did well in 2005. Also, Il Falco probably only has a year left in the peloton, given that he just turned 33. And it will be in Il Falco's interest to not have to make the adjustment to a new team.

 

[FrenchFanNoDope]

-- J Braj and Tommy D are not going to ask for wage increases. They want to remain under Bruyneel tutelage (and, in Tommy D's case, keep on having LA informally mentor him).

We in France laugh at American rider Mr. Danilson because Sandy Caser is riding so well in Giro d'Italy. He is now comes 7 and hopes to be top 5 at end. Arrest of dopo Saiz helps French Federation of riders to have all riding on same road to speak same. Rider must first have talent to be trained by former best then they can become champion. Danilson is not a champion but living in shadow of former rider. They should call him shadow.

 

[wolfix]

We in France laugh at American rider Mr. Danilson because Sandy Caser is riding so well in Giro d'Italy. He is now comes 7 and hopes to be top 5 at end. Arrest of dopo Saiz helps French Federation of riders to have all riding on same road to speak same. Rider must first have talent to be trained by former best then they can become champion. Danilson is not a champion but living in shadow of former rider. They should call him shadow.

The French must be proud to have a rider in the Giro in at least 7th. The French has such lofty ambitions.

 

[FrenchFanNoDope]

The French must be proud to have a rider in the Giro in at least 7th. The French has such lofty ambitions.

Ambition not but talent yes! American rider Mr.Danilson says he can win and win and win but goes sideways. Casar is quite and works hard and now is comes 7th. Not flash like American boy who sleeps in shadow. Soon he Casar ride with Basso and friends to wiin.

 

[bobke]

We in France laugh at American rider Mr. Danilson because Sandy Caser is riding so well in Giro d'Italy. He is now comes 7 and hopes to be top 5 at end. Arrest of dopo Saiz helps French Federation of riders to have all riding on same road to speak same. Rider must first have talent to be trained by former best then they can become champion. Danilson is not a champion but living in shadow of former rider. They should call him shadow.

and we in America fart in your general direction...

stop being a poser and baiter of nationalistic arguments and post under your real name dude
this is a joke

BTW you should learn how to spell Sandy C's last name dufus.
Sandy, thats a real manly name for you.
How do you translate panty-waist bicycle seat sniffing fairy of a name monsieur?

 

[thebluetrain]

and we in America fart in your general direction...

stop being a poser and baiter of nationalistic arguments and post under your real name dude
this is a joke

BTW you should learn how to spell Sandy C's last name dufus.
Sandy, thats a real manly name for you.
How do you translate panty-waist bicycle seat sniffing fairy of a name monsieur?

LOL,

 

[musette]

The main reason S Casar is high up on the GC is he went on a breakaway in an earlier stage because people knew he was not a podium threat and let him participate in that breakaway. How's that for a loser reason to be high up on GC.

 

[micron]

About as good as the theory that says Danielson took it easy and threw away a top ten place on GC so he could maybe get in a breakaway and win a stage

 

[lwedge]

We in France laugh at American rider Mr. Danilson.

What? Was he doing Jerry Lewis jokes for the French news team or something ?

 

[limerickman]

FrenchFanNoDope

thebluetrain

bobke

musette

Moderator Role : I'll not have these threads descending in to an American/French slagging match.
Understood.

The discussion in this thread has been reasonable up until the last few messages.

I will close this thread and remove your respective accounts out of this site if I see anymore insults posted by any of you that I warned.


Limerickman.

 

[thebluetrain]

Laughing at what someone else says is grounds for removal? Come on. I could have said alot of things but I didnt.

FrenchFanNoDope

thebluetrain

bobke

musette

Moderator Role : I'll not have these threads descending in to an American/French slagging match.
Understood.

The discussion in this thread has been reasonable up until the last few messages.

I will close this thread and remove your respective accounts out of this site if I see anymore insults posted by any of you that I warned.


Limerickman.

 

[limerickman]

Laughing at what someone else says is grounds for removal? Come on. I could have said alot of things and I didnt.

Let's just keep the discussion civil, ok?
There's been good contributions to this thread.

I don't want it to descend in to a slagging match.

 

[thebluetrain]

Let's just keep the discussion civil, ok?
There's been good contributions to this thread.

I don't want it to descend in to a slagging match.

No problem. Thats why I kept my mouth shut.

 

[limerickman]

No problem. Thats why I kept my mouth shut.

Thanks.

And you don't have to keep your mouth shut.

 

[musette]

So I understand, for future reference, can you tell me what specifically is wrong with this statement: "The main reason S Casar is high up on the GC is he went on a breakaway in an earlier stage because people knew he was not a podium threat and let him participate in that breakaway." Is that not the main reason S Casar is high up on GC -- that he was not perceived as a threat for the podium and therefore allowed to progress so well on that breakaway he was in a while back?

Then I said: "How's that for a loser reason to be high up on GC." Isn't it a "loser reason" to be high on GC because people think you are not capable of being on the podium even with the time gained in the breakaway? I'm trying to understand what is objectionable, so that we can better address this going forward.

 

[limerickman]

So I understand, for future reference, can you tell me what specifically is wrong with this statement: "The main reason S Casar is high up on the GC is he went on a breakaway in an earlier stage because people knew he was not a podium threat and let him participate in that breakaway." Is that not the main reason S Casar is high up on GC -- that he was not perceived as a threat for the podium and therefore allowed to progress so well on that breakaway he was in a while back?

Then I said: "How's that for a loser reason to be high up on GC." Isn't it a "loser reason" to be high on GC because people think you are not capable of being on the podium even with the time gained in the breakaway? I'm trying to understand what is objectionable, so that we can better address this going forward.

I don't know the reason why Sandy Casar is higher than Danielson on GC.
Quite frankly, it doesn't bother me as to why Casar is higher than Danielson or anyone else for that matter.

What matters to me is the use of labels and the intent to start flame wars here.

Based on previous experience - when posters start shouting the odds about "french" or "american" riders, it's time to step in.