Uber Div3 team Saturn

In article said:

Will Saturn ever move up to Div2?

or do they just want to be the 8000lb gorilla of div3?

They were be Div II through 2001, if I recall correctly, but decided last year to downgrade to Div
III, because of the lower salary and other UCI guarantee requirements.

Since they very seldom race in Europe, where Div II status would gain them entry into some of the
larger races, they figured the additional expense wasn't worth the benefit.

--
Steven L. Sheffield stevens at veloworks dot com veloworks at worldnet dot ay tea tee dot net bellum
pax est libertas servitus est ignoratio vis est

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

Will Saturn ever move up to Div2?

or do they just want to be the 8000lb gorilla of div3?

They were be Div II through 2001, if I recall correctly, but decided last year to downgrade to Div
III, because of the lower salary and other UCI guarantee requirements.

Since they very seldom race in Europe, where Div II status would gain them entry into some of the
larger races, they figured the additional expense wasn't worth the benefit.

Still, a team with a total salary package as large as Saturn (of course I have to assume, but I
think its a safe assumption) is doing a disservice to cycling in the US by staying D3 and thus
avoiding having to treat their riders as employees and, heaven forbid, provide medical coverage and
pay the workers a min salary.

There should be a salary cap and/or number of riders cap on D3 teams, IMHO. If you can afford to
"buy" the best riders, you can afford to provide a professional working environment.

From what I hear, Saturn is extremely well organized and professional in their infrastructure, which
also costs money. Its clear they view themselves as the best team (not just in sporting terms) and
it reflects poorly on them that they do not make the move to D2.

I guess my point is they are hardly a "developmental" team and are taking advantage of a loophole,
not in the spirit it was intended.

but what do I know.

J

[email hidden] (jerry) wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

Will Saturn ever move up to Div2?

or do they just want to be the 8000lb gorilla of div3?

They were be Div II through 2001, if I recall correctly, but decided last year to downgrade to
Div III, because of the lower salary and other UCI guarantee requirements.

Since they very seldom race in Europe, where Div II status would gain them entry into some of the
larger races, they figured the additional expense wasn't worth the benefit.

Still, a team with a total salary package as large as Saturn (of course I have to assume, but I
think its a safe assumption) is doing a disservice to cycling in the US by staying D3 and thus
avoiding having to treat their riders as employees and, heaven forbid, provide medical coverage
and pay the workers a min salary.

There should be a salary cap and/or number of riders cap on D3 teams, IMHO. If you can afford to
"buy" the best riders, you can afford to provide a professional working environment.

From what I hear, Saturn is extremely well organized and professional in their infrastructure,
which also costs money. Its clear they view themselves as the best team (not just in sporting
terms) and it reflects poorly on them that they do not make the move to D2.

I guess my point is they are hardly a "developmental" team and are taking advantage of a loophole,
not in the spirit it was intended.

but what do I know.

J

Dont they have a development team themselves.

you think saturn would be motivated to get into the TDF. I mean if you sponsor bikes and want an
Americian Audience dont you think the TDF gets better main stream attention than does any race
in the US.

does the car company saturn sell in Europe?

"chris II" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Dont they have a development team themselves.

Yes, 1 junior woman and 6 under-23 men.

Quoted message said:

you think saturn would be motivated to get into the TDF. I mean if you sponsor bikes and want an
Americian Audience dont you think the TDF gets better main stream attention than does any race
in the US.

The TdF gets a huge amount of it's mainstream American attention because of Lance's story and
success. Also, the Saturn team has been in existence continually since 1992, which is a long time
for a sponsor. If they wanted to gain entry to the TdF, they would have tried quite awhile ago. At
this point, especially give the current shape of the economy, it's unlikely for Saturn Corporate to
suddenly make the TdF a goal and increase the team budget accordingly.

Quoted message said:

does the car company saturn sell in Europe?

No, and other than brief forays to Europe for tougher races, they are primarily a North American
team because that is where Saturn's vehicles are mainly sold. For a long time they didn't even hire
riders from countries where their vehicles were not sold.

[email hidden] (jerry) wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Still, a team with a total salary package as large as Saturn (of course I have to assume, but I
think its a safe assumption) is doing a disservice to cycling in the US by staying D3 and thus
avoiding having to treat their riders as employees and, heaven forbid, provide medical coverage
and pay the workers a min salary.

There should be a salary cap and/or number of riders cap on D3 teams, IMHO. If you can afford to
"buy" the best riders, you can afford to provide a professional working environment.

It's a business, and like any business they do what's in their best interest. If they don't satisfy
their employees they leave. If they don't satisfy their customers they go out of business.

Quoted message said:

From what I hear, Saturn is extremely well organized and professional in their infrastructure,
which also costs money. Its clear they view themselves as the best team (not just in sporting
terms) and it reflects poorly on them that they do not make the move to D2.

I guess my point is they are hardly a "developmental" team and are taking advantage of a loophole,
not in the spirit it was intended.

I can respect that Saturn does what they do well, and they don't try to be something they're not
(like some that have tried: Mercury, Linda McCartney, Noble House). Being Div 2 as opposed to Div 3
has some advantages and disadvantages. Either status excludes you from certain races. It not about a
loophole, it's about picking the option that meets your objectives.

-Amit

SNIP

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

There should be a salary cap and/or number of riders cap on D3 teams, IMHO. If you can afford to
"buy" the best riders, you can afford to provide a professional working environment.

It's a business, and like any business they do what's in their best interest. If they don't
satisfy their employees they leave. If they don't satisfy their customers they go out of business.

Still, as a small business owner myself, and thus poor, I still feel some moral obligation to hold
myself and my company to some set of guiding principles, or coporate ethics, or whatever.

I'm not putting it in words well (hey, i am an engineer) but my point is I would think that a
company of the stature of Saturn, that puts enough pride and importance in their team to run the
thing very well, would also have that overriding desire or self imposed requirement, as part of
their corporate culture even, to do things the "right" way and go the extra step to take care of
their employees. Not just be driven by the bottom line.

The teams public image IS the marketing value, afterall, and I just feel it reflects poorly on
Saturn to be setup like they are, big budget but D3.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

From what I hear, Saturn is extremely well organized and professional in their infrastructure,
which also costs money. Its clear they view themselves as the best team (not just in sporting
terms) and it reflects poorly on them that they do not make the move to D2.

I guess my point is they are hardly a "developmental" team and are taking advantage of a
loophole, not in the spirit it was intended.

I can respect that Saturn does what they do well, and they don't try to be something they're
not SNIP

Thats the thing, I don't believe they are a "developmental" team. They are a high budget, long term
team that was D2 at one point, IIRC, and chose to downgrade themselves to avoid costs. I hate to
sound like a socialist or something, cause I am not (even though i am in vermont, i am from new
hampshire 😉 but pro riders on D3 teams are basically comparable to bike messengers. Messengers are
given ZERO value by the company. I've been there. Totally expendable.

Its a similar contractural arrangement. Just a contract employee, verses D2 where you become a
salaried, benefitted employee.

Aside from the obvious financial benefits for the rider, it also conveys a certain dedication to the
employee/rider, or value of the employee/rider that you would expect from a Saturn. They want to
appear like "a different kind of car company" with their saturn owner's ralleys and all that.
Choosing to be D3 to, lets face it, simply avoid the costs with being D2 (I can't see the sporting
advantages to the team by staying D3) and those costs being primarily overhead associated with
improving the rider's salary, benefits, and security, just feels wrong. To me anyway.

I thought the whole point was to get people to buy your cars because you want to support what Saturn
stands for. Its not like they are hoping to pick up sales by us the public getting a close look at
the team vehicles and saying, hmmm, yah, thats a nice ride.

Jerry in socialist Vermont paid for by the Howard Dean for President Campaign

"jerry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Aside from the obvious financial benefits for the rider, it also conveys a certain dedication to
the employee/rider, or value of the employee/rider that you would expect from a Saturn. They want
to appear like "a different kind of car company" with their saturn owner's ralleys and all that.
Choosing to be D3 to, lets face it, simply avoid the costs with being D2 (I can't see the sporting
advantages to the team by staying D3) and those costs being primarily overhead associated with
improving the rider's salary, benefits, and security, just feels wrong. To me anyway.

Saturn's riders for Saturn because Saturn offered them more $$$ than they could get elsewhere.

As for benefits - some of my friends are engineering consultants. They get no benefits, but
their hourly rate is much higher. It is an arrangement mutually agreed upon by the consultant
and the employer.

We live in a free market society and its not likely to deviate much in the foreseeable future. If
you want more socialism, there are some cultures in Europe that may fit your bill.

In article said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]

(jerry) said:

Still, a team with a total salary package as large as Saturn (of course I have to assume, but I
think its a safe assumption) is doing a disservice to cycling in the US by staying D3 and thus
avoiding having to treat their riders as employees and, heaven forbid, provide medical coverage
and pay the workers a min salary.

There should be a salary cap and/or number of riders cap on D3 teams, IMHO. If you can afford to
"buy" the best riders, you can afford to provide a professional working environment.

From what I hear, Saturn is extremely well organized and professional in their infrastructure,
which also costs money. Its clear they view themselves as the best team (not just in sporting
terms) and it reflects poorly on them that they do not make the move to D2.

I guess my point is they are hardly a "developmental" team and are taking advantage of a
loophole, not in the spirit it was intended.

but what do I know.

Would the domestic racing scene be any different if Saturn was Division 2 rather than Division 3?

Exactly, and the team's exposure to the US public and all the good that does would not
improve either.

I think it's funny when poor businessmen or people who can't even do that think they know more about
running a business than a large, successful one.

-WG