Top ProTour Riders salaries / query



wicklow200

New Member
May 12, 2005
561
0
0
I know its probably none of my business, but does anyone have any insight into what sort of salary the big tour riders are on?
I just read that Ullrich was being offered 60,000 Euro for one criterium participation. Obviously thats not salary but it sure is a lot of money.
Now that I think of it it would be interesting to know the sort of figures they can earn from sources other than directly from their team salary as well
 
LA earned last year something like 16 million, by faaaaaaaaar the highest paid cyclist......after that you have ullrich estimated 2/3 million in a year and then petachhi 2 million......for the rest I don't know!

But LA asked last year 100.000 for a criterium PLUS security: was in the dutch press last year that the organisers of the critiriums thought he asked too much!


wicklow200 said:
I know its probably none of my business, but does anyone have any insight into what sort of salary the big tour riders are on?
I just read that Ullrich was being offered 60,000 Euro for one criterium participation. Obviously thats not salary but it sure is a lot of money.
Now that I think of it it would be interesting to know the sort of figures they can earn from sources other than directly from their team salary as well
 
LA's take includes his various endorsements arrangements (e.g., Nike, Bristol Myers Squib, Subaru). On top of that, it should be noted he owns part of the DC team. Also, at least until his fifth or sixth victory, USPS has bought an insurance policy regarding payout with additional consecutive wins (the one that is being disputed). One year the payout due was something liked $5M.

Petacci's 2M euro salary also required his new team to pick up about 1M euro in total for a few of his lead-out men.

Heras is pretty well paid too --1.2M euro/year. When Heras left USPS for Liberty, Saiz was reported to have had to pay USPS a significant buy-out fee for Heras' final single year of contract:

"The official confirmation came on the US Postal website. The indications are that 29-year-old Heras will continue to earn his current salary of 1.2 million euros a season for the next three years. Some sources are reporting that Liberty will have to pay US Postal a buy-out requirement of 1.38 million euros to secure Heras."

http://cyclingdiary.blogspot.com/2003_12_01_cyclingdiary_archive.html

"The Portuguese Sports Daily A Bola report that the US Postal will have to pay the Milaneza-MSS team 300,000 euros to release José Azevedo and a further payment of 150.000 euros at the end of the 2004 season. Therefore the total payout to the Milaneza team will be around 450,000 euros.
However much the loss of Heras disappoints Bruyneel, at least the US Postal accountants may be happy. To offset the 450,000 euros paid out. they will receive 1.3 million euros compensation from Liberty Seguros for Roberto Heras, making a net profit of 850.000 euros. In addition, Azevedo is thought to be on a salary of around 500,000 euros, about 700,000 euros less then they would have paid Heras. The other big winner is Azevedo himself, his US Postal salary is thought to be around double of what he would have earned with Milaneza."

So, Ace is at around 500K euros/year. But the Posties in the TdF have bonuses tied to LA winning. Wonder if that is taken into account in the 500K.
 
Basso's new deal is €1.3million a year, Ullrich on €250,000 per month...... LA earns around €4million a year from Discovery and his teammates earn about €30,000 a year...

MJtje said:
LA earned last year something like 16 million, by faaaaaaaaar the highest paid cyclist......after that you have ullrich estimated 2/3 million in a year and then petachhi 2 million......for the rest I don't know!

But LA asked last year 100.000 for a criterium PLUS security: was in the dutch press last year that the organisers of the critiriums thought he asked too much!
 
How much LA's former teammates make depends on which teammate we are talking about. Ace and Heras, for example, made much more. I am sure Savoldelli was not inexpensive, even after his years of misery at TM, and Popo will be earing much better than that. That is because Bruyneel said that Popo chose DC in spite of DC not having made the best financial offer, but a good offer. Popo was focused not just on money, and that was part of what Bruyneel liked about his transfer to DC.

On the David Letterman show, LA says that he, as expected and as is usual, split his TdF winnings for first on GC among the eight other DC participants.
 
whiteboytrash said:
his teammates earn about €30,000 a year...
Could you provide the source of that information, please? Did you inadvertently omit a "0" perhaps?
 
Could you provide the source of that information, please?

musette said:
How much LA's former teammates make depends on which teammate we are talking about. Ace and Heras, for example, made much more. I am sure Savoldelli was not inexpensive, even after his years of misery at TM, and Popo will be earing much better than that. That is because Bruyneel said that Popo chose DC in spite of DC not having made the best financial offer, but a good offer. Popo was focused not just on money, and that was part of what Bruyneel liked about his transfer to DC.

On the David Letterman show, LA says that he, as expected and as is usual, split his TdF winnings for first on GC among the eight other DC participants.
 
It's no use to try and distract people from the prior question about your numerical quote of salaries; it doesn't take away from the request for such a specific, quantitative statement. ;)
 
rejobako said:
Could you provide the source of that information, please? Did you inadvertently omit a "0" perhaps?

€30,000 is the minimum salary for a rider on a ProTour team - mandated by UCI. I have no idea how many riders make that amount, but the fact that the UCI had to mandate a minimum wage probably means that some riders on Continental teams are making less than that.
 
But that doesn't mean that LA's "teammates earn about €30,000 a year", for which readers are still awaiting proof. :cool:
 
musette said:
But that doesn't mean that LA's "teammates earn about €30,000 a year", for which readers are still awaiting proof. :cool:
First of all, "earnings" and "salary" are two different things; of course Disco's riders have average incomes higher than 30,000 Euro. Even without that distinction, you're going to have to convince me that a Disco team which includes the current Giro winner, the best young rider in the TdF, and riders the calibre of Hincapie, Beltran, Azevedo, Ekimov, etc, are being paid the UCI minimum salary for their efforts.

Still waiting for a link . . . .
 
One source - probably reliable because it would be only too obvious if it were false, is Lance's second book. He quotes Floyd's base salary as $60k/year, plus another $50k if he makes the Tour team, plus another $100k if Lance wins ($50k as 1/8 of the 1st place, another $50k from Lance)
 
Another aspect is that DC riders have a very high profile within the peloton, such that if a domestique wanted to leave USPS/DC, they would have reasonably good prospects if they had shown their abilities in the Tour (e.g., Livingston, Hamilton, Heras, Leipheimer, Landis, etc.) So they have the visibility that would allow them, should they decide to leave, to command better earnings. :p

Also, one must remember the very high non-monetary benefits one can have as a USPS/DC domestique, esp when LA was winning the TdF. It's special to be making history with a record number of wins, and riding into Paris with the yellow jersey. Ace has said that the highlight of his career so far has been riding into yellow with LA last year. Hincapie and Rubiera have all talked about how special LA's winning is to them.

... also still waiting for the link ... ;)
 
rejobako said:
First of all, "earnings" and "salary" are two different things; of course Disco's riders have average incomes higher than 30,000 Euro. Even without that distinction, you're going to have to convince me that a Disco team which includes the current Giro winner, the best young rider in the TdF, and riders the calibre of Hincapie, Beltran, Azevedo, Ekimov, etc, are being paid the UCI minimum salary for their efforts.

Still waiting for a link . . . .
While WBT is still trying to pull his link out of his @ss I did some searching and found this link at foxsports.com.

"The average American pro racing domestically makes a base salary of about $7,000 a year compared to a base salary of about $30,000 a year for pros in Europe. Prize money, bonuses, and endorsements can push that paltry figure higher but at the very top level very only a handful of domestic pros make close to six figures. "

Here is the entire article which is a good article on Americans point of view on Cycling. http://msn.foxsports.com/cycling/story/3738098
 
Don’t forget the American dollar is worth nothing now so $30,000 equates to be about £15,00 or €23,000, which is nothing..... its such a poor currency that I think most riders prefer to get paid in Lithuanian litas.... oh and Fox news is a very creditable source of fact..... not.....

thebluetrain said:
While WBT is still trying to pull his link out of his @ss I did some searching and found this link at foxsports.com.

"The average American pro racing domestically makes a base salary of about $7,000 a year compared to a base salary of about $30,000 a year for pros in Europe. Prize money, bonuses, and endorsements can push that paltry figure higher but at the very top level very only a handful of domestic pros make close to six figures. "

Here is the entire article which is a good article on Americans point of view on Cycling. http://msn.foxsports.com/cycling/story/3738098
 
whiteboytrash said:
Don’t forget the American dollar is worth nothing now so $30,000 equates to be about £15,00 or €23,000, which is nothing..... its such a poor currency that I think most riders prefer to get paid in Lithuanian litas.... oh and Fox news is a very creditable source of fact..... not.....

Oh so we should trust the BBC instead? LOL Maybe Jude Law could give us Americans some financial advice. I just checked my Roth IRA and my Mutual Fund and they are presently earning 14.67% for 12 months. I kinda like a weaker dollar.
What Are the Implications of a Weak Dollar?

Who benefits from the weaker dollar? European tourists are flocking to U.S. destinations such as New York City. New York stores report a surge in sales, particularly in high-end items. New York hotels report high occupancy rates and restaurants report increased reservations.

However, the major impact is to U.S. firms, who benefited from a weaker dollar that made their products less expensive in overseas markets. Less expensive products translate into increased sales and higher earnings. It is estimated that the weaker dollar added 2 percent to the S&P 500 companies’ revenues during the first half of 2004. U.S. exports continued to increase in the last half of the year. In November, exports hit their highest level in three years, thereby causing the trade gap to decrease to $38 billion from $41.6 billion in October. Imports also retreated slightly from October’s record highs.

Large companies are not the only ones to benefit from the weaker dollar. More than 212,000 small businesses – those with fewer than 100 employees – and 18,000 midsize companies – with 100 to 500 employees – exported their goods or services overseas in 2001 (the latest year for which the Commerce Department has data). These small and midsize businesses accounted for $182 billion in trade, or 29 percent of all exports.

The weaker dollar has had a positive impact on GDP. International trade represents a portion of GDP, so one may infer a positive effect of the weakened dollar on GDP growth. The Institute for International Economics in 2002 estimated that a decline of 10 percent in the value of the dollar increased GDP by .5 percent and that a 20 percent decline increased GDP by 1 percent.Given the approximately 15 percent decline in the dollar valuation in 2003, we may infer a .75 percent increase in GDP due to the weakened dollar.

Higher corporate profits helped major stock indices post double digit increases in 2003 after two years of negative returns. The good news continued in early 2004 as indices hit two year highs with the Dow Jones Industrial Average passing the 10,000 mark and the NASDAQ exceeding 2100.
 
Was this article on paceline.com ? Jude Law ? Naaaa try the board of Enron or WorldCom to provide financial advice ! LOL !! and for all the Mum's and Dad due for retirement from these companies.... stuff 'em ! The Directors got their stock money out just in time and put into off-shore accounts in the Caymans..... those nest eggs should mature by the time they get out of the minimum security (holiday) jail cells...... in the interim let the wives live it up ! Yep great place to invest ! Now get me some oil !
______________________________________________



The Implications of a Weakened Dollar

Remember that two likely side effects of the sliding dollar for the U.S. are higher interest rates and climbing prices, especially on imports—not the least of which is oil. The Middle East oil-producing countries sell oil in dollars, but they import much of their goods and services from the European Union and must pay for them in euros. As the dollar loses ground against the euro, their purchasing power deteriorates. They can either raise prices (as Americans have already experienced at the gas pumps) or start pricing oil contracts in euros as Iraq did in 1999.

Russia also sells oil in dollars but imports many of its goods from the EU. So it is losing purchasing power too. According to www.gateway2russia.com, the deputy chairman of the Russian Central Bank has recently suggested abandoning the policy of pegging the Russian ruble to the dollar only, replacing it with both the dollar and the euro (March 1).

The unstable dollar is putting pressure on central banks around the world to move away from dollar reserves. In fact, several have already reduced their dollar reserves to stop further losses. “A new analysis by Lehman Brothers estimates that in the last half of last year as much as $133 billion of foreign exchange reserves in non-Japan Asia left the dollar for stronger, higher-yielding currencies such as the euro” (Observer, February 22).

What this indicates is that the U.S. dollar—as a result of its weakening—is losing some of its status as a reserve currency. This has far-reaching implications. In order to be able to transact business on a global scale in a smooth manner that promotes growth, the world relies on a universally accepted currency—the reserve currency. In the 19th century, the British pound sterling served the purpose. After World War ii, the U.S. dollar gradually replaced it.

“A national currency becomes an international reserve currency for other countries when it is established as the currency of choice in global finance and trade, owing to its overwhelming relative economic and financial power. Countries are eager to hold that currency as a reserve. It is a cherished asset that can be deployed anywhere, in any nation with which it has international economic relations, because it knows that every other country also wants this currency as a reserve for the same reasons it desires the currency” (Le Monde Diplomatique, op. cit.).

The U.S. has a big advantage for this reason. It is the only nation that can simply print dollars and easily exchange them for other currencies to buy products without increasing the domestic money supply and risking inflation. It’s like getting an interest-free loan, and it is one reason the U.S. economy has been able to run trade deficits.

The real danger of a weakening dollar is that it cools the demand for dollars as a reserve currency! If the dollar continues to fall over time (which some analysts say it must), and if demand wanes and the supply of foreign capital starts to dry up, we face the prospect of strategic power shifts in global markets that would weaken the power of the U.S.—the same thing that happened to Britain not so long ago.

The Euro Challenge

In 2002, 12 nations of the EU adopted the euro as their common currency. It was not just for domestic economic reasons. “[P]lanners hoped that the importance of the euro would lead individuals throughout the world to hold their assets in euros rather than in dollars” (David C. Colander, Economics). Recent U.S. aggressiveness, as Europe sees it, and the meteoric rise of the euro against the dollar have rekindled that aspiration. There is renewed speculation about whether the euro can become an alternative reserve currency to the dollar.

Admittedly, there are structural problems that hinder such a development. For example, the practices of the European banking system are cumbersome in handling transactions between countries compared to U.S. banking practices. And there are policy roadblocks such as the stability and growth pact that the European Central Bank interprets very narrowly and that unduly constrains national fiscal policy, especially in the economies of Germany and France.

While there are reasons to doubt the emergence of the euro as a reserve currency, remember that the U.S. dollar also has three enormous vulnerabilities: persistent trade deficits now running at about a half trillion dollars a year, budget deficits that are perceived to be out of control, and a lack of confidence in Washington’s foreign policy decisions (whether justified or not).

Meanwhile, the weaker dollar is indeed hurting European exports to the U.S. and undercutting the growth of the EU economy. This is placing “unexpected and growing pressures on the euro zone governments to advance structural reforms to make their economies more competitive” (Stratfor Global Market Brief, February 16). If the EU advances these reforms faster than the U.S. can put its financial house in order, watch for the euro to increasingly edge out the dollar as a preferred reserve currency. This would especially occur if more terrorist attacks on U.S. soil further undermined confidence in the U.S. dollar as a safe haven.

“Britain’s 200 years of global supremacy were based on a strong currency, a large trade surplus and growing foreign investments. Trade decline in the late 19th and early 20th century gave a clear sign that Britain’s empire was on the wane. Today’s trade and payments deficits, and the falling dollar, may point in the very same direction for the global order based on U.S. dominance” (Global Policy Forum, op. cit.).

thebluetrain said:
Oh so we should trust the BBC instead? LOL Maybe Jude Law could give us Americans some financial advice. I just checked my Roth IRA and my Mutual Fund and they are presently earning 14.67% for 12 months. I kinda like a weaker dollar.

What Are the Implications of a Weak Dollar?

Who benefits from the weaker dollar? European tourists are flocking to U.S. destinations such as New York City. New York stores report a surge in sales, particularly in high-end items. New York hotels report high occupancy rates and restaurants report increased reservations.

However, the major impact is to U.S. firms, who benefited from a weaker dollar that made their products less expensive in overseas markets. Less expensive products translate into increased sales and higher earnings. It is estimated that the weaker dollar added 2 percent to the S&P 500 companies’ revenues during the first half of 2004. U.S. exports continued to increase in the last half of the year. In November, exports hit their highest level in three years, thereby causing the trade gap to decrease to $38 billion from $41.6 billion in October. Imports also retreated slightly from October’s record highs.

Large companies are not the only ones to benefit from the weaker dollar. More than 212,000 small businesses – those with fewer than 100 employees – and 18,000 midsize companies – with 100 to 500 employees – exported their goods or services overseas in 2001 (the latest year for which the Commerce Department has data). These small and midsize businesses accounted for $182 billion in trade, or 29 percent of all exports.

The weaker dollar has had a positive impact on GDP. International trade represents a portion of GDP, so one may infer a positive effect of the weakened dollar on GDP growth. The Institute for International Economics in 2002 estimated that a decline of 10 percent in the value of the dollar increased GDP by .5 percent and that a 20 percent decline increased GDP by 1 percent.Given the approximately 15 percent decline in the dollar valuation in 2003, we may infer a .75 percent increase in GDP due to the weakened dollar.

Higher corporate profits helped major stock indices post double digit increases in 2003 after two years of negative returns. The good news continued in early 2004 as indices hit two year highs with the Dow Jones Industrial Average passing the 10,000 mark and the NASDAQ exceeding 2100.
 
whiteboytrash said:
Was this article on paceline.com ? Jude Law ? Naaaa try the board of Enron or WorldCom to provide financial advice ! LOL !! and for all the Mum's and Dad due for retirement from these companies.... stuff 'em ! The Directors got their stock money out just in time and put into off-shore accounts in the Caymans..... those nest eggs should mature by the time they get out of the minimum security (holiday) jail cells...... in the interim let the wives live it up ! Yep great place to invest ! Now get me some oil !
______________________________________________



The Implications of a Weakened Dollar

Remember that two likely side effects of the sliding dollar for the U.S. are higher interest rates and climbing prices, especially on imports—not the least of which is oil. The Middle East oil-producing countries sell oil in dollars, but they import much of their goods and services from the European Union and must pay for them in euros. As the dollar loses ground against the euro, their purchasing power deteriorates. They can either raise prices (as Americans have already experienced at the gas pumps) or start pricing oil contracts in euros as Iraq did in 1999.

Russia also sells oil in dollars but imports many of its goods from the EU. So it is losing purchasing power too. According to www.gateway2russia.com, the deputy chairman of the Russian Central Bank has recently suggested abandoning the policy of pegging the Russian ruble to the dollar only, replacing it with both the dollar and the euro (March 1).

The unstable dollar is putting pressure on central banks around the world to move away from dollar reserves. In fact, several have already reduced their dollar reserves to stop further losses. “A new analysis by Lehman Brothers estimates that in the last half of last year as much as $133 billion of foreign exchange reserves in non-Japan Asia left the dollar for stronger, higher-yielding currencies such as the euro” (Observer, February 22).

What this indicates is that the U.S. dollar—as a result of its weakening—is losing some of its status as a reserve currency. This has far-reaching implications. In order to be able to transact business on a global scale in a smooth manner that promotes growth, the world relies on a universally accepted currency—the reserve currency. In the 19th century, the British pound sterling served the purpose. After World War ii, the U.S. dollar gradually replaced it.

“A national currency becomes an international reserve currency for other countries when it is established as the currency of choice in global finance and trade, owing to its overwhelming relative economic and financial power. Countries are eager to hold that currency as a reserve. It is a cherished asset that can be deployed anywhere, in any nation with which it has international economic relations, because it knows that every other country also wants this currency as a reserve for the same reasons it desires the currency” (Le Monde Diplomatique, op. cit.).

The U.S. has a big advantage for this reason. It is the only nation that can simply print dollars and easily exchange them for other currencies to buy products without increasing the domestic money supply and risking inflation. It’s like getting an interest-free loan, and it is one reason the U.S. economy has been able to run trade deficits.

The real danger of a weakening dollar is that it cools the demand for dollars as a reserve currency! If the dollar continues to fall over time (which some analysts say it must), and if demand wanes and the supply of foreign capital starts to dry up, we face the prospect of strategic power shifts in global markets that would weaken the power of the U.S.—the same thing that happened to Britain not so long ago.

The Euro Challenge

In 2002, 12 nations of the EU adopted the euro as their common currency. It was not just for domestic economic reasons. “[P]lanners hoped that the importance of the euro would lead individuals throughout the world to hold their assets in euros rather than in dollars” (David C. Colander, Economics). Recent U.S. aggressiveness, as Europe sees it, and the meteoric rise of the euro against the dollar have rekindled that aspiration. There is renewed speculation about whether the euro can become an alternative reserve currency to the dollar.

Admittedly, there are structural problems that hinder such a development. For example, the practices of the European banking system are cumbersome in handling transactions between countries compared to U.S. banking practices. And there are policy roadblocks such as the stability and growth pact that the European Central Bank interprets very narrowly and that unduly constrains national fiscal policy, especially in the economies of Germany and France.

While there are reasons to doubt the emergence of the euro as a reserve currency, remember that the U.S. dollar also has three enormous vulnerabilities: persistent trade deficits now running at about a half trillion dollars a year, budget deficits that are perceived to be out of control, and a lack of confidence in Washington’s foreign policy decisions (whether justified or not).

Meanwhile, the weaker dollar is indeed hurting European exports to the U.S. and undercutting the growth of the EU economy. This is placing “unexpected and growing pressures on the euro zone governments to advance structural reforms to make their economies more competitive” (Stratfor Global Market Brief, February 16). If the EU advances these reforms faster than the U.S. can put its financial house in order, watch for the euro to increasingly edge out the dollar as a preferred reserve currency. This would especially occur if more terrorist attacks on U.S. soil further undermined confidence in the U.S. dollar as a safe haven.

“Britain’s 200 years of global supremacy were based on a strong currency, a large trade surplus and growing foreign investments. Trade decline in the late 19th and early 20th century gave a clear sign that Britain’s empire was on the wane. Today’s trade and payments deficits, and the falling dollar, may point in the very same direction for the global order based on U.S. dominance” (Global Policy Forum, op. cit.).



bloddy hell have i just logged on to the Wall Street Journal website?

nice to see the old cut and paste tool's still working.

Now if only you guys understood all of that....
 

Similar threads