TotalEnergies will join Ineos as a co-sponsor, with the French oil major appearing on the jersey in time for the Tour de France next week.
There’s no news from the team on this yet but it is on the Total corporate website. The size of the logo should tell us something about the size of ambitions.
Total is the French oil major, one of the biggest companies in France valued at €120 billion today which means it is one of the bigger corporate sponsors in the sport. As mentioned here before they’ve got a history of working with Ineos too.
TotalEnergies has finalized a sponsorship deal for the INEOS Grenadiers’ jersey, starting at this year’s Tour de France
– Press Release
It’s a shirt sponsorship deal according to the press release and nothing more for now. So the team is likely to stay as Ineos Grenadiers. We’ll have to see what happens with the kit, presumably the logo is prominent on the chest and back rather than a small addition on the back pocket which gets covered by the logo.
Le switch?
Not quite as TotalEnergies will also remain title sponsor for at least one more year for Jean-René Bernaudeau’s band of baroudeurs. They will discuss plans for 2027 and beyond after the Tour de France. We’ll see where these talks go, for now it sounds like a gracious exit route, TotalEnergies is not doing a runner. Bernaudeau is retiring soon and depart without a sour note.
Hang on…
If you’re thinking a sponsor can’t have two teams, you’re almost right. It’s against the UCI rules. Here is the relevant part of the rulebook:
2.15.052 The members of a UCI WorldTeam may have no link with the members of another UCI WorldTeam, with a UCI ProTeam or with an organiser of a UCI WorldTour event likely to influence the sporting course of events or to be perceived as so doing. In exceptional cases, which do not challenge the integrity of the competition or the sporting fairness, the UCI Management Committee may grant an exception.
But if this rule sounds familiar, you might remember it being cited when FDJ bought Unibet and today FDJ and Unibet are each title sponsors of respective teams despite ultimately being part of the same company. Perhaps having different brands means the perception is reduced? Note perception is an issue here but we’re talking about the “paying agent” in the UCI jargon, the people controlling and funding the team. Many teams have common sponsors, think Canyon or Specialized as bike suppliers, likewise for components or clothing.
There might be a way around but this is an issue recognised by Total in their press release today:
TotalEnergies confirms that its agreements with these two cycling teams are strictly commercial and exclude any influence and/or interference in sporting matters and race strategies. The Company is implementing internal rules to ensure this separation and the full independence of both teams. A principle the UCI will monitor in accordance with its regulation.
This statement is meant to reassure but remember the rules cite perception so it’s an open issue, presumably the UCI have blessed all of this but imagine what an average fan might think if there’s a breakaway with an Ineos rider, a TotalEnergies rider and a rider from another team? It might look awkward here but in reality in this situation there is no reason for collusion. The risks are probably higher up in terms of management, would Brailsford want to help out Bernaudeau or vice versa? Hopefully not but we’re back to perception.
Also while the Total talks have been going on, several riders are being linked with a move to Ineos like Kévin Vauquelin, Benoît Cosnefroy and Dorian Godon and guess what they have in common. Linked for now but we’ll see if the team needs to hire a couple of French riders.
The big question is whether the extra money means they can go after Remco Evenepoel, either to buy him out of his contract or to wave a contract for 2027 so tempting that he’ll sign it this summer and wait out his last year at Quickstep. This and other recruitment decisions await after an exodus last summer that ended with Tom Pidcock’s surprise late switch.
TotalEnergies will also become a sponsor of the Tour de France as well. The press release mentions it as an “Official Partner” which is a formal term with race organisers ASO. There are four “Main Partners” whose branding appears on the four jerseys in the race and get prominence elsewhere too. “Official Partner” is the next level down like Vittel water, Shimano and others, including Ag2r which have sponsored a team as well. It gives the company even more coverage, from the Tour’s publicity caravan to VIP opportunities.
It’s a big move by Total which got into cycling sponsorship accidentally as it bought Direct Energie, an alternative energy supplier in France, back in 2018 and found it had a cycling team. But it stayed with this, indeed the company boss Patrick Pouyanné has taken an interest in the sport, if only for sponsoring and communication, for a while. They came close to signing Julian Alaphilippe, now they have a full men’s team.
Summary
TotalEnergies is increasing its sponsorship in the sport. This looks like a gradual deal with jersey sponsorship at Ineos to begin with and one more year with the French pro conti team, the current contract with Bernaudeau’s team was expiring this year. This is unusual with two teams sharing the same sponsor.
For now we can’t see new Ineos jersey but when it comes out in time for the Tour de France the size of the Total logo will tell us plenty about the size of the deal… and their ambitions too.
How real is the link to Evenepoel beyond a refresh from last year?
Rumors in Germany say that the deal with Red Bull Bora-Hansgrohe has already been done. This did not go down well with many, considering Lipowitz’s rise and the fact that he might be the local star, ignoring RBH’s more global / international ambitions to grow beyond its german-speaking core.
It’s just talk but with the idea that he could still be bought out of the final year at Soudal. I can’t see this so well because they really need him and whatever transfer payment they get for selling with just one year to go would not be worth that much either.
Plus for a riddle, imagine you had a €50 million team budget, your big goal is Tour de France exposure, but you cannot buy Tadej Pogačar. Who do you hire? Evenepoel is a candidate here but it’s still a lot of money towards a field currently owned by Pogačar/UAE.
Evenepoel is a fantastic rider, but I’m not sure he’ll win many more grand tours, and I can’t see him ever winning a TdF, even if Pog and Vin were to suddenly retire. I’d like to see him focus primarily on one-day races – I think he’d win more.
I can’t see how he’s worth the money that has previously been mentioned.
I tend to agree; Remco needs to be a lot more consistent (and crash a lot less) to have a chance at winning another grand tour. If both Jonas and Tadej were absent, I’d bet on Almeida or Roglic ahead of Remco (unless we had a really retro parcours with 70+km of TTs).
Whilst I agree that Remco doesn’t inspire the same confidence over 3 weeks as Pogacar or Vingegaard, let’s not forget that he finished 3rd in last year’s TdF, a full 10 minutes ahead of Almeida, and was a minute up on Roglic when he crashed out…
I’d say he’d have a pretty good chance at winning more GTs if Pog and Vinge were absent.
I agree that Remco could win at Grand Tour if Pogi and Vingegaard are not there. But nobody is paying 5 million to get someone who might (or might not) win the Vuelta. And there is no chance that the other two both miss the Tour in the next few years.
It’s a pleasant surprise that Total is continuing sponsorship of the pro team for at least a little while longer rather than dropping them immediately in favour of the World Tour.
Yes, it could have been worse but the money is loose change for Total, and the company boss Patrick Pouyanné at Total has some personal connection to Bernaudeau in recent years, they’re not remote. But it does look like one more year and hard to see beyond that.
A Pro-Tour team costs much less to fund. There is a good chance that they will find someone willing to pay 3-million for a team at the Tour. And they have over a year to find that someone.
Hard to see how this can not be a conflict of interest. And the idea that we can rely on ‘the Company implementing internal rules to ensure’ there is no collusion is laughable.
Ooops. Delete, ta.
Such a cynic… would never happen.
It would; Inner Ring’s deleted my comments previously.
Think MrSwamp was discussing collusion, rather than the spam filter software 😉
I know. ;o)
Well, we do have this with Red Bull and Tudor as well. Besides the sponsorship with other individual riders. Don‘t forget Ineos is without an own devo team, maybe the Bernaudeau Team will be this in the future.
Red Bull is just a drinks supplier at Tudor and, whisper it, no cyclists really drink Red Bull either so it’s surely not a big deal.
Ineos has a team, the German conti team Kern-Haus, they’ve placed riders there like Storm and Oxenberg for the time being.
A long while back Brailsford said he’d love to win the tour with a French rider, perhaps this cements the foundation for a 5 year cycle
This is what immediately came to my mind. And what could motivate Total/Patrick Pouyanné as well.
They’d need a French rider who was actually a contender first.
Brailsford’s magic wand is no longer what it once was.
Also, how much of DB saying that was just for PR?
It’s positive news, in a limited way. A large sponsor expanding, or at least retaining, an interest in the sport.
But what does this mean for the French “pro-tour” level? Arkea’s prospects seem limited. Cofidis are treading water. This is likely the for the Bernaudeau t
Eesh. That’s me with fat thumbs.
TL:DR – will there be a void in French cycling, who will fill it?
You’d think there would be a vacancy as, along as the team is “correct”, then a French second tier team can get a wildcard invite to the Tour de France.
Although it’s interesting that new sponsorship is going into the women’s Tour too, for the sums you can invest in a men’s team that might win a Tour stage and get some exposure eg Arkéa, Total etc, you can win the women’s Tour, eg FDJ-Suez which seems to be collecting big name sponsors.
Unfortunately for the women, winning a stage in the men’s tour delivers a great deal more exposure than winning the whole women’s tour. And sponsors are paying for exposure — eyeballs on their name. The difference in viewing figures is massive, and this is true whether or not we approve of the situation.
I think that’s probably true, for now.
The finale of last year’s TdF Femme was sensational, and gathered coverage in mainstream news, including in the UK where we didn’t have a rider in contention. This means more eyeballs on this year’s edition. As even French domestic sponsors will increasingly have a global outlook, this will have been noted. I am sure the value balance is shifting all the time.
But for now it seems there will be a vacancy, and as nature (ASO) hates a vacuum, no doubt it will be filled. As comments below suggest, it might be a merger.
More consolidation of the few big budget teams?
So much for Brexit!
Well, at least it’s been a roaring success in every other way.
Although it may seem a sort of conflict of interest i would say a bike sponsor having more than one team is a much greater conflict of interest. They have a far greater incentive to make sure their star riders win.
An Evenepoel or Sagan win is worth much more to specialized than a win to a rider at ineos or total energies. And the bike company probably has a lot more day to day contact.
Although if Total is a part owner of a team that does complicate the legalities.
I can’t see the UCI needing to intervene though.
Perhaps only the UN has more laws that it doesn’t implement than the UCI.
The bike sponsors can be very strict on messaging and marketing. For an example, see how corporate sponsors Total have announced this deal but Ineos not yet; by contrast you can set you watch to the second by the time a new Specialized shoe or wheel is announced because every site publishes the review/press release simultaneously. It’s less in terms of race tactics but recruitment, eg Sagan was part of a Specialized package and placed in Total.
It’s an old story but when Andy Hampsten won in the 1988 Giro d’Italia his 7-Eleven struggled to defend his lead in the final week. So in came another team to help, and because 7-Eleven and this other team were both sponsored by Shimano and the European distributor was keen to see what was I think the first grand tour for the Japanese firm.
From a corporate point of view this is a strange sponsorship. Some companies would have an internal rule that would not allow such a sponsorship collaboration.
Ineos is for sure a potential customer and supplier of Total with its various petroleum chemicals. It’s also a potential competitor in some oil and gas production.
Before retirement i worked at an USA company that was a supplier / contractor to multi national oil companies. And such a co sponsorship deal would have been quite a problem and probably not gone ahead. Especially given ineos the team essentially being owned / operated by someone associated with ineos the company.
A truly unpleasant collaboration between two absolutely abhorrent companies
So Ineos get Adidas and Visma get Nike as sponsors.