Nowadays TIME hardly sponsors professional cycling teams at least with their frames, and I feel others like LOOK, De Rosa or Cervélo are also leaning away from it.

Why it happens? Do they think their reputations are already established enough and thus they don't need to promote and advertise products anymore? Or are they running out of money and can't afford to offer teams a better deal than others? Or the quality of their frame are actually inferior and they don't want to let people be aware of it?

Having nothing against companies like Specialized or Canyon, but I kinda feel sad to see multiple teams share the same bike.

  • 5
    The teams want too much money. Nov 7, 2014 at 12:48
  • Did you notice this downturn economy?
    – Batman
    Nov 7, 2014 at 12:52
  • 7
    What @DanielRHicks says hits it right on the head. When a team uses a frame, they are providing advertising to the makers of the frame. The frame is the most visible and recognizable portion of the bike. The sponsor not only has to provide frames, but actual money as well. I would say that frames aren't really that much of a deciding factor on how well an athlete performs, and what really matters is money, as it allows them to spend more time training, and have better coaches, doctors, and lifestyle. Whoever provides the most money will be the frame they choose to ride.
    – Kibbee
    Nov 7, 2014 at 13:42
  • I doubt they are running out of money, more likely they are spending the money they have (for advertising) elsewhere. As far a frame quality goes, as suggested - its about money, not frame quality.
    – mattnz
    Mar 30, 2015 at 20:38

3 Answers 3


You have it backwards. You seem to think pro bike teams are looking to purchase frames from suppliers, and all the supplier needs to do is offer a decent discount. It's the other way around - most pro-tour bike teams require payment from the supplier if they are to display decals, and needless to say the gear will have to be supplied without cost.

You will often see a rider on a certain team has insisted on bringing his favorite saddle, which will then have all decals and logs removed if the supplier doesn't want to pay, or the team already has a primary supplier for that part. You will also see them removing logos from tubular tires made specifically for the cobbles, where most the big-shop tire sponsors do not have a suitable tire. As well, you may even see a team using old frames from a competing brand for a cobble stage where the current frame sponsor did not supply a suitable frame - in this case, the frame will either be rebranded or have branding removed.

In short, I think the lack of diversity you see is more a fault of the sport and the economics of it, not the fault of niche frame manufactures. Big high-revenue bike companies can afford to bet on multiple teams, while betting on one team may be a too risky proposition for a niche player (especially a team they can afford to sponsor).


I think the bike manufacturers do it for a while until they get enough brand recognition. Then they stop for a while to save money, until their brand recognition drops off.


Could it be liability or even just association with a frame that breaks during a race and causes injury? Especially if this is a novel frame design that has not been proven?

Companies can be especially touchy about liability and reputation.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.