The UCI typically assigns WorldTour teams a license for a period of three years. This year, they took the somewhat unusual step of assigning the Picnic PostNL team a provisional one-year license, signaling lower confidence that the team will be able to meet its financial burdens for the following seasons.
Resolves YES if Picnic PostNL, or any team under a different name but sharing the same underlying structure, is granted a WorldTour license for the 2027 cycling season. Resolves NO if they are not granted such a license or if the team folds by the end of the year.
1,000People are also trading
@Eliza I would think that the UCI would be obligated by their own rules to issue Picnic a WorldTour license if Picnic wants one, as long as their financial obligations check out. That was the reason the UCI initially gave for only issuing a one-year license as opposed to the three years they rightfully earned by sporting criteria in 2025.
So, the NO resolution is composed of two likely scenarios: either Picnic’s financials are bad enough that the UCI rejects their license, or Picnic themselves voluntarily choose not to apply for the WorldTour in 2027. The news article makes it sound like #2 is possible, but doesn’t read like a hard confirmation to me.
@RedzoneITG I think the reality is there is a mixture of actual rigid rules with flexibility/understanding. And if the team doesn't want to tryhard to get the approval they will just claim they intentionally went down in status.
@Eliza The article is based on rumors. I'm pretty sure they are exploring all their options at the moment, but this isn't any official statement or a confirmation that they are going to go that route. The article doesn't give many informations at all tbh. Technically, they don't have a reason to leave WT if they get their finances right. And it doesn't make much sense. If they don't, it'll be the obvious solution to leave the WT. I'm also pretty sure, UCI would go after them if they were successful and didn't get their financing, that's the most important part for the UCI ;).
I'm a little bit surprised that this has been reported by French cycling media and not Wielerflits (etc.)
It would be a real shame to see them go. They have done such an amazing job in the development of riders and made huge improvements in the methodology of technical and biophysical cycling. In my opinion, it's a little bit of a shame that they were never able to keep their successfull riders or get financial compensation for them. Considering they have connections to Eindhoven, I'd be wondering if they wouldn't be able to find sponsors.
@Lion The riders leaving thing is weird because at various times they seem to have essentially 'supported' it and other times they act like they can't believe the guy is leaving yet still let them go. The total number of riders who have left the Sunweb/DSM/Picnic/whatever organization early is about 20 in just the last 10 years.
There has to be some kind of internal blockage within the team that causes this situation to keep happening over and over again.
@Eliza There are definitely problems within the management. I do understand riders leaving because they don't like this very scientific approach (probably shouldn't sign the contract in the first place, but that's another topic) or get higher offers. What I don't understand is why they aren't more open to riders leaving with financial compensation from the new team and writing that into the contract. In reality, they are more of a development team with WT status than an usual team.
Lorena Wiebes was probably the most prominent example. They had her under contract for 2024 but had an exception for her to be allowed to leave early!?!?