The UCI has invited cycling stakeholders, including riders, teams, and race organizers, to discuss and jointly work on reforms to the structure of professional cycling.
UCI President David Lappartient sent a corresponding letter to the Association of Professional Cycling Teams (AIGCP), the International Association of Cycling Races (AIOCC), the Cyclists' Alliance (CPA), and the presidents of national federations. Lappartient acknowledged that previous attempts to implement changes have failed and that it is now time to sit back at the table. The UCI head added that there are significant shortcomings in the sport's overall economic model.
"Cycling is an extremely popular sport. However, its media coverage and generated revenues do not correspond to its popularity. There is significant room for improvement," noted Lappartient. "We are convinced that this potential can only be realized by consulting with all stakeholders and by creating a jointly agreed-upon structure based on our sport's historical strengths and future challenges."
Lappartient’s letter followed disputes surrounding the One Cycling project – a Saudi-backed plan to reshape the race calendar and revenue distribution. One Cycling has been yet another attempt to find a new economic vision for the sport, particularly by teams who often face long-term financial instability.
Last year, the UCI rejected One Cycling, calling it "incompatible with the UCI governance and regulatory framework and sportingly inconsistent." While the Tuesday letter did not mention One Cycling directly, Lappartient’s dissatisfaction with a project that developed behind the UCI's back was clearly palpable.
"In the meantime, there have been various discussions about the future of our sport, and some stakeholders have initiated efforts aimed at reforming professional road cycling. These initiatives were either abandoned after a few years or never reached implementation," said Lappartient. "The lack of prior consultation and the absence of consensus on proposed models certainly contributed to these shortcomings. Such projects require thorough consultation with all cycling stakeholders and, above all, they must take place under the aegis of the UCI."
Lappartient’s address gives the impression that the UCI is open to new and potentially revolutionary ideas. "The UCI is prepared to consider significant developments in a sport known for its conservatism, provided that these changes allow cycling to continue its growth and internationalization and ensure greater stability for stakeholders in a particularly complex environment. We are open to all proposals and strongly encourage you to actively participate in this consultation. Only by working together can we guide the development of cycling in a way that brings long-term benefits to all its stakeholders. There is no other option," noted Lappartient.
The UCI has requested proposals to be submitted by April 30, with input expected in the following thematic areas:
1. Calendar and participation:
a. Race formats
b. Race calendar
c. Organization of the race and team pyramid
d. Participation rules (teams and riders)
e. Internationalization of cycling
f. Development obligations
2. Economic model:
a. Management of commercial rights (media and sponsorship)
b. Creation of new commercial rights and distribution of value created
c. Solidarity between different levels
d. Financial rules (organizers, teams, riders)
e. Rules governing rider transfers
3. Fan engagement:
a. Digital platform
b. Marketing and promotion
c. TV production
d. Integration of AI and new technologies
4. Safety:
a. Courses
b. Conduct (drivers, riders, spectators)
c. Equipment
d. New technologies (GPS tracking, race communication)
5. Integrity and credibility of results:
a. Consistency of refereeing
b. Anti-doping fight
c. Technological fraud.
UCI is planning major reforms, and Estonia will also have a say
