Been trying to understand the contract situation with Pidcock/Ineos. Is there a reason why they have to come to an agreement whereby Ineos continues paying part of the salary so that he’s still on the same money as his existing contract at the new team? Could they cancel the existing contract if all parties agreed so that he can then negotiate with a new team and a clean slate?
Hi Joanna, that's certainly possible. They (Ineos) could also demand a fee from either Pidcock or the third-party team for the existing contract to be broken. There are several potential options but we've been hearing during the summer that Ineos might continue to pay part of the rider's salary moving forward. We don't know if that's accurate because they won't comment on the matter. It's certainly not unheard of though. A few years ago a British team paid the salary of a rider who left, while he raced for another squad. Granted the sums involved in that deal were far smaller.
Been trying to understand the contract situation with Pidcock/Ineos. Is there a reason why they have to come to an agreement whereby Ineos continues paying part of the salary so that he’s still on the same money as his existing contract at the new team? Could they cancel the existing contract if all parties agreed so that he can then negotiate with a new team and a clean slate?
Hi Joanna, that's certainly possible. They (Ineos) could also demand a fee from either Pidcock or the third-party team for the existing contract to be broken. There are several potential options but we've been hearing during the summer that Ineos might continue to pay part of the rider's salary moving forward. We don't know if that's accurate because they won't comment on the matter. It's certainly not unheard of though. A few years ago a British team paid the salary of a rider who left, while he raced for another squad. Granted the sums involved in that deal were far smaller.