“Introducing ticket sales is absolutely not being considered” - ASO firmly shuts down talk of charged roadside viewing at 2026 Tour de France

The debate surrounding professional cycling’s financial future has intensified, with Tour de France organiser ASO now publicly ruling out paid roadside access, despite influential voices elsewhere warning that the WorldTour’s current economic model is becoming harder to sustain.

Previous concerns were raised, among others, by Team Jayco AlUla's Valerio Piva and former Decathlon AG2R LA Mondiale Team boss Vincent Lavenu, who described a system in which the gap between the strongest and most vulnerable structures is growing year on year, fuelled by the reality that “cycling does not benefit from TV rights, nor from ticketing.” With “four to five big teams” winning the majority of races while others “settle for the crumbs,” both men made clear that the sport must confront the question of how new revenue can be generated if it wishes to protect riders, staff and long-term stability.

It was in that wider context that former professional and ex-B&B Hotels manager Jerome Pineau suggested that controlled, ticketed zones on climbs such as Alpe d’Huez could form part of a future solution, arguing that “it becomes possible to charge an entry fee” if the area is separated and managed.

His proposal, however, was immediately met with resistance from figures who believe commercial reform should not come at the cost of cycling’s defining identity.

ASO has now responded directly, issuing the most definitive public position to date. Speaking to La Derniere Heure, deputy cycling director Pierre-Yves Thouault stressed that the sport’s open-access culture is not something the organisation is willing to sacrifice.

“Cycling is by definition free. Introducing ticket sales is absolutely not being considered.”

That stance aligns more closely with Lavenu, who warned that “removing free access does not seem a good idea,” even as he acknowledged the need for a broad structural conversation. It also echoes comments of UCI president David Lappartient, who cautioned that the backlash would be immediate and severe, noting that “if you try to make people pay to watch the Tour, you will face enormous resistance.”

This latest response underlines a key divide in the conversation: team leaders are focused on sustainability, while organisers are focused on safeguarding accessibility. Neither position is unreasonable, yet they currently pull in opposite directions. The tension is clear — cycling needs new, reliable and fair revenue, but the roadside experience remains one of its few untouchable traditions.

For now, ASO’s message is unequivocal, but the concerns raised by Piva and Lavenu have not gone away. The question is no longer whether cycling values its free-to-watch identity — that appears settled — but how the sport finds a modern economic model that does not threaten it.