SEG Cycling owner Martijn Berkhout: 'We are watching cycling learn the language of leverage'

“People talk about who went where, and how much it cost,” Berkhout tells Domestique. “But for me it’s mainly a signal. Cycling is starting to behave differently. Not richer in the way football is, but more professional in the way power is used.”

This winter made those shifts visible. Remco Evenepoel and Juan Ayuso both moved on before their contracts had run their course, while Oscar Onley’s transfer to INEOS Grenadiers came with a reported buyout in the region of €3-4 million.

The Dutchmen does not pretend the backdrop is stable. Quite the opposite.

“Let’s be honest, it’s not in a great place,” he says. “Teams disappear, teams merge because they have to, licences come with conditions, and sponsors move around like they’re shopping. Everyone is looking for new money, while the sport still wastes a lot of energy doing things inefficiently. So yes, a lot is going wrong. But it was definitely not boring.”

One detail, he feels, captured the difference with other years. The biggest names did not wait for contracts to expire.

“This year we saw more high profile transfers where riders left despite having contracts,” he says. “That’s the part that feels new for cycling. The market is saying: if you have leverage, you can use it.”

Asked for the best pick of the window, Berkhout does not hesitate.

“Oscar Onley is by far the best purchase,” he says. “INEOS are building toward the future, but they were missing a home grown leader for the next chapter. Now they have him.”

For Berkhout, the logic goes beyond performance.

“Ownership, the UK fanbase, everyone is behind Oscar and sees perspective for the team again,” he says. “That would not have happened with another rider. It’s a win win for team and rider, and it’s good for cycling.”

His choice for the most underrated transfer is more pragmatic, and maybe more revealing.

“Olav Kooij,” he says. “Decathlon went safe. Not an investment in potential, not an investment in a seventh place in a Grand Tour. An investment in wins. A clear leader.”

He frames it as a decision shaped by reality. In a sport where return on investment is often difficult to explain, sprint victories remain the cleanest currency.

“Where is the room to score in the short term? Sprints,” he says. “And now they have that with Olav. He will make sure other talent in that team can grow quietly. And Olav can go to the biggest stage, the Tour, where he belongs.”

Berkhout keeps returning to one structural issue: demand for talent is huge, but patience is thin.

“The question is not whether there is enough talent,” he says. “The question is whether talent gets time. Riders get signed for too much money too early, expectations become unrealistic, and teams feel forced to chase results immediately. Then you spend too much too soon, and later you struggle when you need to invest in proven names.”

The effect is a widening gap across the peloton.

“The divide between the top teams and the rest is getting bigger,” he says. “If you’re not at the top, you function like an upgraded development team for the top. I don’t see that as a problem created by the top teams. They are simply doing what they are built to do.”

It is impossible to talk about this winter without the football comparison, and Berkhout leans into it, carefully.

“Cycling is drifting toward football,” he says. “Not glamour. Not wealth. The mechanics: buyouts, leverage, pressure points.”

SEG Cycling, one of the biggest agencies in the sport, have long supported a formal transfer system. Berkhout even notes the irony of how the debate has come back around.

“I read that Iwan Spekenbrink [CEO of Picnic PostNL) is now talking about introducing a transfer system,” he says. “I looked it up, because in 2014 I had a discussion with him on Dutch radio where I argued for it, and he was against it.”

His preferred model is straightforward: two windows, and clear dates.

“I’d introduce two transfer windows,” he says. “One window of one week between the Dauphiné and the Tour de France. It sounds radical, but think about it. How often does a team arrive at the Tour without its leader because of a crash in the build up, while other teams start with four riders who could make the podium. Try explaining that to a sponsor putting 25 million into a team. You should be able to do something.”

Then the second window would clean up the annual mess.

“A window from 1 September to 31 October, with contracts starting on 1 November,” he says. “Then we’re done with that weird grey zone,” he says, referring to the awkward in between period when riders are already training with their new team, but still wearing their former team’s kit.

Berkhout believes a transfer system would not only help the buying teams but also create a healthier ecosystem.

“Teams that can buy will ensure selling teams have a business model,” he says. “Just like in football, you get a pyramid of buying and selling teams. If you educate well, invest smart, and work efficiently, you can build yourself up.”

The impact, he insists, would be positive even if the adjustment is painful.

“It’s progress,” he says. “Innovation never goes smoothly. There will be winners and losers. But on the long term, it’s good for the sport.”

Transfers, Berkhout says, also raise the bar for agents.

“Yes, it changes the game,” he says. “If an agency doesn’t have the knowledge and network, you add no value for riders or teams. Transfers are never easy, but everyone has to leave the table with a good feeling. Like with Oscar Onley.”

The agent world itself has changed sharply in the last decade.

“There are more agents, more offices,” he says. “Riders and teams have choices. That’s only a good thing.”

SEG’s perspective is shaped by operating in both football and cycling, and Berkhout is blunt about where cycling still lags.

“Cycling is high performance in training, nutrition, equipment,” he says. “But on the business side it’s often low performance.”

He points to a contradiction teams still underestimate.

“You can chase marginal gains to find a few watts,” he says. “But then you leave riders in uncertainty about contracts and their future during the off-season. That’s completely counterproductive, even for performance.”

His broader argument is that the next edge is not found in physiology. “Performance wise, teams are not that far apart,” he says. “The difference has to be made in the front office: scouting, recruitment, strategy. Making choices, daring to select, creating a profile for partners.”

When the conversation turns to cost control and ideas like a salary cap, recently floated by Jonathan Vaughters in the Domestique Hotseat, Berkhout pushes back.. “A salary cap is an American way of thinking,” he says. “In Europe that won’t work. But I agree something has to change.”

His preferred solution looks closer to a franchise structure, governed independently, with all stakeholders represented. “Think about how Formula 1 is run,” he says. “You need a structure where teams, organisers, riders, fans, industry and media have representation. Build a new organisation responsible for running professional cycling, with a mandate from the UCI.”

Asked what matters most, he lands on something quieter than buyouts and headlines.

“Stability,” he says. “Long term stability for teams, riders, organisers. Less turnover. Too many teams disappeared. That’s bad.” Still, he finishes with optimism that feels earned rather than performed.

“Despite everything,” Berkhout says, “I’m genuinely excited about the future of the sport.”