Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #531  
Old 01-02-13, 03:01
Merckx index's Avatar
Merckx index Merckx index is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,775
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkvW View Post
My guess is that the settlement agreement will be enforced. I'm guessing it was an arm's length deal that was intended to finally end all possibility of future litigation between SCA and Lance Armstrong. The idea that SCA can invalidate the settlement agreement based upon a fraud theory appears silly to me.
Quote:
THIS is what I was hinting at (although obviously MUCH more fleshed out).
If MacRoadie is actually correct that LA could face many more lawsuits if he had to testify about his doping under oath, then it would seem that even “settling” for the full $12 million that SCA is demanding might be cheaper than facing deposition. But if that were the case, he would settle immediately, saving a lot of lawyer’s fees.

Ergo, we can surely conclude that LA and his team, at least, do not see the price of deposition as high as $12 million. This also supports BroDeal’s contention that his QT liability would likely be no more than double charges, or $6 million. If it were triple charges and $9 million, agreeing to pay SCA in full would still make sense, since the QT business would cost him something in legal fees, and since there would at least be some uncertainty about other suits. Plus the additional uncertainty, noted by BroDeal, that he might not win in court against SCA.

Or it could be that LA does see the price of deposition as more than $12 million, but is gambling that SCA will not view it that way. If SCA is also making these calculations, they might hang tough, knowing LA will come around.

Whew! Lotta opportunities for playing chicken here.

Last edited by Merckx index; 01-02-13 at 03:34.
Reply With Quote
  #532  
Old 02-04-13, 19:21
Race Radio's Avatar
Race Radio Race Radio is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 9,758
Default

Lance says he will not pay SCA their money

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...money/1890933/
Reply With Quote
  #533  
Old 02-04-13, 19:26
Mrs John Murphy's Avatar
Mrs John Murphy Mrs John Murphy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Stamping on Cadel's dog
Posts: 2,167
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Race Radio View Post
Lance says he will not pay SCA their money

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...money/1890933/
My god that's a puff piece and a half for the Uniballer. Less of an interview and more an advert
__________________
Justcycling

...girls and ****ed 'em at school. All I know is that there were rumours he was into field hockey players

"the only thing worse than reading Cycling News is talking to them" Paul Kimmage

"The four most beautiful words in our common language: I told you so." Gore Vidal
Reply With Quote
  #534  
Old 02-04-13, 19:32
86TDFWinner's Avatar
86TDFWinner 86TDFWinner is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 952
Default

Wonderboys lawyer comes off as a huge, condescending, narcississtic ******bag. He's wrong on alot of things in that article, I'm going to laugh when he has to pay back the $$$, or tries to claim "he won't address the issue any longer..blah blah blah", then will address it in various outlets like usual.

The last paragraph about Wonderboy "trying to make a positive impact" had me laughing out loud. No one takes him serious, how can he expect anyone to listen to him now? he's clearly delusional, sad, pathetic, etc. Liestrong will go down too.
__________________
Quote:
"According to Mrs LeMond, Armstrong said: "There's no way you could have won your Tour de Frances without EPO." And Greg got very angry and said, "Listen, I won my - I was third in 1984, I was second in 1985, I won in 1986. This type of drug did not exist.The difference between you and me is that I have a 95 VO2 max and you have an 82, and you're - you don't - basically you don't know what you're talking about."(Proving Wonderboy is a clueless, lying POS)
Reply With Quote
  #535  
Old 02-04-13, 19:32
Benotti69's Avatar
Benotti69 Benotti69 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,030
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Race Radio View Post
Lance says he will not pay SCA their money

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...money/1890933/
I thinks Bob Hamman will enjoy getting his money back.
__________________
"ahaha, ever had the feeling you been cheated?" JL SF Jan'78
Reply With Quote
  #536  
Old 02-04-13, 20:20
MarkvW's Avatar
MarkvW MarkvW is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,036
Default

Seems to me that Lance was using the Oprah appearance as a tool to eliminate or minimize the extortion value of SCA's lawsuit. In effect, he's telling them: "Fine. Go ahead and depose me. I'll admit to all my doping that's relevant to you (which doesn't include the comeback).

This is now boiling down to the settlement agreement--a document none of us have seen--and the circumstances surrounding its execution--which are unknown to us.

I wouldn't bet against Armstrong on this one.
__________________
Dr. Maserati, my friend, don't you start away uneasy.
Reply With Quote
  #537  
Old 02-04-13, 20:43
H2OUUP2's Avatar
H2OUUP2 H2OUUP2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkvW View Post
I wouldn't bet against Armstrong on this one.
As much as I despise this man, and want to bet against him, I won't be. He and his entourage are just snakes. The kind that swim in water so their scales are extra slimy to.
Reply With Quote
  #538  
Old 02-04-13, 20:54
Clausfarre's Avatar
Clausfarre Clausfarre is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Denmark
Posts: 150
Default

I think Lance's gamble will pay off in the end; raking in as much dough as possible during the Yellow Years, writing books, doing documentaries, getting all the sponsorships, foundation money etc. Surely enough cash stowed away to pay off all the collectors.

Only the Landis/USPS government fraud thing could rip him apart financially but somehow I don't see that happening.

Anyway, I'll enjoy the ride from the sideline like all users (of the Clinic, not the drugs).

Edit: nothing wrong with recreational drugs, thank goodness.
__________________
"Kys til Bjarne, kys til Danmark"

Last edited by Clausfarre; 02-04-13 at 20:55. Reason: Clarification!
Reply With Quote
  #539  
Old 02-04-13, 21:32
Merckx index's Avatar
Merckx index Merckx index is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,775
Default

Another one of hoggie's predictions bites the dust. No settlement for the full twelve million by the middle of January.

What Mark said. And this seems to fit BroDeal's original scenario, except that Oprah takes the place of the federal case. By admitting to doping, LA no longer has to worry about being deposed. Ergo, willing to take the risk that he would lose the suit by SCA.

SCA now has to ask themselves whether they really want to spend more money on a case they might lose. I find it interesting that it was reported a full month ago that SCA was "about" to file a lawsuit. Possible they're having second thoughts? I wonder if they regret not taking the one million LA initially offered them.
Reply With Quote
  #540  
Old 02-04-13, 21:37
reginagold reginagold is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clausfarre View Post
I think Lance's gamble will pay off in the end; raking in as much dough as possible during the Yellow Years, writing books, doing documentaries, getting all the sponsorships, foundation money etc. Surely enough cash stowed away to pay off all the collectors.
Do you really think he's done all this without tripping massively over the criminal prohibitions against money laundering? Rhetorical question: Why have continue to have a well known money laundering defense lawyer on the payroll?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:55.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.