Armstrong Misleads & Swindles Livestrong Donors

Page 10 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
frenchfry said:
I am still waiting for the one that exposes Livestrong. Not to say they haven't done any "good" at all, but there must be a lot of dirt to dig up.
Spade up, dude. Leave no strong stone unturned. We await your next installment.
 
frenchfry said:
Then again you could say live by the sword, die by the sword. Armstrong has blatantly manipulated the press and the general public for years and this video is pretty soft compared to some of the crap Nike and Public Strategies have cooked up to create and maintain the myth.

I don't think this video is proof of the nefarious nature of Livestrong, however I have little doubt that its main mission was to promote the myth, serve as a shield, and finance the extravagant lifestyle of Wonderboy.

All these books about how Armstrong is a sociopath are great, but I am still waiting for the one that exposes Livestrong. Not to say they haven't done any "good" at all, but there must be a lot of dirt to dig up.
You're probably right. And that's why they removed him and his name from the organisation.

I don't doubt Armstrong used the charity for his own means. But brave of them to remove him when it all became clear. They were fooled more than anyone and acted under his instructions as the "intern bots".

You have to wonder why Smith sold Nike Livestrong shoes if he was fuled by such anger for so many years, yes?
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
thehog said:
You're probably right. And that's why they removed him and his name from the organisation.

I don't doubt Armstrong used the charity for his own means. But brave of them to remove him when it all became clear. They were fooled more than anyone and acted under his instructions as the "intern bots".

You have to wonder why Smith sold Nike Livestrong shoes if he was fuled by such anger for so many years, yes?
brave?

brave is when you have choice and choose the courageous path less traveled.

this what damage mitigation at its most expedient. dont conflate, or conflate away and get perceived as a chump
 
blackcat said:
brave?

brave is when you have choice and chose the courageous path less traveled.

this what damage mitigation at its most expedient. dont conflate, or conflate away and get perceived as a chump
Maybe so. But they still ousted their founder and friend. It was all he had left and they set the knife forth.

It's not easy thing to do because everyone in the board room was there because of Armstrong. Armstrong reminded them of that. But they still went ahead and did it to save themselves and the foundation.

No wonder Lance hurts so much over it. Is there a way back? Maybe. But that will be years from now.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Alpe73 said:
Fair enough - agreed. Fact remains ... Armstrong has been set adrift, they're going it alone, trying to help people, doing a decent job.
Yeah not many believe your fact, which is not provided.
 
If I recall correctly Liestrong had some pretty hefty reserves when the poop hit the fan, that is probably the only reason they are still around.

Is there still a Liestrong stand in every sporting goods store in North America?

Maybe now they are actually focused on doing good, but the hefty salaries of the top brass are going to do them in eventually, as I would think donations have pretty much dried up.

Tough times for cancer business, it was good while it lasted.
 
Jun 14, 2012
49
0
0
Maybe they are clean.

"Report suggests Livestrong lobbyist could have sought to influence USADA investigation into Armstrong"

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12421/Report-suggests-Livestrong-lobbyist-could-have-sought-to-influence-USADA-investigation-into-Armstrong.aspx#ixzz2vfsgzliC

"An examination of Livestrong shows the degree to which the charity, Mr. Armstrong’s business interests and those of his associates have long been intertwined.

While Mr. Armstrong’s celebrity fed the charity, the charity also enhanced his marketability. Livestrong also engaged in some deals that appeared to have benefited him and his associates, according to interviews and financial records.

In one case, the charity sold the rights to its iconic Livestrong name to a commercial media company that also hired Mr. Armstrong as a spokesman. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/14/sports/cycling/lance-armstrongs-business-brand-and-livestrong-are-bound-together.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.lifenews.com/2012/02/03/lance-armstrongs-livestrong-to-donate-100k-to-planned-parenthood/


Think they helped get proposition 15 passed, some controversy around the bond:

http://www.livestrong.org/What-We-Do/Our-Approach/Reports-Findings/Prop-15-Case-Study

http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/the-texas-cancer-controversy-a-comprehensive-timeline/
 
frenchfry said:
If I recall correctly Liestrong had some pretty hefty reserves when the poop hit the fan, that is probably the only reason they are still around.

Is there still a Liestrong stand in every sporting goods store in North America?

Maybe now they are actually focused on doing good, but the hefty salaries of the top brass are going to do them in eventually, as I would think donations have pretty much dried up.

Tough times for cancer business, it was good while it lasted.
The charity game is ruthless. Survival rates are low & many charities cease to exist.

Poor government funding, no one gives a ***, hard to procur donations, lack of long term revenue growth, strict legislation on ways and means of obtaining finance, regulation on advertising.

Get a celebratity on board and it may give you some longevity. Corporate and wealthy donars assist greatly.

As always if you don't want to donate, you don't have to.

Of course the expectation of many is their healthcare or GP will explain everything when diagnosed. They won't. They can't. That's where a foundation can step in.

My biggest regreat for Armstrong was he had influence. He always sat on the fense with regards to universal health care. Mainly I believe because of Clinton and Myers-Squibb. Which is very sad.

For the US not only do you come to terms with diagnosis, but you have work how you're going to pay for it all. That's tough.

In France you'd just get treated.
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
3
0
frenchfry said:
So true, even if it is financed with borrowed money, but that is another story.

I still donate to the Institut Curie. They are the best.

http://curie.fr/?prehome=0 (faites un don = make a donation)
In Canada, it's financed through provincial and federal taxes. That way those who can afford to pay more, do. And those who can't, don't. In the end everyone gets the exact same level of care, and to be honest, it's quite impressive.

Recently I went to the doctor at my local clinic (I could have picked any clinic, anywhere - most without an appointment). The receptionist asked me if I had been there before. Yup. Then she asked my name. Then she asked if I still lived at <address>. Yup. I didn't have to present any ID, or any other documents. Nada. Ten minutes later I was having a good chat with my doctor who knew me from previous visits. After looking me over, he wrote a prescription and I left. No bill. No paperwork. Just a nod and a "goodbye" to the receptionist.

A few minutes later I was at the pharmacist, who provided me with a half year's worth of medication for all of eight dollars ($8). The whole thing was as stress free as getting a coffee from Starbucks. Almost as cheap, too. I shudder to think what my experience would have been in the US.

John Swanson
 
Jack Ruby said:
.....

"An examination of Livestrong shows the degree to which the charity, Mr. Armstrong’s business interests and those of his associates have long been intertwined.
...

In one case, the charity sold the rights to its iconic Livestrong name to a commercial media company that also hired Mr. Armstrong as a spokesman. "
Wonderboy's appearance fees, liveswrong.com, liveswrong.org divide up some revenue from some event. In theory, this largely complies with tax and organization regulations.

Somewhere there's a post by Gerard Vroomen (??) that describes other ways charity event budgets are abused.

Overall, it's brilliant planning and it's almost impervious to scrutiny. You don't know who gets paid what when and where under the guise of "charity." With almost no transparency, no one can ever sort the facts out.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
frenchfry said:
If I recall correctly Liestrong had some pretty hefty reserves when the poop hit the fan, that is probably the only reason they are still around.
I think they have close to $100,000,000 in reserves. The problem is they are not funding much. People donated that money to fund programs but these days Livestrong is so concerned about their long term viability that they have reduced the funding of programs and focused on long term survival.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Race Radio said:
I think they have close to $100,000,000 in reserves. The problem is they are not funding much. People donated that money to fund programs but these days Livestrong is so concerned about their long term viability that they have reduced the funding of programs and focused on long term survival.
Pretty sure those suffering from cancer now will feel assured by that:rolleyes:
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
Alpe73 said:
Baloney ....
He was looking for guidance on free/low cost cancer screenings, a service that is widely available[/QUOTE]
Reasonable expectation.

[/QUOTE]Livestrong tried to sell him a $4,000 bike ride.[/QUOTE]
The details on this supposed incident would be worth fleshing out.

[/QUOTE]I don't think JT was shafted[/QUOTE]
Good to hear.

[/QUOTE] but a donor who gave money to livestrong to help fund their sponsorship guidance services might feel his money was not used in the most effective way[/QUOTE]
Absolutely ... that's why the details, context and frequency of such purported incidents are worth examination.[/QUOTE]

Alpe73 said:
You're an insider to "the many"? Cool story, bro.

BTW,
Yeah not many believe your fact [/QUOTE] ... you got a link for that?[/QUOTE]
--------------------------------------------



Good lord. With such botched html it's impossible to even properly quote the above misquoted quotes. And you can "quote" me on that.


Dude, seriously, this one's for free.

Eliminate that slash [/] in front of the first "QUOTE". The results will be...
Trust me.
 
May 19, 2010
1,899
0
0
I wonder how many $ 4000 payers Livestrong had to round up before Armstrong could be bothered to do the ride, and what their cut was. 10 percent? It is still more than they got when Armstrong duped the Norwegian Cancer Society and the Norwegian Cycling Federation into paying him 2,4 million NOK when they thought he was riding for Livestrong.
 
Jack Ruby said:
Maybe they are clean.

"Report suggests Livestrong lobbyist could have sought to influence USADA investigation into Armstrong"

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12421/Report-suggests-Livestrong-lobbyist-could-have-sought-to-influence-USADA-investigation-into-Armstrong.aspx#ixzz2vfsgzliC


I have a theory (theory only) that Livestrong.org people and/or prominent people on their behalf pressured the Dept. of Justice through political contacts to drop the criminal charges because of the damage it would do to the charity.

The Dept of Justice and Birotte the DA who killed the charges have never publicly advised us as to why the charges were dropped. Food for thought?
 
RobbieCanuck said:
Jack Ruby said:
Maybe they are clean.

"Report suggests Livestrong lobbyist could have sought to influence USADA investigation into Armstrong"

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12421/Report-suggests-Livestrong-lobbyist-could-have-sought-to-influence-USADA-investigation-into-Armstrong.aspx#ixzz2vfsgzliC


I have a theory (theory only) that Livestrong.org people and/or prominent people on their behalf pressured the Dept. of Justice through political contacts to drop the criminal charges because of the damage it would do to the charity.

The Dept of Justice and Birotte the DA who killed the charges have never publicly advised us as to why the charges were dropped. Food for thought?
I don't think that is an uncommon theory.
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
RobbieCanuck said:
Jack Ruby said:
Maybe they are clean.

"Report suggests Livestrong lobbyist could have sought to influence USADA investigation into Armstrong"

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12421/Report-suggests-Livestrong-lobbyist-could-have-sought-to-influence-USADA-investigation-into-Armstrong.aspx#ixzz2vfsgzliC


I have a theory (theory only) that Livestrong.org people and/or prominent people on their behalf pressured the Dept. of Justice through political contacts to drop the criminal charges because of the damage it would do to the charity.

The Dept of Justice and Birotte the DA who killed the charges have never publicly advised us as to why the charges were dropped. Food for thought?
In one of the older Armstrong threads, there's considerable discussion of all the various theories behind why the investigation was terminated.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 2

ASK THE COMMUNITY