Armstrong's financial situation

[Moose McKnuckles]

I would not be surprised to see a class action lawsuit from Livestrong donors.

 

[Race Radio]

He is forked.

He is running out of cash and is facing huge fees and judgements. SCA, Sunday Times, and the Qui Tam case will bankrupt him

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

He is forked.

He is running out of cash and is facing huge fees and judgements. SCA, Sunday Times, and the Qui Tam case will bankrupt him

Perhaps. There is little evidence that he is anywhere close to being in a difficult financial position.

 

[Maxiton]

He is forked.

He is running out of cash and is facing huge fees and judgements. SCA, Sunday Times, and the Qui Tam case will bankrupt him

Perhaps. There is little evidence that he is anywhere close to being in a difficult financial position.

Shortly after the Fed case was dropped, I said that Armstrong's case would now be handled by USADA, which would result in his being stripped of titles and becoming more and more a pariah in the public eye. Then, various litigants from his past would reappear, in court, and get their money back. Then, if it still could, the state of Texas would prosecute him for perjury. Then, the qui tam suit would proceed, stripping him of any remaining assets. And somewhere in this process, the Fed case would be re-opened or a new one begun, and by then conviction would be a foregone conclusion.

So far, anyway, this is exactly how things are playing out. I agree he's forked. Forked and knifed. Whether he faces financial difficulties now or a little later is I think the least of his worries.

 

[mountainrman]

In the past your posts have been in support of LA. That continues.

There is no SOL in UK for obtaining a judgment by fraud. A court stamped settlement is deemed at law to be a judgment.

Texas law would have to be visited about the SCA settlement and Armstrongs now known perjury. SCA lawyer, Tillotson, is publicly informing confidence for SCA about an outcome. Only known "hearing" where Armstrong was under oath and was cross examined.

Perjury is a crime. No?

Don't know how a "sign off deal" with Livestrong offers Armstrong protection from his former sponsors. Unless you are of the opinion that Armstrong and Livestrong have confounded law by morphing into a single entity.

Arrangements to defeat creditors can be, depending upon jurisdiction, retrospectively set aside.

My comments do no not support armstrong, they challenge some of the more far fetched views expressed here in favour of more realistic. Perjury does indeed have a short SOL in the US depending on state or federal.

Expressing the facts that the lawsuits (other than unlikely sponsorship reclamation ) are unlikely to be a financially mortal blow - his houses are worth tens millinons between them, is not support. It is just not joining in with the wishful thinkers.

Also the sports legal system sucks and needs replacing bottom up, to avoid the arbitrary , random and inequitable treatment demonstrable. Why should hincapie or spanish be treated leniently better than basson who missed one test?. It is not justice of any description. When those who tell are given effective lifetime bans, ( take jaksche ir in running dwain chambers who cannot get races) where those who Are good and say nothing and so do not embarass authorities like twice banned sprinter Gatlin get to race around europe.

The system is sick, USADA should limit to being investigator prosecutor, and not publish evidence till after the fact. UCI should be sport promoter only to avoid the clear conflict if interests and say CAS extended to hearing all cases with proper judicial process before not after declaring guilt and sentence ( like USADA revealing any evidence it is aware of that does not support their case to the defence - eg how many riders did they interview in postal who said they saw nothing )

We may hate him but bruyneel is right. He can no longer get a fair hearing now selective subjudice evidence is in the public domain from USADA

it is set to get worse not better. UCI and WADA attempting to gag Michael Ashenden leading to him resigning would have prevented the question over 1999 dooing ever being made public now - without which the case may never have exploded. UCI must not be allowed to control thevflow of information.

in short tygarts kangaroo court and others in other countries need replacing. in short Spanish or UCI should not judge COntador, a third party must. Cycling will have no credibility until these petty banana republic dictatorships are consigned to the dustbin of history.

 

[Zweistein]

He is forked.

He is running out of cash and is facing huge fees and judgements. SCA, Sunday Times, and the Qui Tam case will bankrupt him

He will never be broke. He has too many friends/people he has dirt on that will be perfectly will to give him a job or something. He also I bet will be collecting a salary for the livestrong organization for the rest of his life as well to promote cancer awareness, whatever the means. I'd be more than happy to trade my financial situation with him. I could easily retire on his "crumbs".

 

[Epicycle]

At the time, I thought his comeback had a lot to do with money - he's got an expensive lifestyle to keep up - not just to grab the race appearance fees and whatever salary he actually got paid, but to re-establish himself as an upper tier product endorser (after he retired the first time his endorsement options noticeably dried up). Now all of that has gone down the drain.

My guess is that he'll be feeling a real financial pinch sooner than a lot of people think.

 

[thehog]

At the time, I thought his comeback had a lot to do with money - he's got an expensive lifestyle to keep up - not just to grab the race appearance fees and whatever salary he actually got paid, but to re-establish himself as an upper tier product endorser (after he retired the first time his endorsement options noticeably dried up). Now all of that has gone down the drain.

My guess is that he'll be feeling a real financial pinch sooner than a lot of people think.

I've being saying this for months to much ridicule.

He lives like Prince. He ended up bankrupting himself because he wanted a pink Rolls-Royce.

Seriously it's very difficult running multiple shell companies and business operations.

The sponsorship money has dried up its going to be hard to finance the loans. The legal team will be cut down but he knows he needs them for the Quincy MD suit.

He should have snuck in a few more of those million dollar charity rides before the reasoned decision.

The price of being an arsehole.

 

[thehog]

PS I still maintain he's not that wealthy. He's not liquid cash. He's just well off.

 

[silverrocket]

[...
We may hate him but bruyneel is right. He can no longer get a fair hearing now selective subjudice evidence is in the public domain from USADA
...]

I disagree on two counts.
1. He could have had a fair hearing completely out in the open and in public before USADA released their reasoned decision, but Armstrong declined. The last thing Armstrong wanted was a fair hearing, because he would have been torn apart.

2. I believe that the reasoned decision by USADA is important in balancing public opinion about Armstrong, and so is the very thing that would give him a "fair hearing". Since 1999 public opinion has been manipulated by Armstrong and his Cancer-powered PR machine, and this has prevented any "fair hearings" up until now. You don't think those deciding the SCA case were aware that Armstrong was a global hero and icon to a cancer community that desperately did not want to see their hero fall?

 

[Yingge]

I would hazard a guess that not much money is actually in the name of LA. Will be in various Companies, Trusts, Swiss Bank Accounts, Trusted friends. It is the latter who then usually support their 'friend in need' after the Bankruptcy Court seizes what they can find.

The Lawyers of course will be the big money winners, and no doubt demand payment up front.

 

[Telmisartan new]

My comments do no not support armstrong, they challenge some of the more far fetched views expressed here

in short tygarts kangaroo court and others in other countries need replacing. in short Spanish or UCI should not judge COntador, a third party must. Cycling will have no credibility until these petty banana republic dictatorships are consigned to the dustbin of history.

Right,just so we understand,USADA are a kangaroo court and Tygart runs a petty banana republic dictatorship.Mmm....how much is Wonderboy paying you?

Let's play a little game,the guessing game (a personal favourite i do admit).

Q. Can you disclose if you have a vested interest in the Pharmstrong case?

Q. Are you connected to USA Triathlon?

Q. Is your first name Dan?

 

[MarkvW]

The Sunday Times may very well have Armstrong by the short and curlies. My expectation is that he will settle promptly and he will give them all the money that they ask for. They could go hard on Armstrong and demand an apology.

What's Armstrong going to do? If he goes under oath he very much risks undergoing the Jeffrey Archer experience (you can look it up in Wikipedia, or you can read his book about prison). The bottom line is that for fear of perjury Lance can't lie under oath.

SCA is all about the settlement agreement and the circumstances surrounding its execution. Everybody (except SCA and Lance) is just guessing about that one.

For perjury (a criminal charge) to work, you have to have the false statement within the statute of limitations. Forget tolling. I don't think Armstrong's at any risk for perjury because he hasn't lied in the last five years (or whatever the SOL period is) under oath (AFAIK).

The severance agreements with Lance's sponsors for sure included liability releases. They're off the table.

I'll be interested to see how long Lance can milk the Livestrong thing for his own personal profit. My bet is that the Wall St. Journal (another Murdoch paper) is going to devote big resources to the Lance-Livestrong profit relationship. The blood is seriously in the water, because people love to read about the downfall of a former hero.

 

[Velodude]

He will never be broke. He has too many friends/people he has dirt on that will be perfectly will to give him a job or something. He also I bet will be collecting a salary for the livestrong organization for the rest of his life as well to promote cancer awareness, whatever the means. I'd be more than happy to trade my financial situation with him. I could easily retire on his "crumbs".

Suggest you read more on LAF (Livestrong).

The 17 LAF board members are reported in the IRS Form 990 to receive no fees or salary other than the CEO, Doug Ulman, who sits on the Board.

Lance Armstrong has zeroes next to his name.

Only LAF employees are remunerated and, according to complaints, excessively when compared to industry norm.

So any income Armstrong receives directly or indirectly through LAF is, in breach of the law, undisclosed.

It would appear that Armstrong receives income in the name of Livestrong but arranges to intercept those funds before they are accounted to LAF. 2005 Alberta group ride is testimony to those shenanigans.

If Armstrong was forced out of LAF (through criminal conviction?) ethical administrators of LAF would have scope to investigate all these occurrences and enter into recovery action against Armstrong.

 

[jam pants]

PS I still maintain he's not that wealthy. He's not liquid cash. He's just well off.

A number of his decisions over the past 4 years point to this.

 

[thehog]

A number of his decisions over the past 4 years point to this.

I won't go into details but a lot people lost money in the 2008 meltdown. Armstrong included.

If 2008 never happened he wouldn't have comeback. The comeback was built on making money for himself and the entourage.

He did well in 09 but since that time it has been blood letting cash. Now it's getting worse and worse.

Risk vs reward. He probably should have thought more about the risk part.

 

[virandociclista]

A number of his decisions over the past 4 years point to this.

Can u list some of them? I only know the comeback...

 

[reginagold]

and, well this appears to be outside the expertise of the otherwise very knowledgeable posting community here, participating in a material way in the whole Demand Media (aka LiveStrong.com) IPO, knowing you were at substantial risk of being discovered as a complete fraud, likely will bring some serious litigation. Would a reasonable investor have purchased Demand Media knowing it planned a major Lance/LiveStrong tied program if they knew Lance as he is known post Reasoned Decision. If no, run. Here come the securities lawyers. He's in a web with layers he never saw coming. Watch, his team will pick up on this now from their views of the forum. It's too late.

 

[Neworld]

I've being saying this for months to much ridicule.

...

The price of being an arsehole.

And to think, he could have avoided ALL of it with a 50-60K contract to Landis. Dumb

 

[Velodude]

And to think, he could have avoided ALL of it with a 50-60K contract to Landis. Dumb

A normal, psychologically functional human being would lie in bed every night regretting that decision (not to employ loose cannon Landis).

Don't think it would enter sociopath Armstrong's train of thought. In his justification all of us who believe in the evidence of his bullying and doping conduct are mere trolls.

 

[Page Mill Masochist]

and, well this appears to be outside the expertise of the otherwise very knowledgeable posting community here, participating in a material way in the whole Demand Media (aka LiveStrong.com) IPO, knowing you were at substantial risk of being discovered as a complete fraud, likely will bring some serious litigation. Would a reasonable investor have purchased Demand Media knowing it planned a major Lance/LiveStrong tied program if they knew Lance as he is known post Reasoned Decision. If no, run. Here come the securities lawyers. He's in a web with layers he never saw coming. Watch, his team will pick up on this now from their views of the forum. It's too late.

Good call!



10

 

[ustabe]

We may hate him but bruyneel is right. He can no longer get a fair hearing now selective subjudice evidence is in the public domain from USADA

it is set to get worse not better. UCI and WADA attempting to gag Michael Ashenden leading to him resigning would have prevented the question over 1999 dooing ever being made public now - without which the case may never have exploded. UCI must not be allowed to control thevflow of information.

What kind of fair hearing do you have in mind? Armstrong already waived his right to a hearing and arbitration with USADA. The doping charges are now part of the public record. Lots of companies and persons with evidence against them in the public record still face prosecution. Regarding Demand Media, well, Armstrong should have thought about getting caught before he started selling shares.

 

[odelltrclan]

Since we seem to have read a few things from lawyers or those with legal experience please clarify a few things. I have been reading people stating that the Statute of Limitations will prevent this or that from happening. However, I have read elsewhere things that seemingly disagree with some of these claims:

1. The statute of limitations do not exist in instances where fraud exist.

2. The statute of limitations BEGIN when the fraud or perjury are discovered, not when the "event" that later was found to be false was given.

USADA layed out in their arguments why the SOL does not apply. And given the history of and extent of Lance's coverups, etc., I have a hard time believing the SOL would apply in many of the cases being discussed given the above.

 

[knewcleardaze]

I am amazed that Armstrong was able to carry on this charade for so long.
Consider the number of people involved just on the cycling side.
Of all the palms he had to grease, he certainly should have taken care of Floyd.
Bad Lance.

 

[BroDeal]

and, well this appears to be outside the expertise of the otherwise very knowledgeable posting community here, participating in a material way in the whole Demand Media (aka LiveStrong.com) IPO, knowing you were at substantial risk of being discovered as a complete fraud, likely will bring some serious litigation. Would a reasonable investor have purchased Demand Media knowing it planned a major Lance/LiveStrong tied program if they knew Lance as he is known post Reasoned Decision. If no, run. Here come the securities lawyers. He's in a web with layers he never saw coming. Watch, his team will pick up on this now from their views of the forum. It's too late.

Interesting but probably a decent defense could be made. Demand Media's business model is to commission articles based on search queries. They then use their massive footprint on the web to interlink articles to increase the article's page rank. If the search term is health related it gets placed under the Livestrong brand. Traffic comes mostly from people searching for phrases. The articles could be put under a different brand with little effect on the traffic numbers. Armstrong's implosion may have little effect on traffic to articles on livestrong.com.