Armstrong's financial situation

[Microchip]

That will never happen.

He has no integrity or reason or capacity to own up to what he did.

Armstrong doesn't have a fraction of what it takes to do what Tyler did.

+1 for this. The background story of the author is important also. The majority wouldn't waste their money on an Armstrong book.

 

[spetsa]

If he wrote a real tell-all book revealing all the sordid details of his cycling career and how he doped and conspired you don't think that would be a best-seller?

Tyler Hamilton's book is a best-seller, an Armstrong book in the same vein would outsell it for sure.

There are laws in the US that prohibit a felon from profiting off of his or her stories. If LA ever gets to the point in which he could be honest in a book, he will have already committed a felony, leaving the point moot.

 

[thehog]

There are laws in the US that prohibit a felon from profiting off of his or her stories. If LA ever gets to the point in which he could be honest in a book, he will have already committed a felony, leaving the point moot.

Playgirl magazine?

 

[spetsa]

Playgirl magazine?

Maybe he can find a sponsor there. Livestrong dissapears and Playgirl rturns.

 

[silverrocket]

There are laws in the US that prohibit a felon from profiting off of his or her stories. If LA ever gets to the point in which he could be honest in a book, he will have already committed a felony, leaving the point moot.

Are you referring to felony perjury? That's a good point: he's got no story unless he commits perjury, but if he commits perjury he has no book. Catch-22.

Unless he actually gets busted and goes to jail first, gets released, has no money, and some publisher dangles a book deal in front of him. Then he could indeed tell all, and I bet the vast majority of us here would indeed want to read what he has to say.

 

[Merckx index]

Unless he actually gets busted and goes to jail first, gets released, has no money, and some publisher dangles a book deal in front of him. Then he could indeed tell all, and I bet the vast majority of us here would indeed want to read what he has to say.

Speaking for myself, it would depend on what he has to say. If it is just details of how he doped, no thanks. I think the Tyler/Travis show put enough of those out into the public domain to give us the gist. No doubt there are a lot more similar stories to be told, but the operational word there is similar, unless he really was on some experimental drug like HemAssist, PFCs, etc. I don’t need to hear in his own words when, where, how he transfused.

OTOH, he might have a lot of previously untold information about payoffs to UCI and related non-chemical forms of cheating. There are still a lot of details to be filled in on the TDS positive, his relationship with Verbruggen, how much power he had over the testers, the way he got UCI to target certain rivals, and much more. And also the whole trafficking story, how they acquired, transported and distributed the PEDs. I doubt very much he would ever come clean about all that, but if he did, I would read that stuff. Especially if it included his pre-Tour relationships with USA Cycling, Wiesel, and so on. Though we can guess a lot of it, I would love to hear an insider explain exactly what happened.

 

[Carlo Algatrensig]

There are laws in the US that prohibit a felon from profiting off of his or her stories. If LA ever gets to the point in which he could be honest in a book, he will have already committed a felony, leaving the point moot.

Perhaps Armstrong could write a book along the lines of OJ Simpsons "If I Did It"

 

[thehog]

He's not at desperation levels yet. When he gets there he'll start talking again.

Never tested positive seems such a long time ago.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

Are you referring to felony perjury? That's a good point: he's got no story unless he commits perjury, but if he commits perjury he has no book. Catch-22.

Unless he actually gets busted and goes to jail first, gets released, has no money, and some publisher dangles a book deal in front of him. Then he could indeed tell all, and I bet the vast majority of us here would indeed want to read what he has to say.

Yes, there would be an abundance of curiosity. And, yes, I would be interested in knowing more although it appears that other investigations will reveal plenty. And then there's Bruyneel's arbitration should it actually take place.

Other scenario: He and Bruyneel co-author a book. "We Might As Well Cheat" where the dynamic duo tell all if there is anything left to tell after the seemingly endless supply of repentant cheaters, currently unzipping their lips, dries up.

 

[Deagol]

I was going to point out that Armstrong's eventual memoirs will surely be quickly available as a file-sharing download, but I didn't want to stir up the debate:

Would that fact that Armstrong cheated us justify us cheating to avoid paying for a book by Armstrong...that would essentially be about his cheating?

I think I would trust others who have observed LA cheating over Lance's own version, which would be interwoven with his excuses.

We have been subjected to his side of the story for well over a decade, now, and it has been a big lie.

 

[Velodude]

I was struck by the fact that the Livestrong "headquarters" is worth $9million. That's an expensive office for a charity.

Under the current circumstances of the palace revolution occurring at the Livestrong Foundation (formerly known as the Lance Armstrong Foundation) it is interesting to be acquainted with how that building cost was funded.

As a foundation cannot raise funding through retention of profits, issue of shares or going to the lending market it earmarks donors' contributions by agreement with the donors to be held in abeyance and not to be applied towards its mission objectives until the stipulations imposed by the donors are met.

At 31 December 2011 Livestrong held in its balance sheet"donor restricted" amounts of about $15m of which about $10m was restricted to be maintained into perpetuity. The last amount obviously funds the building.

Given the sudden "divorce" of LAF and Armstrong and name change it would be of interest to know if there was a run of these donors exercising their discretions on their contributions that may have not been in the short or long term financial interest of Livestrong.

 

[thehog]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthony...ating-lance-armstrongs-livestrong-foundation/

The IRS. The IRS.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

This was on Roopstigo earlier this week. I can imagine poor Ullman wondering how the hell he ended up with this mess on his hands. Likely more LA ride organizers will step forward with plenty more to offer up as to whether the fee/ appearance/ charity money was correctly recorded. With the IRS, there is no SOL when tax fraud is discovered.

It is awfully quiet right now, and I am wondering how many settlement cheques have already been written in exchange for complete non-disclosure.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthony...ating-lance-armstrongs-livestrong-foundation/

The IRS. The IRS.

To late thehog.

RaceRadio tweeted the real story and posted it here back on November 19th. Your Forbes link just refers to the link he put up.

To bad so sad.

 

[thehog]

To late thehog.

RaceRadio tweeted the real story and posted it here back on November 19th. Your Forbes link just refers to the link he put up.

To bad so sad.

I'm aware of that and responded to Race's post. In fact this article, if you bothered to read it, references te first.

Perhaps instead of trying to deride myself you could contribute to the discussion?

Would that be too much to ask?

 

[silverrocket]

Yes, the first mention of this last week made it sound much more vague and unlikely, but this new article makes it seem more likely the IRS is actually involved. I'm not sure why this makes me laugh...

 

[thehog]

Yes, the first mention of this last week made it sound much more vague and unlikely, but this new article makes it seem more likely the IRS is actually involved. I'm not sure why this makes me laugh...

Correct. Forbes publishing the story means there's some merit in the story.

Just to think all that money for "cancer research" going into Armstrong's pocket and most likely tax free!

 

[DirtyWorks]

Correct. Forbes publishing the story means there's some merit in the story.

This is not directed at you per se, but these pubs sell myths every issue. That Forbes has any credibility is only because of its success packaging myths and marketing messages, nothing else.

What I liked was the article fertilizes the idea that Liveswrong is a fraud. I would argue it's much, much bigger than the sporting fraud and hopefully that story gets told along with some felony indictments and earned jail time.

But, proving the fraud at felony levels is another thing entirely.

 

[frenchfry]

Correct. Forbes publishing the story means there's some merit in the story.

Just to think all that money for "cancer research" going into Armstrong's pocket and most likely tax free!

From what I have seen, it would appear that Armstrong had a well oiled method of promising to show up at an event in exchange for a donation to Livestrong, then at the last minute would request all or some of the "donation" to be paid to himself. Too late for the event promoter to change his plans, and because it was "Cancer Jesus" himself little or nothing would be said.

Nifty little arrangement, relying on arrogance and bullying as usual. No funds taken from Livestrong, but in the end Livestrong was screwed out of donations that they should have received.

Doug Ulman must have been directly involved in the scam. The Livestrong CFO has a background in forensic accounting, all the better for knowing how to cover up the audit trail.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Doug Ulman must have been directly involved in the scam. The Livestrong CFO has a background in forensic accounting, all the better for knowing how to cover up the audit trail.

We should be so lucky! The ignorance defense could be played well here with Doug's message, "I swear I just processed the .org checks and have no knowledge of what CSE (hello, Thom Weisel) was skimming."

Thom's USACDF is a similary tangled mess of non-profit operations, donation skimming, and more.

 

[mewmewmew13]

From what I have seen, it would appear that Armstrong had a well oiled method of promising to show up at an event in exchange for a donation to Livestrong, then at the last minute would request all or some of the "donation" to be paid to himself. Too late for the event promoter to change his plans, and because it was "Cancer Jesus" himself little or nothing would be said.

Nifty little arrangement, relying on arrogance and bullying as usual. No funds taken from Livestrong, but in the end Livestrong was screwed out of donations that they should have received.

Doug Ulman must have been directly involved in the scam. The Livestrong CFO has a background in forensic accounting, all the better for knowing how to cover up the audit trail.

Yes good post frenchfry.
This is just unreal to me but after reading some of the articles written by those involved it becomes clear of his m.o.

Despicable but it didn't seem to faze lance.

 

[mewmewmew13]

I think I would trust others who have observed LA cheating over Lance's own version, which would be interwoven with his excuses.

We have been subjected to his side of the story for well over a decade, now, and it has been a big lie.

This exactly.

I'd rather read Bruyneel's rantings.

 

[Velodude]

The IRS were investigating LAF in 2010/2011 ostensibly relating to the 2006 year.

The LAF financials recognized their presence but claimed it was only a "routine" audit. IRS do not turn up routinely for foundations. They were there on a mission. Maybe an internal whistleblower?

What has been of recent revelation concerning Armstrong and LAF misconduct would not be traceable in LAF's records.

Armstrong's "appearance fees" or "celebrity speaking fees" would not have been paid by LAF for Livestrong events but be paid out of funds before they hit LAF's books. It is only information coming out of Canada, Norway and Australia (TDU) that exposed Armstrong was milking the Livestrong gravy train to his own benefit. Tip of the iceberg?

Likewise his political bullying using LAF for leverage. No evidence in the records.

Years ago LAF created separate divisions for events, merchandising and endowments and ran them as separate reporting entities with separate IRS registrations. Net incomes were transferred to the tax exempt foundation.

I suspect the motive behind this odd and superfluous arrangement was to remove that income and transactions away from IRS scrutiny and external professional audit. In 2011 those arrangements were abandoned and folded back into the tax exempt body.

Imagine the scope available to make arrangements to skim off income from events and merchandising. The yellow Livestrong bracelets sold for $1 but cost LAF only just above 20c. Considering the millions claimed to have been sold that result, 400/500% markup, was not apparent in the accounts.

 

[Zweistein]

Yes, the first mention of this last week made it sound much more vague and unlikely, but this new article makes it seem more likely the IRS is actually involved. I'm not sure why this makes me laugh...

I have a hard time imagining how much hubris you would have to have in order to do all the things he did. Ask President of France to fire the head of the AFLD. Destroy Lemond's business. Pocketed appearance moneys. And the thing that will probably take him down is not following the rules with the IRS. I wonder if he ever thought enough is enough or did he really believe himself to be invincible and above all rules.

 

[thehog]

Ask President of France to fire the head of the AFLD. Destroy Lemond's business. Pocketed appearance moneys.

Asked Ashley Olsen on a date...