Did Nike pay $500,000 to Verbruggen to cover up Armstrong positive?

Sep 25, 2009
7,527
0
0
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-did-nike-pay-dollar-500000-to-verbruggen-to-cover-up-armstrong-positive

Report: Did Nike pay $500,000 to Verbruggen to cover up Armstrong positive?


The NY Daily News reports that Kathy LeMond testified under oath during a 2006 deposition in the SCA arbitration case that Julian Devries, a mechanic for Armstrong’s team, had told her and others that Nike and Thom Weisel –the San Francisco banker who sponsored and part-owned Armstrong’s team - had transferred $500,000 to a Swiss bank account that belonged to Verbruggen.
The money was apparently sent to cover up a 1999 positive drug test for corticosteroids, which Armstrong had used to treat saddle sores.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
lovely new twist to an already exciting story.

not to pet myself on the back, but i've been waiting for more salient data on cover-ups to be released. Race Radio has hinted on several occasions that we'd be hearing more about cover-ups. The data in the recent USADA file weren't really providing much news in that respect, so one could figure that there still was (and hopefully is) new cover-up-related info out there waiting to be released.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Yes.

I have heard, and written about, this story many times over the years. The source was always Julian.

Don't forget, when USPS team staff were filmed dumping drugs in 2000 Julian took the fall and said the bags of Actovigen and dozens of syringes were for his diabetes. He then showed up at the following years training camp with a big new Mercedes

When Armstrong tested positive for EPO in 2001 he was not worried, told his teammates it was no problem to take care of. The deal was already in place
 
Jul 23, 2010
1,695
0
0
Race Radio said:
Yes.

I have heard, and written about, this story many times over the years. The source was always Julian.

Don't forget, when USPS team staff were filmed dumping drugs in 2000 Julian took the fall and said the bags of Actovigen and dozens of syringes were for his diabetes. He then showed up at the following years training camp with a big new Mercedes

When Armstrong tested positive for EPO in 2001 he was not worried, told his teammates it was no problem to take care of. The deal was already in place
I always thought the hush money was Lance's! This is going to be good! It's getting better all the time.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
0
0
Microchip said:
If they did, it's a good explanation of why they're firmly supporting Lance.
i am just wondering here...since the story had several witnesses according to kathy, and the bank account was involved wouldn't it be relatively easy for any competent police to get the investigation going ?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
python said:
i am just wondering here...since the story had several witnesses according to kathy, and the bank account was involved wouldn't it be relatively easy for any competent police to get the investigation going ?
Like the ones already trawling Ferrari's accounts. There's lots of US<-->Switzerland bank a/c openness / investigation at the moment...
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,530
0
0
Since (Anti-)Nike threads open by the minute, i post this here too:

I guess almost all clinic guys boycott Nike. But you have to let them know it.

If "D-Qued" reads this post, he may can post the nike mail adress of this vice president (?) again. It´s no need to write the protest to some low paid customer care slave in a small bunker like office in india...
 
Oct 22, 2009
66
0
0
python said:
. . . The money was apparently sent to cover up a 1999 positive drug test for corticosteroids, which Armstrong had used to treat saddle sores.
Can CN get nothing right??

The money was apparently sent to cover up a 1999 positive drug test for corticosteroids, which Armstrong claimed was attributable to some cortisone cream he had used to treat saddle sores.
There, fixed it for you. See the difference, CN? No-one believes it was really cortisone cream. That's just the cover story.
 
Oct 25, 2010
434
0
0
if that money trail can be followed and proven, and big IF I would say, that right there is what will be termed the "Kaboom moment"....
 
Jul 26, 2012
524
0
0
The $500k could potentially be explained away, as sponsorship or some other baloney. Also, there may be difficulty in obtaining the evidence depending on the keeness of federal authorities to probe further. So far they've shown no great enthusiasm, having probably been leaned on by politicos.
 
May 6, 2010
158
0
0
UCI has sued Kimmage in a SWISS court for libel, Kimmage having accused the UCI of corruption. Kimmage must prove the UCI corrupt. Can his lawyers in Switzerland compel the production of interbank transfer receipts? If so, this should come out. Anybody understand Swiss rules of evidence and discovery? If Kimmage can force these receipts into the public sphere, his legal defense fund suddenly takes on a whole new significance.
 
Jul 8, 2012
21
0
0
Seems crazy that Nike would have been so committed to Lance so early in his (2nd) career, before he had even won a tour. Was he already worth that much to them?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
will we finally see the sysmex?

Love the Scenery said:
UCI has sued Kimmage in a SWISS court for libel, Kimmage having accused the UCI of corruption. Kimmage must prove the UCI corrupt. Can his lawyers in Switzerland compel the production of interbank transfer receipts? If so, this should come out. Anybody understand Swiss rules of evidence and discovery? If Kimmage can force these receipts into the public sphere, his legal defense fund suddenly takes on a whole new significance.
i was wondering along the same lines:
can Kimmage's lawyers compel the UCI to show exactly were the money went and what they did with it? In other words, will we finally get to see that sysmex machine?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
kcycle12 said:
Seems crazy that Nike would have been so committed to Lance so early in his (2nd) career, before he had even won a tour. Was he already worth that much to them?
it's a good question with an easy answer: yes (imo)
Nike always knew the potential cycling has to write heroic stories.
I guess those who knew Lance knew he had the potential and the desire to become an action hero.
 
Jun 22, 2010
44
0
0
Just the fact that Nike continues to support Lance despite the evidence from USADA should be enough to start a consumer boycott to bankrupt the company. How much more corruption in sports could they be responsible for? And where does Trek stand in all of this? Have they made a statement about the USADA report?
 
Sep 30, 2009
117
0
0
Long time reader, don't post much. I gotta say that this is just awesome if it turns out to be true! This is unfolding like one of the best spy novels ever. Makes total sense though. 500K is nothing compared to his marketed value.
 
Oct 22, 2009
71
0
0
kcycle12 said:
Seems crazy that Nike would have been so committed to Lance so early in his (2nd) career, before he had even won a tour. Was he already worth that much to them?
The corticosteroid positive was near the end of the 99 Tour, stage 15 I think - Armstrong had a healthy lead in the GC, and one of the greatest (& so most lucrative) comeback stories in sporting history was thus nearing its soul-stirring, cash-jangling final chapter.

Throw in the fact that this was supposed to be the post-Festina "tour of redemption" & you have a perfect storm. The UCI would hardly have needed any financial encouragement to cover it up, which makes me suspect that if there's any truth in this (PLEASE LET THERE BE LOADS) it's as much to do with Lance wanting to make sure that everyone's hands were as dirty as possible, to minimise the future risk of somebody blowing the whistle on him.
 
Jun 22, 2009
794
0
0
kcycle12 said:
Seems crazy that Nike would have been so committed to Lance so early in his (2nd) career, before he had even won a tour. Was he already worth that much to them?
this occurred to me as well. it seems far fetched that even a company as wealthy as Nike would recklessly throw 500k at this problem. armstrong wasn't an established commodity.

although LA was on the precipice of winning the TdF. what would a tour winner be worth to Nike? maybe a half million was a gamble they were willing to take?

we need to REALLY return to 1999 in our minds. in another sense, the last thing ASO or the UCI wanted at that time was an armstrong positive following the 98 disaster. Nike is bribing the UCI with a large sum to accept the TUE, something they already WANT to do? it doesn't seem shrewd. i wouldn't rule it out but it seems like a stretch to me.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY