As far as I can see from the statement from nike they do not deny the payment, nor that it was made to heir V, just that they did not pay 500,000 to cover up a positive drug test.Thats very different to not paying over the money at all, so I imagine there is more to come.
noddy69 said:
Yep. Nike knows something about that money. Their opening statement they even talk about "insurmountable evidence". Think about that. Last week the were calling it "allegations". The other big kicker is this... Nike talks about being duped by Armstrong. Duped! Tricked! Conned! Nike has set the stage if the 500 thousand payment accusation gets leveled at them to point it right back to Armstrong.
- Jul 10, 2012
- 200
- 0
- 0
Is Nike now off the hook for their transgression? Was the goal of the story to get them to drop Lance because they didn't do it initially?
- Oct 2, 2012
- 152
- 0
- 0
Yeah. Something is out of place here. Nike MUST know something about the 500 thousand. Why else would they abruptly terminate Armstrong's contract? Why wouldn't Nike just let the contrqct expire without such a drqstic change.
Nike called the evidence against Armstrong "insurmountable" and further adding insult to injury by saying that Armstrong "duped" Nike. Nike doesn't say stuff like this. Even when Nike terminate Michael Vick's contract there were no such speech like this.
If this 500 thousand funding and later Armstrong's "donation" helped Armstrong gain favor with the UCI to cheat the system, then the UCI has some serious explaining to do. You gotta wonder what Armstrong told Nke to get that money. Could this be the end of the UCI as we know it?
Nike called the evidence against Armstrong "insurmountable" and further adding insult to injury by saying that Armstrong "duped" Nike. Nike doesn't say stuff like this. Even when Nike terminate Michael Vick's contract there were no such speech like this.
If this 500 thousand funding and later Armstrong's "donation" helped Armstrong gain favor with the UCI to cheat the system, then the UCI has some serious explaining to do. You gotta wonder what Armstrong told Nke to get that money. Could this be the end of the UCI as we know it?
- Dec 7, 2010
- 8,773
- 1
- 0
- Dec 7, 2010
- 8,773
- 1
- 0
So after the "500 million payment" and then the Armstong donation was it then 500million500thousand dollar total?Big Daddy said:
- Mar 18, 2010
- 356
- 0
- 9,030
- Oct 30, 2011
- 2,642
- 0
- 0
Dunno when they terminated the Vick contract, but might it be a case of timing? If they moved quickly enough on Vick, then it's obvious why they did it when they did it. I think for many people the time to act on the LA contract was a long time ago - today isn't that different from yesterday and won't be that different tomorrow, hence the speech laced with fake regret.Big Daddy said:
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,530
- 0
- 0
The (alleged) real reason Nike fired Pharmstrong:
http://www.businessinsider.com/reason-why-nike-fired-lance-armstrong-2012-10
http://www.businessinsider.com/reason-why-nike-fired-lance-armstrong-2012-10
- Jul 16, 2011
- 211
- 0
- 0
That's quite interesting, wonder what they feel he misled them on. I don't think its the doping.FoxxyBrown1111 said:
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,530
- 0
- 0
Yes, seems bigger. All the other cheaters on Nike payroll were allowed to finish the contract. I am looking forward the next weeks. There is more to come...
- Oct 2, 2012
- 152
- 0
- 0
There wasn't a TUE before he tested positive. Then Nike told the UCI that it was under the pile of $500,000 on their desk.Altitude said:
- Jul 28, 2010
- 139
- 0
- 0
It is important that Kathy LeMond and Julien DeVries not be viewed as the sole source for this information. Sylvia Schenk said more-or-less the same thing in an interview with Sport1.de in 2005:
"Sylvia Schenk, ex-President of the Bund Deutsche Radfahrer and member of the UCI management committee... noted further that since 1998, much has been done to combat doping in cycling, "But everything is suddenly different when it comes to Armstrong...There is obviously a close relationship to Armstrong. For example, the UCI took a lot of money from Armstrong - as far as I know, $500,000. Now of course there is speculation that there are financial relationships to Armstrong as well as to the American market."
[Clipped from http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/schenk-criticises-uci-over-armstrong-case]
Remember that after some clown-like confusion, Verbruggen and McQuaid finally settled on "$125,000" as the amount Armstrong "donated". Clearly they referred only to the amount he paid in his own name, and the amount does not refer to any other entities associated with Armstrong.
Only an idiot (or a newbie to the world of international bribes) would make a payment like this in their own name (or even a partial payment), but I suppose Armstrong was compelled by his arrogance and unwillingness to give up the vestige of control as occurs with an anonymous bribe, and to preserve his leverage over the UCI.
The only reason we don't know more about this is that the UCI has never been compelled to back up their statements or open their records. Allez Kimmage.
"Sylvia Schenk, ex-President of the Bund Deutsche Radfahrer and member of the UCI management committee... noted further that since 1998, much has been done to combat doping in cycling, "But everything is suddenly different when it comes to Armstrong...There is obviously a close relationship to Armstrong. For example, the UCI took a lot of money from Armstrong - as far as I know, $500,000. Now of course there is speculation that there are financial relationships to Armstrong as well as to the American market."
[Clipped from http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/schenk-criticises-uci-over-armstrong-case]
Remember that after some clown-like confusion, Verbruggen and McQuaid finally settled on "$125,000" as the amount Armstrong "donated". Clearly they referred only to the amount he paid in his own name, and the amount does not refer to any other entities associated with Armstrong.
Only an idiot (or a newbie to the world of international bribes) would make a payment like this in their own name (or even a partial payment), but I suppose Armstrong was compelled by his arrogance and unwillingness to give up the vestige of control as occurs with an anonymous bribe, and to preserve his leverage over the UCI.
The only reason we don't know more about this is that the UCI has never been compelled to back up their statements or open their records. Allez Kimmage.
- Sep 29, 2012
- 12,197
- 0
- 0
bs? so marion jones committed perjury but told nike the truth and they sat on it?FoxxyBrown1111 said:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Volta ao Algarve em Bicicleta 2020, Portugal, February 19 - February 23- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 383
-
Vuelta a Andalucia Ruta Ciclista Del Sol 2020, Spain, February 19 - February 23- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 124
-
-
-
-
Teams & Riders Transfers and Rumours 2019 > 2020
- Started by Anderis
- Replies: 2K
-
Fuglsang and Lutsenko under investigation for cooperation with Michele Ferrari.
- Started by MADRAZO
- Replies: 225
Latest posts
-
-
The "MVP" Mathieu Van der Poel Road Discussion Thread- Latest: Dekker_Tifosi
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram