How does a Charity sponsor a team?

[workingclasshero]

Very well said.....

glad we agree. now over to the facts of this world. lance is a cheat who exploits cancer to get away with his doping and get rich

 

[kurtinsc]

You guys take the fact that your hero is a fraud pretty personally.

I am not really a fan of Lance. I liked watching him ride in his prime and enjoy watching him ride now, but I tend to favor younger up and coming riders over established guys.

I am a fan of the Lance Armstrong Foundation. I've seen some of the work they do through people I know who have cancer and I've been impressed.

I think attacking the charity is wrong. I think those that want to attack Lance should keep it to attacking Lance... not a charity that bears his name and does a lot of good work.

As I've said before in this thread, there are a LOT of reasons to go after Lance Armstrong. He's due plenty of criticism. Just not for his charity.

 

[Anonymous]

I am not really a fan of Lance. I liked watching him ride in his prime and enjoy watching him ride now, but I tend to favor younger up and coming riders over established guys.

I am a fan of the Lance Armstrong Foundation. I've seen some of the work they do through people I know who have cancer and I've been impressed.

I think attacking the charity is wrong. I think those that want to attack Lance should keep it to attacking Lance... not a charity that bears his name and does a lot of good work.

As I've said before in this thread, there are a LOT of reasons to go after Lance Armstrong. He's due plenty of criticism. Just not for his charity.

I am sorry that his charity isn't all that well run compared to may others, but that is the case. It costs a lot of money to run the PR part of it, and considering most of the promotional materials feature one person's picture, to opine that maybe the motivations of said person might be tainted by self love is merely expressing a conclusion drawn from observation of the totality of that person's actions. Sorry that you think his charity is a golden cow only to be worshiped. I don't.

 

[kurtinsc]

I am sorry that his charity isn't all that well run compared to may others, but that is the case. It costs a lot of money to run the PR part of it, and considering most of the promotional materials feature one person's picture, to opine that maybe the motivations of said person might be tainted by self love is merely expressing a conclusion drawn from observation of the totality of that person's actions. Sorry that you think his charity is a golden cow only to be worshiped. I don't.

It's a 3 star (out of 4) rated charity.

It's got the same rating as the American Cancer Society.

I've shown all the information about the charity earlier in the thread, I'm not going to be bothered to do it again. The fact is it's a good charity, it does a LOT for people who have cancer and their families, and is graded as being fairly efficient with the donations (not the best, but better then most).

I've substantiated these claims with links to third party ratings services. You are simply stating an opinion that seems to be solely based on a dislike for a guy who rides a bike.


I don't care about that... but I'm a bit offended by you attacking a good charity because you don't like the celebrity who they use for fundraising. If you want to attack the LAF because they are wasting money... show where they are wasting money and provide some evidence.

Don't lie by saying it isn't well run... when the services that rate charities all say that it is.

Don't talk about Lance's ego... he does have a huge ego and he's an ***... but that has nothing to do with the charity.

And don't assume that because you see "livestrong" on something that means that the charity paid for it. Like any charity, the LAF seeks donations... and if they can get their name on something for free to advertise their charity and get more donations... they'll probably do it.

Simply put... find some evidence, or please stop talking about it. The LAF posts their financial statements online for public viewing. Honestly if there was truly something nefarious afoot... it would be pretty easy to see.

 

[Murray]

...considering most of the promotional materials feature one person's picture, to opine that maybe the motivations of said person might be tainted by self love is merely expressing a conclusion drawn from observation of the totality of that person's actions.

Well, it kind of makes sense that promotional materials for the "Lance Armstrong" Foundation might feature pictures of Lance Armstrong... This does not seem unreasonable to me.

In other scandalous news, the Jerry Lewis Telethon featured Jerry Lewis.

 

[Anonymous]

blah blah blah

show where they are wasting money and provide some evidence.

First off, I don't know who paid for that, but I do know that the promotional material for all of this was spread all over the roads of Califorina. I don't know who paid for the spray machine at the TdF. I don't know who paid for much of the stuff that supposedly moves towards "cancer awareness" but I do know who's picture is all over the place, and it doesn't appear to have anything to do with cancer considering the myriad of ways His Highness has prostituted his former illness.

Don't lie by saying it isn't well run... when the services that rate charities all say that it is.

Don't lie and pretend that there are not MANY organizations for not just cancer, but every other disease on the books that are better run than is the LAF.

Don't talk about Lance's ego... he does have a huge ego and he's an ***... but that has nothing to do with the charity.

Did you see this:

And don't assume that because you see "livestrong" on something that means that the charity paid for it. Like any charity, the LAF seeks donations... and if they can get their name on something for free to advertise their charity and get more donations... they'll probably do it.

How could you tell what this is for? Nike, Livestrong, Hope, or the douche bag in the middle?

Simply put... find some evidence, or please stop talking about it. The LAF posts their financial statements online for public viewing. Honestly if there was truly something nefarious afoot... it would be pretty easy to see.

Simply put, quit portraying yourself as an impassioned observer only wishing to set the record straight. You are trying way too hard to convince us of that.

 

[Anonymous]

Well, it kind of makes sense that promotional materials for the "Lance Armstrong" Foundation might feature pictures of Lance Armstrong... This does not seem unreasonable to me.

In other scandalous news, the Jerry Lewis Telethon featured Jerry Lewis.

Did you see this?

It has "cancer Awareness" all over it. Goes real well with this: Its where you can go after charging hundreds of thousands or millions to talk about cancer. You can swim in "Cancer Awareness" literally. Pretty sweet.

 

[blackcat]

another good TFF post

 

[Anonymous]

another good TFF post

I am guessing that those forum members don't understand the expense of the artwork alone on that type of advertising. And when the material makes it hard to know whether I am supposed to cheer for him, buy Nike products, visit Niketown, visit livestrong.com or is is livestrong.org (I get all mixed up on that), donate to a charity, buy a yellow wristband, buy a pair of yellow sneakers, buy a yellow racing singlet to wear at my local track, maybe go see a Ben Stiller movie, I just am not sure what to do when I see that. What I do know is that all of it promotes they guy's picture they use. He mainlines positive public opinion like a junkie shoots dope.

I will say that Lance does have a really butch look in the picture. I'll bet he is a top.

 

[blackcat]

I am guessing that those forum members don't understand the expense of the artwork alone on that type of advertising. And when the material makes it hard to know whether I am supposed to cheer for him, buy Nike products, visit Niketown, visit livestrong.com or is is livestrong.org (I get all mixed up on that), donate to a charity, buy a yellow wristband, buy a pair of yellow sneakers, buy a yellow racing singlet to wear at my local track, maybe go see a Ben Stiller movie, I just am not sure what to do when I see that. What I do know is that all of it promotes they guy's picture they use. He mainlines positive public opinion like a junkie shoots dope.

I will say that Lance does have a really butch look in the picture. I'll bet he is a top.

with Matthew McConaughey?

 

[Anonymous]

with Matthew McConaughey?

You ever notice how much McConaughey looks like Linda Armstrong with facial hair?

 

[blackcat]

You ever notice how much McConaughey looks like Linda Armstrong with facial hair?

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,1547724,00.html
Lance Armstrong & Matthew McConaughey: We're Not Gay

By Stephen M. Silverman

Wednesday October 18, 2006 04:00 PM EDT
Lance Armstrong & Matthew McConaughey: We're Not Gay | Matthew McConaughey

Kevin Mazur/WireImage

* Facebook
* Twitter
* Yahoo Buzz
* E-mail

Lance Armstrong and Matthew McConaughey are laughing off questions about their sexuality and rumors that they're anything more than just pals.

"We tried it. Wasn't for us," McConaughey jokes to Details magazine in a new interview that addresses rumors about them – and pal Jake Gyllenhaal – being gay.

 

[blackcat]

It gets better...

"Our friendship just kind of developed," the cycling champ tells the magazine for its November issue. "He got out of a relationship; I'd just gotten out of a relationship."

Prance, it will be a weight off your mind, just admit it, let it out

 

[blackcat]

 

[Anonymous]

Wow, you notice how McConaughey is always half wheeling him. I think I got the "top" thing wrong.

 

[Race Radio]

You ever notice how much McConaughey looks like Linda Armstrong with facial hair?

 

[blackcat]

which one is his mum?

 

[Anonymous]

which one is his mum?

Freaking HILARIOUS!! The man does love a good blond.

 

[Race Radio]

which one is his mum?

 

[kurtinsc]

First off, I don't know who paid for that, but I do know that the promotional material for all of this was spread all over the roads of Califorina. I don't know who paid for the spray machine at the TdF. I don't know who paid for much of the stuff that supposedly moves towards "cancer awareness" but I do know who's picture is all over the place, and it doesn't appear to have anything to do with cancer considering the myriad of ways His Highness has prostituted his former illness.

As I stated before, there IS documentation showing NIKE paid for the spray machine. I'm guessing they paid for pretty much everything regarding Lance at the TOC, but I can't confirm that... but I can confirm that the "Nike Chalkbot" was in fact paid for by Nike. The LAF's Livestrong brand got free publicity from that... and they unsuprisingly took it.

You've also said several times that money isn't being spent to promote cance awareness... WHICH IS NOT WHAT THE LAF DOES. It's what LANCE said he was going to do with his comeback... and it's complete crap. But that has nothing to do with the LAF's mission. The fact that you KEEP saying that when I KEEP correcting you on it shows you are working with some sort of agenda. READ THE LAF's MISSION. Cancer awareness isn't there. All the "Livestrong" brand is used for is raising money. That's it... it's a fundraising tool that brings in the funds the LAF spends on helping cancer survivors.

Don't lie and pretend that there are not MANY organizations for not just cancer, but every other disease on the books that are better run than is the LAF.

There are some. There are a lot of well regarded disease based charities that are worse at getting dollars spent on mission specific programs. I've mentioned them earlier in this thread... you just chose not to read it. Just because the "V" foundation for example gets a higher percentage toward their mission does not mean all the charities that rank below them suck. And simply put... there isn't another charity that is as efficient and covers as many people that's focus is centered on helping cancer survivors. Feel free to name a survivor based cancer charity that has as wide a reach that is more efficient and I'll admit I'm wrong... but I'm not aware of one.

Did you see this:

How could you tell what this is for? Nike, Livestrong, Hope, or the douche bag in the middle?

Flickr is blocked from this PC... so no, I haven't seen either of them yet.

Simply put, quit portraying yourself as an impassioned observer only wishing to set the record straight. You are trying way too hard to convince us of that.

I'm not impassioned... I'm being annoyed. I AM impartial, if that's what you were trying to say. I'm simply NOT presenting much in the way of opinion here. I'm stating facts that are readily available to anyone. I view 3-star charities as rated by charitynavigator.com as being "GOOD". I can't find an indication that the LAF is paying for things outside of administration, fundraising and mission specific programs. The only examples you've given seem to be funded by Nike.

You seem to be very misinformed. You don't even know what the LAF does, you don't know if they're spending any money on things that you view as bad... but you're slamming them merely because of the associationg with a cyclist you dislike. Present some proof that the LAF is paying for something... ANYTHING... they shouldn't be based on their mission. Just give me a nugget of SOMETHING WITH SUBSTANCE... not just "Lance is a jerk".

 

[kurtinsc]

Did you see this?

It has "cancer Awareness" all over it. Goes real well with this: Its where you can go after charging hundreds of thousands or millions to talk about cancer. You can swim in "Cancer Awareness" literally. Pretty sweet.

Did the LAF give Lance money for his pool? Can you provide a link showing that?

 

[kurtinsc]

I am guessing that those forum members don't understand the expense of the artwork alone on that type of advertising. And when the material makes it hard to know whether I am supposed to cheer for him, buy Nike products, visit Niketown, visit livestrong.com or is is livestrong.org (I get all mixed up on that), donate to a charity, buy a yellow wristband, buy a pair of yellow sneakers, buy a yellow racing singlet to wear at my local track, maybe go see a Ben Stiller movie, I just am not sure what to do when I see that. What I do know is that all of it promotes they guy's picture they use. He mainlines positive public opinion like a junkie shoots dope.

I will say that Lance does have a really butch look in the picture. I'll bet he is a top.

And the LAF isn't paying for any of it.

I think that's where you're getting lost. If Nike, Radio Shack, Trek or whoever will pay to put the Livestrong logo (used to raise funds for the LAF) on their kits or on a car or pretty much anywhere... the LAF will allow it. If you buy anything with "livestrong" on it, all money paid by the producer of the item for licensing the name will go directly to the LAF. The manufacturer of the item pays the LAF to use the "livestrong" brand. This isn't unique... if you volunteer for the special olympics for example you'll see their logo all over everything... and they'll have paid for none of it.

This is one way the LAF gets funds to run their programs. It's all INCOME for the charity... not an expense.

Does it help Lance? Perhaps. That's why most famous people start charities... for PR. But the charity is NOT spending money to hype Lance. They use Lance to bring in money... to fund their programs.

 

[blackcat]

looks less a pool and more a grotto from a porn set

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

Did you see this?

It has "cancer Awareness" all over it. Goes real well with this: Its where you can go after charging hundreds of thousands or millions to talk about cancer. You can swim in "Cancer Awareness" literally. Pretty sweet.

Obviously, a NikeTown billboard advertising the Nike Livestrong 10//2 clothing line. Brilliant marketing if you ask me: recognizable public figure and a catchy slogan can go a long way in the way of merchandise sales (or votes). Not surprisingly 100 percent of those sales go to the LAF. Ultimately, that means more money for the LAF which is then redistributed into research, awareness, etc.

Oh and that sign is on top of a Niketown store in San Francisco, which was paid for by Niketown.

 

[Anonymous]

As I stated before, there IS documentation showing NIKE paid for the spray machine. I'm guessing they paid for pretty much everything regarding Lance at the TOC, but I can't confirm that... but I can confirm that the "Nike Chalkbot" was in fact paid for by Nike. The LAF's Livestrong brand got free publicity from that... and they unsuprisingly took it.

So are we. Wouldn't it be nice if there were a line between the profit making arm of Armstrong Inc and his charity?

You've also said several times that money isn't being spent to promote cance awareness... WHICH IS NOT WHAT THE LAF DOES.

Now, pray tell, what does the charity do and what does Lance do, and who profits and who just gets donations and why does it cost $1 million US to hear him talk about cancer sometimes, and where does that money go (I am guessing the pool got a portion) and does Niketown give some of the money spent by customers who come in to buy the bracelet but also buy a jock strap and the whole thing is kind of confusing but Lance has a sweet private jet that his winnings from the TdF surely didn't pay for considering Eddy probably doesn't even have one and...

It's what LANCE said he was going to do with his comeback... and it's complete crap. But that has nothing to do with the LAF's mission. The fact that you KEEP saying that when I KEEP correcting you on it shows you are working with some sort of agenda. READ THE LAF's MISSION. Cancer awareness isn't there. All the "Livestrong" brand is used for is raising money. That's it... it's a fundraising tool that brings in the funds the LAF spends on helping cancer survivors.

Wait, so the "Livestrong" brand raises money but that isn't part of the charity but the charity uses it and the "Livestrong" brand is the one with the "Cancer Awareness" campaign to raise money that they give to LAF, but that isn't part of the LAF, but somehow much of the marketing material has his picture and a big Nike SwooshTM and the waters are really muddy on that one, and did all the money get there?

See the thing you keep missing, is the murkiness of the whole thing. What is what and who gets what and what is the point and if it is so confusing, my point has always been, WHY NOT GIVE TO A CANCER CHARITY THAT PROVIDES THE SAME SERVICES YET DOES SO MORE EFFICIENTLY WITH LESS CONFUSION ABOUT WHERE YOUR MONEY IS GOING?

There are some. There are a lot of well regarded disease based charities that are worse at getting dollars spent on mission specific programs. I've mentioned them earlier in this thread... you just chose not to read it. Just because the "V" foundation for example gets a higher percentage toward their mission does not mean all the charities that rank below them suck. And simply put... there isn't another charity that is as efficient and covers as many people that's focus is centered on helping cancer survivors. Feel free to name a survivor based cancer charity that has as wide a reach that is more efficient and I'll admit I'm wrong... but I'm not aware of one.

There are HUNDREDS of small ones that do and their combined efforts do exceed the LAF, and your money could go there. In fact, I would suggest that instead of buying a yellow wristband, you find a local charity that actually has staff that works much more closely with people in your area and give them $1. There will always be people who plop down $75 for a pair of Nike shoes that are yellow and have "Livestrong" on the sole, but they probably buy some Nike socks and shorts and a singlet too when they buy, and hey, Nike will take that money too.

Flickr is blocked from this PC... so no, I haven't seen either of them yet.

Its a big sign with Nike, Niketown, Livestrong, and Lance, but I cannot figure out where cancer fits in because Niketown is in pretty big letters.

I'm not impassioned... I'm being annoyed.

Yea, me too!

I AM impartial,

And I am the King of France, nice to meet you.

if that's what you were trying to say. I'm simply NOT presenting much in the way of opinion here. I'm stating facts that are readily available to anyone. I view 3-star charities as rated by charitynavigator.com as being "GOOD". I can't find an indication that the LAF is paying for things outside of administration, fundraising and mission specific programs. The only examples you've given seem to be funded by Nike.

My goodness, why that is what a charity does so there shouldn't be any more expenses. Problem is that this whole thing is so muddled because you are the first to tell me that Livestrong.org is not a part of the LAF (I was for sure that it was, but since their mission is "cancer awareness" then I guess not because the LAF has nothing to do with "cancer awareness." See, where does Nike come in again, and why does Lance charge so much to talk about his cancer and where does that money go?

You seem to be very misinformed.

Really, so are these guys: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/123013.php
and these guys: http://www.athletesforhope.org/armstrong-news13.html

You don't even know what the LAF does,

Does anyone? These guys sure missed the boat too: http://stanford.wellsphere.com/heal...nce-armstrong-cancer-awareness-website/549510

you don't know if they're spending any money on things that you view as bad... but you're slamming them merely because of the associationg with a cyclist you dislike. Present some proof that the LAF is paying for something... ANYTHING... they shouldn't be based on their mission. Just give me a nugget of SOMETHING WITH SUBSTANCE... not just "Lance is a jerk".

I have no idea what they are paying to whom and for what. The thing is that there is a problem here you have yet to figure out too, and that is where is all the money going, and for what? And someone better phone Lance and tell him that his "LivestrongTM Global Cancer Awareness" mission was not part of his charity or his Nike shoes or his yellow bracelets or his singlets or his pool or Niketown or the soon to be released Emperors New Clothes in LivestrongTM yellow. Does anyone know if he has trademarked the color yellow yet?