Interesting piece on Livestrong

[BroDeal]

I don’t think that you are getting the whole picture. I have had some experience with one kind of event, and let me share with you, how it works. Say there is a popular century event that sells out every year. The organizers will usually be contacted by xyz charity about the possibility of getting several entries into the event. The event organizers will agree to either give or sell a decided number of entries to the charity. Since there is a waiting list to participate in the event, there is a high demand for the spots the charity has. The charity in turn offers the spots to public at a set price with the addition of a fundraising goal included benefitting the charity. The participant either raises money for the charity -- however they decide-- or pays it themself. At the event, they are usually distinguished from other participants with clothes or something like that. The charity will usually provide support etc. for their participants. In brief, that is how it works.

I think you are just making sh!t up, as usual. I am talking about things like centuries that have been run for years and years, do not "sell out", and suddenly hike their prices. A small donation to a charity is used to justify the price hike.

 

[BotanyBay]

I do think that if someone digs enough they will find all sorts of financial malfeasance at LAF. This is the guy who cheated his teammates out of a few thousands of dollars in prize money. It is hard to believe that he would not have saved himself money by expensing all sorts of things that he should not have.

Read Mike Anderson's affidavit. Lance is cheaper than Jack Benny.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

If the media could find something that is easy to encapsulate in a sound bite, like Armstrong spending contributions on $500 bottles of wine, then there would be a scandal. That he is defrauding people with terminal diseases and their families would add to it considerably. But "conflict of interest" is a fuzzy term that most people won't take the time to figure out.

Yeah dumb the message down....jet fuel....

It also has to be seen in light of people on Wall Street knowingly funneling billions of dollars to the crooks like Madoff while collecting hundreds of millions of dollars in fees, or executives making mega bonuses for bankrupting companies worth tens of billions by giving out loans that could never be repaid. In the overall scale of the criminal overclass, what Armstrong is doing is kids stuff.

Actually that's a good point, I need judge it on a US scale where it's small, rather than on a NZ scale, where it would be massive.

I do think that if someone digs enough they will find all sorts of financial malfeasance at LAF......

Me too.

 

[BotanyBay]

Yeah dumb the message down....jet fuel....

I don't think he owns the jet. "Chartered Jet" sounds so much more insidious.

 

[miloman]

I think you are just making sh!t up, as usual. I am talking about things like centuries that have been run for years and years, do not "sell out", and suddenly hike their prices. A small donation to a charity is used to justify the price hike.

And the world is flat, right. Your ignorance is showing. I stated that that is "one type" of event, not that they are all that way. Wow, you seem angry!

 

[BroDeal]

And the world is flat, right. Your ignorance is showing. I stated that that is "one type" of event, not that they are all that way. Wow, you seem angry!

I would rather be angry than stupid. I can always clam down. You are sh!t outta luck.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I share your perspective on conflicts of interest in general, although I actually think there is a worse conflict of interest between Lance and LAF than you have listed.

Can I ask if your perspective on conflict of interest is an American one? Not meaning to be personal; it's just that there have been indications from some forum members that conflicts of interest are often* not viewed as seriously in the US as they would be in NZ or the UK.

I'm just trying to get an idea of what the consequences in the States would for LA/LAF if these conflicts of interest were made public, out of idle curiosity.

*trying to avoid gross generalizations that risk "insulting an entire nation"

In the 990 from that the LAF have to submit annually. (Page 51 of 990)

Form 990, Part VI, Section B, Line 12c. Annually we require Board Members to disclose any interests that would give rise to conflicts.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

And the world is flat, right. Your ignorance is showing. I stated that that is "one type" of event, not that they are all that way. Wow, you seem angry!

Wow, you seem boring!

 

[miloman]

I would rather be angry than stupid. I can always clam down. You are sh!t outta luck.

So, what makes me stupid -- not agreeing with you, or having broader life experiences than you? Why resort to name calling? Keep it civil. I guess I shouldn't be too surprised by the lack of courtesy and decorum exhibited by some when they are safely shrouded in anonymity.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

Annually we require Board Members to disclose any interests that would give rise to conflicts.

"Then we larf our @rses off, it's funnier than the dinner game....."

 

[kurtinsc]

Again - you keep saying its "reasonable to assume" based on.....assumptions!

A quick search shows that Irish Cancer Society were doing a lot of the organizing at a local level for the Global Campaign in Dublin. Also there were 250 volunteers brought in to help with the summit - so few Livestrong personnel would have been needed to be flown in.

As for these other events in Mexico, Monaco, Italy etc - they appeared to involve LA meeting with a politician, so lots of talk and a photo oppurtunity.

Why are you so upset about some assumptions on my end, but feel free to make assumptions on the other end about why the travel dollar number went up?

Look... I'm not defending Lance. I'm not even defending Livestrong's priorities at this point... it's clear they've shifted from what they once were and that's disappointing.

But I'm still flabbergasted that everyone seems to be perfectly accepting that the increase in travel had to come from fueling Lance's jet, and that starting a global cancer campaign (as stupid as that campaign might be) couldn't have anything to do with it.

The guy's a jerk... but unless someone knows something they haven't posted in this thread, I fail to see how you can look at it objectively and come to "jet fuel" as the conclusion.

 

[D-Queued]

...

But I'm still flabbergasted that everyone seems to be perfectly accepting that the increase in travel had to come from fueling Lance's jet, and that starting a global cancer campaign (as stupid as that campaign might be) couldn't have anything to do with it.

The guy's a jerk... but unless someone knows something they haven't posted in this thread, I fail to see how you can look at it objectively and come to "jet fuel" as the conclusion.

If you think it is as simple as 'jet fuel', then you haven't been paying attention or are trying for gross oversimplification.

The travel expenses are way out of line for the size of the organization.

If it were the corporate world, someone would not be getting a positive review for Christmas.

Moreover, it wasn't even a Global Cancer Campaign. Setting aside that it wasn't about Cancer, but Awareness (audience cue: ooh, aah), the definition of Global is closer to wherever they have Cappuccino, hot babes ("Hotter than Donut Grease" according the the grand poobah himself) and bike races.

Where exactly in these first world destinations is there a problem with Cancer awareness? Haven't they heard about Cancer in Australia yet?

The travel expenses are high. (Setting aside all of the other problems already discussed on this thread)

The contributors to this 'Charity' should be provided with the goals of the expenses, what the expenses were for, and whether the goals were achieved.

Did anyone get special padded VIP treatment that is inconsistent with charity?

Dave.

 

[patricknd]

And all the things you can SPEND the money on

Lance Armstrong Uses More Water Than Anyone Else in the World

But, why would Lance care?

Why the Colorado River Doesn't Meet the Sea

because... Austin has entered into water supply contract agreements with the Lower Colorado River Authority

This is the river whose water is all sucked up by the house that Lance built

Dave.

and this has something to do with the topic of this thread? he runs his sprinklers too much?

get real, dave.

 

[patricknd]

At this point it is difficult to understand what the topic of the thread is. I thought it was about “Interesting piece on Livestrong” the OP says that Lance Armstrong has done more for good than Floyd Landis revelations (confession) ever will.

What it is now,,,is a debate about CN forum members and the main topic of discussion is how these couple of member or members does not have objectivity, can not answer questions and is a hypocrite. This could go on forever correct? Dr. - you and BB tried earlier yesterday to lump me in with this even when it was a sarcastic joke on my part. That just shows how easy some are at jumping the gun to label someone a fanboy, trollcraft, etc.

LAF will never live up to the charity it is seen as because the individual is bigger than the cause. Seems like when given the chance it is all about Lance and not about the charity. That should be opposite. In my opinion.

you're finally beginning to understand the purpose of this forum. next everyone can post their "funny" troll pictures.

 

[frenchfry]

and this has something to do with the topic of this thread? he runs his sprinklers too much?

get real, dave.

Maybe it's just about values. It might be relevant that someone who apparently uses a foundation to finance his jet set lifestyle would also consume an inordinate amount of scarce natural resources. Kind of a package deal.

 

[kurtinsc]

If you think it is as simple as 'jet fuel', then you haven't been paying attention or are trying for gross oversimplification.

The travel expenses are way out of line for the size of the organization.

If it were the corporate world, someone would not be getting a positive review for Christmas.

Moreover, it wasn't even a Global Cancer Campaign. Setting aside that it wasn't about Cancer, but Awareness (audience cue: ooh, aah), the definition of Global is closer to wherever they have Cappuccino, hot babes ("Hotter than Donut Grease" according the the grand poobah himself) and bike races.

Where exactly in these first world destinations is there a problem with Cancer awareness? Haven't they heard about Cancer in Australia yet?

The travel expenses are high. (Setting aside all of the other problems already discussed on this thread)

The contributors to this 'Charity' should be provided with the goals of the expenses, what the expenses were for, and whether the goals were achieved.

Did anyone get special padded VIP treatment that is inconsistent with charity?

Dave.

I agree with what you said about the expenses being high.

That doesn't mean they were funneling money to Lance to pay for VIP travel to races. The only person who actually CLAIMED to know about travel to the Dublin event (theHog... so it's not like we can take it for fact) even stated that Lance paid his own way and that Livestrong didn't pay for his trip to Ireland.

Lance is obviously using the LAF for PR purposes. I don't think his motives at the moment are anything but selfish. But I find the whole idea of them funneling him money that could easily be traced and questioned a silly idea. Sure... dumb things get done every day, but this one just seems unlikely.

It seems to me like there are PLENTY of reasons to dislike Lance without targeting something like this that seems unreasonable.

 

[Race Radio]

At this point this topic has been beaten to death.....the good news is shortly we will have a lot more info on the topic that could give additional background to the discussion.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Why are you so upset about some assumptions on my end, but feel free to make assumptions on the other end about why the travel dollar number went up?

Look... I'm not defending Lance. I'm not even defending Livestrong's priorities at this point... it's clear they've shifted from what they once were and that's disappointing.

But I'm still flabbergasted that everyone seems to be perfectly accepting that the increase in travel had to come from fueling Lance's jet, and that starting a global cancer campaign (as stupid as that campaign might be) couldn't have anything to do with it.

The guy's a jerk... but unless someone knows something they haven't posted in this thread, I fail to see how you can look at it objectively and come to "jet fuel" as the conclusion.

I fail to see how anyone can look at this objectively and not see that the LAF are funding part of LAs private jet fuel bill.
No, the full $2 million travel expenses is not consumed by N7LA but 'conferences' for the 'global campaign' are all centered around other events that LA is being personally reimbursed for, a handy way to put the expense on the LAFs books.


As for your assumptions - its because they can be dismissed with a quick search, 100 people didn't go from Houston to Dublin as Livestrong have less than 80 staff, there was no need for the LAF to send a forward delegation to set up the conference as a PR firm WHPR (part of the Ogilvy firm that on the 990 form got $3.8 million in 2009!!!)set it up with help from the Irish Cancer Society and the cost per hour of the Jet was way off.

 

[BotanyBay]

but 'conferences' for the 'global campaign' are all centered around other events that LA is being personally reimbursed for, a handy way to put the expense on the LAFs books.

And this is how a foundation covers the chartered jet without ever having to identify it as such. Just tuck it into something that doesn't need to be itemized.

 

[miloman]

I fail to see how anyone can look at this objectively and not see that the LAF are funding part of LAs private jet fuel bill.
No, the full $2 million travel expenses is not consumed by N7LA but 'conferences' for the 'global campaign' are all centered around other events that LA is being personally reimbursed for, a handy way to put the expense on the LAFs books.


As for your assumptions - its because they can be dismissed with a quick search, 100 people didn't go from Houston to Dublin as Livestrong have less than 80 staff, there was no need for the LAF to send a forward delegation to set up the conference as a PR firm WHPR (part of the Ogilvy firm that on the 990 form got $3.8 million in 2009!!!)set it up with help from the Irish Cancer Society and the cost per hour of the Jet was way off.

The point is, no one knows for sure what is in there until an outside audit. Any statement to the contrary is purely speculation and should be treated as such. You have your opinion and you may be right. However, others with contrary opinions should be able to voice theirs as well without being bullied by all the usual suspects in the forum.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The point is, no one knows for sure what is in there until an outside audit. Any statement to the contrary is purely speculation and should be treated as such. You have your opinion and you may be right. However, others with contrary opinions should be able to voice theirs as well without being bullied by all the usual suspects in the forum.

Where have I bullied 'kurtinsc'?
Unlike you I am quite happy to challenge their information - not the poster.
I appreciate kurtrinsc's contribution as they have raised some interesting points, but unfortunately (for them) it does not stand up to scrutiny.

'We' don't need an outside audit - we know for a fact the LAF travel expenses are close to $2 million, while other charities are in the tens of thousands - we know LA arrived at these 'global' events in his private jet, and a look at most of these events show it was merely a meeting with a politician and a photo opportunity.

 

[BotanyBay]

The point is, no one knows for sure what is in there until an outside audit. Any statement to the contrary is purely speculation and should be treated as such. You have your opinion and you may be right. However, others with contrary opinions should be able to voice theirs as well without being bullied by all the usual suspects in the forum.

People have challenged Lance to allow his samples to be re-tested on his Twitter page. His reply? "Go ahead". Not that he ever took any action. If anyone were to try and take him up on that "offer", do you think he'd sign the release papers for the UCI? No way. Not to worry though. We don't need to retest the samples. They've already been re-tested.

You think he's ever going to allow an outside audit of the LAF? No. Well, possibly, so long as it's performed by the Dutch attorney that the UCI hired to "investigate" the L'Equipe story.

 

[poupou]

If I am correct, LAF gives money to the lab of the famous Dr. Coyle after he wrote his fake research study used during SCA affair !

Could it be a conflict of interest?

If Lance is promoting Livestrong, a profit company, why should LAF have to pay for their expenses?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

If I am correct, LAF gives money to the lab of the famous Dr. Coyle after he wrote his fake research study used during SCA affair !

Could it be a conflict of interest?

If Lance is promoting Livestrong, a profit company, why should LAF have to pay for their expenses?

Excellent point........... but I believe you may have confused Coyle with LA's cancer care Doctors Einhorn of the IUCC and Doctor Nichols in relation to the SCA case;

• The Indiana University Cancer Centre received an 'endowment' of $1.5 million from the Lance Armstrong Foundation in October 2005.
• The OHSU where Dr. Nichols worked received a 'grant' of $500,000 from the LAF in May 2006. He is also on the Board of Directors of the LAF.

 

[miloman]

Where have I bullied 'kurtinsc'?
Unlike you I am quite happy to challenge their information - not the poster.
I appreciate kurtrinsc's contribution as they have raised some interesting points, but unfortunately (for them) it does not stand up to scrutiny.

'We' don't need an outside audit - we know for a fact the LAF travel expenses are close to $2 million, while other charities are in the tens of thousands - we know LA arrived at these 'global' events in his private jet, and a look at most of these events show it was merely a meeting with a politician and a photo opportunity.

Don’t discount what celebrity brings to a cause. Take for example what celebrities from sports and film did for the war effort during WWII. Awareness to a cause or issue may be nebulous for some, but can be measured and tracked; an example being how war bond sales would soar in a city when celebrities came to town. I think you missed the point. I don’t believe the 100 LAF employees was a hard figure. It was only used to point out that the cost to send any kind of contingent to these conferences is substantial. And as far as Armstrong participation in said event, would you expect him not to show?

Since I am not part of the inner circle it is impossible for me to say for sure which came first, the conference or the race and neither can you. Were the dates massaged so that things better fit schedules? Perhaps. But how does that really change anything? You don’t think things like this happen every day? Do you think if say Sting was available to do a fundraiser for a charity on a certain day, the charity would say “no thanks, it doesn’t work with our schedule?” Speaking of Sting, I remember seeing a documentary about his jazz band many years ago and there was an interesting exchange between Sting’s manager and one of the band members who was a renowned musician. Essentially, he acknowledged the musicians fame but to put things in perspective for him; he reminded him that if he were to get sick and can’t perform, they get a replacement and the show goes on. If Sting can’t perform the concert gets cancelled; who would pay to see them perform? My point is, if Lance isn’t there, where does that put the conference, the global initiative etc. To me, comparing LAF to other charities is an apples and oranges comparison. Again it doesn’t mean I support what they do and how the do it, but I understand why it may be that way.