Interesting piece on Livestrong

[JMBeaushrimp]

I know that advertising number sticks OUT more than the copy room. What did they need to advertise?
It is appears to be expensive to make everyone in the world “aware”.

Awareness, buddy, awareness...

What sort of useless quasi-speak is that? It reminds me of something else in the media right now...

Here's a world-rocker, the climate changes. If we can tie cancer into climate change, there might be a few billion to be made...

How're those record snow-falls going?

 

[thehog]

http://consumerist.com/2009/11/radio-shack-employees-say-they-cant-force-donations.html

All for the greater good.
--
Responding to the post about a customer who thinks Radio Shack forced him to donate a dollar to Livestrong, a couple Radio Shack employees wrote in and said that cashiers lack the ability to force such charges.

They say it's up to the customer to push a button that requests the donation, and all a clerk can do is approve it. Kenneth writes:

“
This just a little bit of info on the whole Livestrong post on Consumerist. I actually work at a radio shack, and we can't force anyone to donate. After ringing the sale, our computer screen prompts a donation for the Livestrong collection, however from our end all we are able to do is decline it. The only way for a customer to make the donation is if they actually hit the "accept" button on the credit card pad.

However, I have seen people hit it thinking its a prompt asking if the amount is correct when they slide their card. What I'm more than willing to bet happened is the customer hit the accept button thinking he was confirming the amount for his credit purchase. And, unfortunately, after the sale is complete, we are unable to refund donations. As far as I know, the funds immediately go to the Livestrong foundation and the whole thing is out of our lowly associate hands.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Well, that's encouraging....

 

[miloman]

I agree - but this then goes back to what other charities are spending on 'travel' (which all the ones I have checked are in the tens of thousands) and to how the travel for the LAF has grown significantly over the 08 & 09 years.
We are not talking about the difference in a few dollars here.

For me the $4 million 'advertising' was an eye opener!

Based on what you and others have put forth, little is as it seems when it comes to charity accounting practices. Maybe the other charities flew everywhere and dined on the finest food money could buy, but put it under “Misc.” or “Programs.” Maybe LAF is just accounting for it more honestly than those charities you hold in higher regard. And as far as advertising, how much do you think an ad campaign and commercials cost to produce? What does it cost to air commercials if it isn’t a PSA? What about print and radio advertising? I have heard that some charities participate in what I would consider very questionable and deceptive practices by adding some facts or figures in their advertisements and fundraising materials and thus accounting for these costs as “Education” not “Fundraising” or “Advertising.” Maybe here, the LAF is being more forthright and honest in its accounting. It’s possible.

 

[thehog]

Well, that's encouraging....

The Livestrong tax.

 

[patricknd]

Honestly I like reading it.

It is interesting to see what the different “takes” on foundations and charity’s are. I try and am trying not to get very emotional with it. I know for some it is personal.
(I think your previous or ongoing fight with the disease give’s you a different perspective.) In my opinion you should voice it more often. It is good to hear all sides of this. If you feel like it is too personal to share,,, I can fully respect that.
I still owe you a beer sometime anyhow. You can crack the bottle over my head when your done.

previous fight and hopefully it stays that way. i've done livestrong challenge ride twice now, and i love it. there are a lot of survivors and it's cool to see them celebrating life. last year i had just finished chemo and radiation and i was still in crappy shape, but this year was a blast. i've raised about $3500.00 and if people have a problem with that then oh well. i think i payed the price to do whatever i want. that being said i don't have a problem with opinions contrary to mine. how you feel about the services offered by different charities depends greatly on your needs. mine were different than someone that went through katrina. red cross did nothing for me, but that doesn't mean they don't help anyone. it just means they weren't what i needed.

 

[pmcg76]

http://consumerist.com/2009/11/radio-shack-employees-say-they-cant-force-donations.html

All for the greater good.
--
Responding to the post about a customer who thinks Radio Shack forced him to donate a dollar to Livestrong, a couple Radio Shack employees wrote in and said that cashiers lack the ability to force such charges.

They say it's up to the customer to push a button that requests the donation, and all a clerk can do is approve it. Kenneth writes:

“
This just a little bit of info on the whole Livestrong post on Consumerist. I actually work at a radio shack, and we can't force anyone to donate. After ringing the sale, our computer screen prompts a donation for the Livestrong collection, however from our end all we are able to do is decline it. The only way for a customer to make the donation is if they actually hit the "accept" button on the credit card pad.

However, I have seen people hit it thinking its a prompt asking if the amount is correct when they slide their card. What I'm more than willing to bet happened is the customer hit the accept button thinking he was confirming the amount for his credit purchase. And, unfortunately, after the sale is complete, we are unable to refund donations. As far as I know, the funds immediately go to the Livestrong foundation and the whole thing is out of our lowly associate hands.

Holy crap, thats a shocking practice to undertake. I konw for one I would almost automatically press enter. Surely, the RS employees have to inform customers of such an addition on their bill. I would be serioulsy ****ed, regardless of what the addition was for if I was not informed. That is ambush marketing.

 

[Gaear Grimsrud]

What I'm more than willing to bet happened is the customer hit the accept button thinking he was confirming the amount for his credit purchase.

Wow. It's a like a supermarket that overcharges, and instead of paying a fine and apologizing, turns around and blames the customer for not noticing the overcharge.

LA Inc. is reminding me of the last months of Blockbuster, when they started taking advantage of their remaining customers by jacking rental prices and late fees in anticipation of bankruptcy.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Miloman;

I'd like to be able to address you directly and publicly (hence, no PM).

Can you please explain why you're fighting so hard against the information with which you've been presented?

Is it only because you would like to defend Armstrong's actions? Is it because you want to defend the ability of other Ameican 'charities' to make money off of famous spokes-people?

I've been following this thread for a few days, and I can appreciate your doggedness as to this issue. But I'm having a bit of a hard time understanding where you're coming from.

If you could help me understand your points, you may have another poster 'in your corner', so help me out.

Gimme your points, buddy!

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Based on what you and others have put forth, little is as it seems when it comes to charity accounting practices. Maybe the other charities flew everywhere and dined on the finest food money could buy, but put it under “Misc.” or “Programs.” Maybe LAF is just accounting for it more honestly than those charities you hold in higher regard. And as far as advertising, how much do you think an ad campaign and commercials cost to produce? What does it cost to air commercials if it isn’t a PSA? What about print and radio advertising? I have heard that some charities participate in what I would consider very questionable and deceptive practices by adding some facts or figures in their advertisements and fundraising materials and thus accounting for these costs as “Education” not “Fundraising” or “Advertising.” Maybe here, the LAF is being more forthright and honest in its accounting. It’s possible.

Yet again you didn't answer a question I asked.

Your post has lots of opinions (conjecture) and no links to back up your claims. Can you name the charities you 'heard' about - because then we can check them out in the same way as we do to the LAF - I wouldn't like peiople to be accusing you of making stuff up?
Also, can you show an expensive ad campaign like the one you suggest that featured the LAF?

Let me help - for 'Advertising' Ogilvy who helped organise the 'Global Summit' received $3 million from the LAF in 2009.

Here is the 990 for National Cancer Coalition - its very detailed, and unlike the LAF which has put in 'OTHER' $1.3 million, they have broken down all those 'other' items seperatley to show those individual amounts.

 

[kurtinsc]

W-w-what? Your Sting or WWII stuff is irrelevant.

Yes LA should be there - but does he need to have his personal jet expenses picked up while he is also at an event for which he is receiving renumeration??

I posted it earlier - but again, LA said the Global Summit was going to be in Paris, France (Aug '08), then after his Tour participation is assured (Oct 08) he starts negotiating with Darach McQuaid (Dec '08)to participate in the Tour of Ireland.
He confirmed his participation in the TOI in a joint press release in Feb '08 that reveals that the Global Summit was now in Dublin, Ireland.

Do we have documentation that Lance got an appearance fee from Ireland?

I'd assume he would have, but the links I found stated the organizers flat denied that he was paid a fee. If that's the case, the timeline would prove that they moved the conference for his convenience, but not that moving it was used to secure him an appearance fee.

I also note that he was the "starter" at Mexican race when the LAF contingent went to Mexico. Do we know if he was paid for that, or if he did it for PR while he was there for the LAF thing?

We know he got a fee from the Giro in 2008 and the TDU in 2008 and 2009... did those coincide with the events in Italy and Australia?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Do we have documentation that Lance got an appearance fee from Ireland?

I'd assume he would have, but the links I found stated the organizers flat denied that he was paid a fee. If that's the case, the timeline would prove that they moved the conference for his convenience, but not that moving it was used to secure him an appearance fee.

I also note that he was the "starter" at Mexican race when the LAF contingent went to Mexico. Do we know if he was paid for that, or if he did it for PR while he was there for the LAF thing?

We know he got a fee from the Giro in 2008 and the TDU in 2008 and 2009... did those coincide with the events in Italy and Australia?

Which links are these and why not just post them?

I don't read cycling magazines anymore but this post (153) about the Tour of Ireland said:

Dr, we have speculated before on those two missing days from the Tour of Ireland. I dont know if you get Cycle sport magazine but in their most recent issue, they ran an article on the Tour of Ireland which focused on Lances participation(Typical) During the course of article, it is mentioned that the organiser Andrew McQuaid said that they paid the equivalent of thousands of pints of Guinness to secure Lances participation. You were not far of as usual and another reason to dislike Lance and he didn't even finish. VFM, I dont think so.

This ties in with my earlier link showing how the TOI went from a 5 day to a 3day to accommodate LAs appearance fee.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

As for LA'strip to Mexico.

Google is your friend - here is an interesting piece:

According to Reforma newspaper in Mexico City, Armstrong is also tentatively scheduled to meet with President Felipe Calderon sometime before the March 1 race.

So Lance is confirmed for the race and 'tentatively scheduled' to meet the Pres...... KaChing.

Then there is this article:

Armstrong is also scheduled to travel to the Tour of Mexico in March to act as official “godfather” to the race and drop the start flag before the first stage in Oaxaca.

........ just too many jokes in that piece.

 

[Polish]

This ties in with my earlier link showing how the TOI went from a 5 day to a 3day to accommodate LAs appearance fee.

It is quite silly to blame the failure of the Tour of Ireland on Lance.
If Lance can not save a race, you KNOW it must be very sick indeed.

The effects of the "global recession" shortened the 2009 race.
2010 race did not take place. Dead. Lance is not a miracle worker.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/oth...s-plug-pulled-on-tour-of-ireland-2202046.html

 

[D-Queued]

... It’s possible.

And this is more probable:

Dave.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It is quite silly to blame the failure of the Tour of Ireland on Lance.
If Lance can not save a race, you KNOW it must be very sick indeed.

The effects of the "global recession" shortened the 2009 race.
2010 race did not take place. Dead. Lance is not a miracle worker.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/oth...s-plug-pulled-on-tour-of-ireland-2202046.html

The 'Global Recession' played well - but does not stand up to scrutiny for the 2009 event as contracts had already been signed long before - I addressed this earlier.

 

[red_flanders]

http://consumerist.com/2009/11/radio-shack-employees-say-they-cant-force-donations.html

All for the greater good.
--
Responding to the post about a customer who thinks Radio Shack forced him to donate a dollar to Livestrong, a couple Radio Shack employees wrote in and said that cashiers lack the ability to force such charges.

They say it's up to the customer to push a button that requests the donation, and all a clerk can do is approve it. Kenneth writes:

“
This just a little bit of info on the whole Livestrong post on Consumerist. I actually work at a radio shack, and we can't force anyone to donate. After ringing the sale, our computer screen prompts a donation for the Livestrong collection, however from our end all we are able to do is decline it. The only way for a customer to make the donation is if they actually hit the "accept" button on the credit card pad.

However, I have seen people hit it thinking its a prompt asking if the amount is correct when they slide their card. [obviously, it was clearly designed that way] What I'm more than willing to bet happened is the customer hit the accept button thinking he was confirming the amount for his credit purchase. And, unfortunately, after the sale is complete, we are unable to refund donations. [We can take 'em, but not give 'em back! Gee...again... it was clearly designed that way] As far as I know, the funds immediately go to the Livestrong foundation and the whole thing is out of our lowly associate hands.

The level of slime in that explanation is staggering.

 

[miloman]

Miloman;

I'd like to be able to address you directly and publicly (hence, no PM).

Can you please explain why you're fighting so hard against the information with which you've been presented?

Is it only because you would like to defend Armstrong's actions? Is it because you want to defend the ability of other Ameican 'charities' to make money off of famous spokes-people?

I've been following this thread for a few days, and I can appreciate your doggedness as to this issue. But I'm having a bit of a hard time understanding where you're coming from.

If you could help me understand your points, you may have another poster 'in your corner', so help me out.

Gimme your points, buddy!

I don't think what I have to say will sway you in anyway but here it goes. I have no interest in defending Armstrong or his actions. In many ways I think he is an incredible cad. However, that being said, I believe that regardless of my personal opinions about him, unless there is verifiable proof that he has done all that some have suggested and his charity knowingly defrauded people of millions from around the world, the discussion should be held to a higher standard. I am as guilty as anyone in that I sometimes get caught up in the debate and lose sight of what is important.

However, I am conscious that there are people out there that have a stake in much of what we debate here. In this particular case they include amazing people who volunteer their time and resources to help cancer patients. They volunteer their valuable time to a charity that gives hope and comfort to so many when they need it most. Have you ever seen a family come together after someone they love is diagnosed with cancer and as a show of support they all shave their heads? Or have you ever had someone offer you a yellow wristband and explain that they want you to wear it as a sign of support and then they add, I was just diagnosed with cancer? And what about the cured or those who are in remission; these are people celebrating life after going through the most frightening and darkest period they could ever have imagined. They want to celebrate life and also give back, so they participate in a bike ride or walking event and raise money to fight cancer, be it for LAF, ACS or CCC; it doesn’t really matter. What matters is how they feel. They feel that they are being proactive and hope that some day, in the near future, no one else will have to go through what they did. And then finally, there are the employees. Could they really do what is asked of them everyday if they didn’t believe what they were doing was important?

So is LAF a great charity? I guess that depends on who you talk to. But I suspect that looking over their financials won’t really give you the whole picture. Who can really understand them? This thread was started with a post I made in another thread and was moved by a moderator. The point that I was trying to make was that with all the talk about whether he doped or not (and certainly there is plenty of evidence out there to suggest he did) we lose sight of the fact that he did establish a charity in 1997. That was two years before he claimed his first Tour title. I am hesitant to believe like some have suggested, that the creation of LAF was all part of some great master plan to cover his “rock star” lifestyle and pay for his “jet fuel.” I surmised that by accident or design, Armstrong has done more good through his charity than Floyd has with his admission and FFF. Unfortunately, that is what started the “pile on” in regards to the LAF.

A lot of the information cited on this thread lacks proof, so it is purely speculative. It may be interesting but insupportable. We can connect the dots so-to-speak, but no one can say with any certainty that this is what happened. I believe the investigation into Postal/Discovery needs to run its course. Hopefully some good will come of it; I admit that I am skeptical. Regardless of what happens, all the misinformation that is being passed off as fact surrounding Armstrong and his interests surely doesn’t help. THIS IS ONLY MY OPINION!

 

[Polish]

The 'Global Recession' played well - but does not stand up to scrutiny for the 2009 event as contracts had already been signed long before - I addressed this earlier.

What does "signing contracts" have to do with the death of the race?

You hire the best doctor money can buy, but the patient still dies.
It might NOT be the doctors fault you know. Very sick patient.

Hopefully, the Tour of Ireland can return in 2011.
But the current Irish economic prognosis is not good...

 

[D-Queued]

... Have you ever seen a family come together after someone they love is diagnosed with cancer and as a show of support they all shave their heads? Or have you ever had someone offer you a yellow wristband and explain that they want you to wear it as a sign of support and then they add, I was just diagnosed with cancer?

...

Gee, I feel so guilty now.

Did you ever see the reaction on their faces when you told them the money they gave to Livestrong was spent on flying around in a private jet trying to impress chicks that were hotter than donut grease?

Dave.

 

[BotanyBay]

If it looks like a duck... or was that really a dragon?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

What does "signing contracts" have to do with the death of the race?

You hire the best doctor money can buy, but the patient still dies.
It might NOT be the doctors fault you know. Very sick patient.

Hopefully, the Tour of Ireland can return in 2011.
But the current Irish economic prognosis is not good...

When you say 'sick patient' I presume you mean Darach...... which is a fair point, although I am sure he would have liked if it was Lance who was doing the mouth to mouth.

Amazing how Irelands other stage "The Ras" manages to keep on going, and has secured a new sponsor during the 'Global Recession'.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

I don't think what I have to say will sway you in anyway but here it goes. I have no interest in defending Armstrong or his actions. In many ways I think he is an incredible cad. However, that being said, I believe that regardless of my personal opinions about him, unless there is verifiable proof that he has done all that some have suggested and his charity knowingly defrauded people of millions from around the world, the discussion should be held to a higher standard. I am as guilty as anyone in that I sometimes get caught up in the debate and lose sight of what is important.

However, I am conscious that there are people out there that have a stake in much of what we debate here. In this particular case they include amazing people who volunteer their time and resources to help cancer patients. They volunteer their valuable time to a charity that gives hope and comfort to so many when they need it most. Have you ever seen a family come together after someone they love is diagnosed with cancer and as a show of support they all shave their heads? Or have you ever had someone offer you a yellow wristband and explain that they want you to wear it as a sign of support and then they add, I was just diagnosed with cancer? And what about the cured or those who are in remission; these are people celebrating life after going through the most frightening and darkest period they could ever have imagined. They want to celebrate life and also give back, so they participate in a bike ride or walking event and raise money to fight cancer, be it for LAF, ACS or CCC; it doesn’t really matter. What matters is how they feel. They feel that they are being proactive and hope that some day, in the near future, no one else will have to go through what they did. And then finally, there are the employees. Could they really do what is asked of them everyday if they didn’t believe what they were doing was important?

So is LAF a great charity? I guess that depends on who you talk to. But I suspect that looking over their financials won’t really give you the whole picture. Who can really understand them? This thread was started with a post I made in another thread and was moved by a moderator. The point that I was trying to make was that with all the talk about whether he doped or not (and certainly there is plenty of evidence out there to suggest he did) we lose sight of the fact that he did establish a charity in 1997. That was two years before he claimed his first Tour title. I am hesitant to believe like some have suggested, that the creation of LAF was all part of some great master plan to cover his “rock star” lifestyle and pay for his “jet fuel.” I surmised that by accident or design, Armstrong has done more good through his charity than Floyd has with his admission and FFF. Unfortunately, that is what started the “pile on” in regards to the LAF.

A lot of the information cited on this thread lacks proof, so it is purely speculative. It may be interesting but insupportable. We can connect the dots so-to-speak, but no one can say with any certainty that this is what happened. I believe the investigation into Postal/Discovery needs to run its course. Hopefully some good will come of it; I admit that I am skeptical. Regardless of what happens, all the misinformation that is being passed off as fact surrounding Armstrong and his interests surely doesn’t help. THIS IS ONLY MY OPINION!

Thanks for your reasonable response. I have to say it makes a bit more sense coming from you, rather than trying to figure out your stance based upon what I can only see as a days-long p*ssing contest.

The more I know, the better...

 

[Polish]

Gee, I feel so guilty now.

Did you ever see the reaction on their faces when you told them the money they gave to Livestrong was spent on flying around in a private jet trying to impress chicks that were hotter than donut grease?

Dave.

Why would they care? Much bigger issues for them to worry/care about.

Don't get me wrong. Other people will care. Handbaggers and morans.
Private jets and hot chicks. omg omg.

 

[D-Queued]

Why would they care? Much bigger issues for them to worry/care about.

Don't get me wrong. Other people will care. Handbaggers and morans.
Private jets and hot chicks. omg omg.

Right.

These people, who have just been handed a horrible scenario and then have solicited their closest friends for contributions, won't mind at all having their misfortune being used to pad someone else's lifestyle.

Oh, sorry, of course you don't understand. You are trying to defend the jet-setting deception.

Dave.