Interesting piece on Livestrong

[mewmewmew13]

Sorry guys, but that chart is perfectly accurate.
No reason to say "not drawn to scale".

You just need to think Globally. Global Awareness.
Or planetary awareness if that makes you feel better.

Planets are measured and compared by their diameter.
Scientific Fact. Newtonian. Not lies.
And Planet Yellow would dwarf Planet Black exactly as pictured.
Of course, Planet Armstrong is the biggest of them all.
Canis Majoris. Big Dog.

Armstrong's head is the biggest of them all.
Scientific Fact.

 

[Yeahright]

I wonder if there is anyone other than the same 10 posters on here who really cares about this stuff...So what so LA has a .com site that raises more money than the .org site. The .org site exists solely because of LA and who he is. Perhaps the anti LA posters could list the charitable donation amounts that other ex top cyclists make every year? Then we could maybe do some comparison analysis.

 

[Straßenrennen]

I care, although i dont post in this thread i read it often, with most charitys i expect 80% or more of my donation to actually go to frontline causes, not only 20% or less.
A charity is about helping people get the most from the donations it receives I see no clear way that livestrong achieves this. If I am wrong please correct me. Frankly if Lance cared enough, he would step back from livestrong and provide his image rights free of charge to another more successful charity. That would be real class.

 

[Benotti69]

I wonder if there is anyone other than the same 10 posters on here who really cares about this stuff...So what so LA has a .com site that raises more money than the .org site. The .org site exists solely because of LA and who he is. Perhaps the anti LA posters could list the charitable donation amounts that other ex top cyclists make every year? Then we could maybe do some comparison analysis.

How about we list how many riders have set up a charity and direct most of the traffic to the money making for themselves .com and not the 'for charity' .org all while lying about caring about cancer?

Maybe you as a Live$trong fan could provide some better details than what has been provided to the public where the money really goes?

 

[AussieGoddess]

I wonder if there is anyone other than the same 10 posters on here who really cares about this stuff...So what so LA has a .com site that raises more money than the .org site. The .org site exists solely because of LA and who he is. Perhaps the anti LA posters could list the charitable donation amounts that other ex top cyclists make every year? Then we could maybe do some comparison analysis.

I care

The difference between Lance Armstrong and others is the direction of the money flow.

Many, many cyclists donate time, effort, money and promotion to any number of charities ....... but for them, the money and promotion goes from them TO the charity, not the other way around as with Lance and Livestrong.

 

[HL2037]

I wonder if there is anyone other than the same 10 posters on here who really cares about this stuff...So what so LA has a .com site that raises more money than the .org site. The .org site exists solely because of LA and who he is. Perhaps the anti LA posters could list the charitable donation amounts that other ex top cyclists make every year? Then we could maybe do some comparison analysis.

I care. Milking a cancer charity for money is rather despicable to me.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

I wonder if there is anyone other than the same 10 posters on here who really cares about this stuff...So what so LA has a .com site that raises more money than the .org site. The .org site exists solely because of LA and who he is. Perhaps the anti LA posters could list the charitable donation amounts that other ex top cyclists make every year? Then we could maybe do some comparison analysis.

I'm convinced that anything Lance donates to the Lance Armstrong Foundation is peanuts compared the amount he earns as a result of the charity's activities. The strange thing about the livestrong.com deal between Demand Media and the LAF, is that as a result of the deal Lance himself earned nearly as much as the LAF. Think about it. The charity raises money by licencing its Livestrong brand to Demand Media, and a board director profits almost as much as the entire charity.....and none of this appears on the charity's books. Seems a bit wrong doesn't it? Wanna know how it works?

I care, although i dont post in this thread i read it often, with most charitys i expect 80% or more of my donation to actually go to frontline causes, not only 20% or less.
A charity is about helping people get the most from the donations it receives I see no clear way that livestrong achieves this. If I am wrong please correct me. Frankly if Lance cared enough, he would step back from livestrong and provide his image rights free of charge to another more successful charity. That would be real class.

This. Anyone who claims whopping endorsement fees while presenting himself to the unsuspecting masses as some kind of philanthropic hero disgusts me. LAF's odd expenditure and opaque reporting of program expenses vs overheads just adds insult to injury; I hope the media keeps digging.

 

[Race Radio]

I wonder if there is anyone other than the same 10 posters on here who really cares about this stuff...So what so LA has a .com site that raises more money than the .org site. The .org site exists solely because of LA and who he is. Perhaps the anti LA posters could list the charitable donation amounts that other ex top cyclists make every year? Then we could maybe do some comparison analysis.

If only 10 people care why did a magazine like Outside have a 8 page story with a front page headline? Was this done for the 10 people that will read it?

Livestrong hopes people will not care, or notice, that their donations go to shipping t-shirts and not cancer research..... Problem is they do. Maybe you are on to something here. I doubt any other Pro Cyclist spends $3.5 million per year to ship t-shirts. Doubt any of them have the balls to call this a program expense

 

[mewmewmew13]

If only 10 people care why did a magazine like Outside have a 8 page story with a front page headline? Was this done for the 10 people that will read it?

Livestrong hopes people will not care, or notice, that their donations go to shipping t-shirts and not cancer research..... Problem is they do. Maybe you are on to something here. I doubt any other Pro Cyclist spends $3.5 million per year to ship t-shirts. Doubt any of them have the balls to call this a program expense

+1
Also, I think a lot of other pro cyclists are involved in charities. Most don't feel the compulsion to scream about their good will and philanthropy.

 

[Velodude]

I'm convinced that anything Lance donates to the Lance Armstrong Foundation is peanuts compared the amount he earns as a result of the charity's activities. The strange thing about the livestrong.com deal between Demand Media and the LAF, is that as a result of the deal Lance himself earned nearly as much as the LAF. Think about it. The charity raises money by licencing its Livestrong brand to Demand Media, and a board director profits almost as much as the entire charity.....and none of this appears on the charity's books. Seems a bit wrong doesn't it? Wanna know how it works?



This. Anyone who claims whopping endorsement fees while presenting himself to the unsuspecting masses as some kind of philanthropic hero disgusts me. LAF's odd expenditure and opaque reporting of program expenses vs overheads just adds insult to injury; I hope the media keeps digging.

The intense media scrutiny over the Demand Media deal with Livestrong/Armstrong has caused Armstrong to act like a little kid being caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

"Put those cookies back!"

With head bowed the usually recalcitrant Armstrong is returning his multi million dollar profits out of the deal as donations to the Foundation. But one doubts that this act of contrition will save him from the ire of the IRS. Individuals, particularly decision makers, cannot benefit out of a tax exempt charity.

The initial transaction is evidence that the system of governance, that is required to be in place by the IRS, was not being observed and Armstrong was running the Foundation as his personal fiefdom.

Next project the Tour Down Under fees of $2-3m that Armstrong promised to the Foundation but he pocketed.

 

[cathulu]

I also care... I give my head a shake every time I see Liestrong merchandise.

 

[thehog]

The intense media scrutiny over the Demand Media deal with Livestrong/Armstrong has caused Armstrong to act like a little kid being caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

"Put those cookies back!"

With head bowed the usually recalcitrant Armstrong is returning his multi million dollar profits out of the deal as donations to the Foundation. But one doubts that this act of contrition will save him from the ire of the IRS. Individuals, particularly decision makers, cannot benefit out of a tax exempt charity.

The initial transaction is evidence that the system of governance, that is required to be in place by the IRS, was not being observed and Armstrong was running the Foundation as his personal fiefdom.

Next project the Tour Down Under fees of $2-3m that Armstrong promised to the Foundation but he pocketed.

Don't forget the Flinders Research center which he "donated" - sorry - I mean paid a fee for him to "lend" Livestrong to the naming rights of the center.

Such generosity! http://blogs.crikey.com.au/northern...-pay-lance-armstrong-for-use-of-his-trademark.

He fleased those Aussies good a proper!

Along with Demand Media paying naming rights to Livestrong.com with shared from LAF.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365038/000104746911000109/a2201506zs-1a.htm

 

[Race Radio]

I also care... I give my head a shake every time I see Liestrong merchandise.

That is not merchandise, that is awareness raising product.

 

[Digger]

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoo...nce-armstrong/Its-Not-About-the-Lab-Rats.html

 

[AussieGoddess]

interesting article.

Focuses a lot of attention on the financials and where the money goes which I think is interesting - and Livestrong doesnt come off that well for that.

Says an awful lot about the cross-promotion and blurry lines between Livestrong and Lance ....

but falls short in a few ways.

I have always believed that Lance stopped short of actual fraud in terms of his charity, and this article seems to confirm that. Just that the funds raised are spent to promote Lance, and to raise speaking and appearance fees for Lance.

 

[Epicycle]

The author would have done a lot better pointing out the garbage articles on Livestrong.com with examples like these:

ERGOGENIC BENEFITS OF HGH

BODYBUILDING HORMONE SUPPLEMENTS

THE EFFECTS OF PERFORMANCE ENHANCING DRUGS

 

[Cloxxki]

I like the article, although I'm not quite through it yet.

I wonder whether those big appearance fees, considered charitable donations by those writing the checks, were subsequently filed as tax deductions, while Lance considered it personal income.
Then Lance's financiers might be formally guilty of tax fraud, even if they were unaware of this.
I realize, Lance is global, his national IRS may not have jurisdiction over all his operations of both end of the money trail.

 

[Stingray34]

Ya, hard to say if fraud has occured at Livestrong, but if Gifford is right about anything, it's the conjunction of the foundation and the man himself. If and when Armstrong is indicted and falls, so will the LAF. If he's indicted this year, I'll give the LAF another two years.

Lance and Livestrong: it's sort of like a reverse Harry Potter-Voldemort kinda thing...

 

[Cloxxki]

Ya, hard to say if fraud has occured at Livestrong, but if Gifford is right about anything, it's the conjunction of the foundation and the man himself. If and when Armstrong is indicted and falls, so will the LAF. If he's indicted this year, I'll give the LAF another two years.

Lance and Livestrong: it's sort of like a reverse Harry Potter-Voldemort kinda thing...

With a substantial (lion share) of income collected fromcorporations, the dive could prove pretty steep.
Seems that although many volunteers are blind fanboys, they are not the ones caughing up the budget. They may actually be large Demand Media customers

I myself almost fell for this, and chance (it seemed like bad luck upon bad luck at the time) kept me out of the deathtrap. I could have been running an operation funneling 7-figure amounts to Armstrong and/or Demand, had I pressed through and been "successful". And doing it all for free, too. We too, of course, were looking for the LiveStrong angle to promote a for-profit start-up brand. It all seemed like a great idea at the time, but I am now infinitely grateful we never got our presentation and product ready to wow Lance with. Money and success are not everything, at least for us.

 

[Benotti69]

interesting article.

Focuses a lot of attention on the financials and where the money goes which I think is interesting - and Livestrong doesnt come off that well for that.

Says an awful lot about the cross-promotion and blurry lines between Livestrong and Lance ....

but falls short in a few ways.

I have always believed that Lance stopped short of actual fraud in terms of his charity, and this article seems to confirm that. Just that the funds raised are spent to promote Lance, and to raise speaking and appearance fees for Lance.

Which is not Cancer Awareness, that is Armstrong Awareness, which is fraud.

 

[Anonymous]

Pelkey responds to his inclusion in the article..
http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2012/charles-pelkey-responds-outside

 

[Race Radio]

Pelkey responds to his inclusion in the article..
http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2012/charles-pelkey-responds-outside

Charles Pelkey's response

I got more support from NYVeloCity and its readers than from anywhere else

 

[Cloxxki]

Pelkey responds to his inclusion in the article..
http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2012/charles-pelkey-responds-outside

Without a hint of sarcasm, I'd like to state I read that as very classy indeed. Props.

 

[Cobblestoned]

Pelkey responds to his inclusion in the article..
http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2012/charles-pelkey-responds-outside

"I got more support from NYVeloCity and its readers than from anywhere else."

Oh really ? Who would have thought ?

Do not consider yourself as fooled, but tooled.
bah, bah, bahhhh is all that comes to my mind when thinking about that disgusting approach.
Those are just the ghosts that you have called by your genius wristband comment. They give a sh** about you, one could think. Noble and fine people those guys from the hater-crews really are.

That approach reminds me of noble countries "helping" African countrys, to secure resources.

Of course I got it all wrong.

 

[Cloxxki]

"I got more support from NYVeloCity and its readers than from anywhere else."

Oh really ? Who would have thought ?

Do not consider yourself as fooled, but tooled.
bah, bah, bahhhh is all that comes to my mind when thinking about that disgusting approach.
Those are just the ghosts that you have called by your genius wristband comment. They give a sh** about you, one could think. Noble and fine people those guys from the hater-crews really are.

That approach reminds me of noble countries "helping" African countrys, to secure resources.

Of course I got it all wrong.

Are you confusing LS's unpaid employees for outside haters? Surely there are more anonimous fanboys sending out cancer flavored hate then there are LS employees? I bet most volunteers are well-meaning people. A touch naieve, but ready to do good work at no pay. More of those work at other cancer charities, obviously, but still. Good people.
Not so sure about a 6-figure CEO and other well-paid insiders, though. Working for a possibly evil government vs. working for a questioned athlete and filantropisch, very possibly a similar thing.