Benotti69 said:
Will any other sponsors who have long shackled their carts to donkeys on dope join them.
Hardly any bike manufacturers will be hypocritical enough or will they?
The interesting part of the suit is that Skins are requesting 2m back due to the fact the McQuaid and Hein had misrepresented the contract that Skins signed. The contract for sponsorship was signed under the condition that doping and the sport was conducted in a fair and honest manner.
Now McQuaid (UCI) are compelled by the first letter to respond by either paying back the money or sending a response in return respectfully saying no. The interesting part is context. Its now in a "legal" context. If a letter is returned its deemed by the courts as "legal" and thus should truthful and honest. It is not a media statement.
Then Kimmidge has his own suit which also applies pressure. They have McQuaid (UCI) in the crosshairs.
As we know McQuaid knows full well of the extent of Armstrong's doping and what other teams were/are doing - he even applied pressure to certain people not to talk. If this wasn't fully represented to Skins during the contract signing then they have a right to their money back and they have a very good case. They cannot ignore the letter. McQuaid will have to state on "public record" that he was unaware of the doping.
Its a good play by Kimmidge/Skins.
UCI are caught here. I'm interested to see the UCI's next move. They have to tread very carefully.
(I say they'll pay the 2m back)