Lemond - Trek lawsuit

[Anonymous]

dont know, Michelle Malkin is pretty hot.

When are you guys gonna start bagging on Sarah Palin?

 

[gregod]

just a thought...

compare the prominence of bontrager within the trek line-up to the fate of the lemond brand.

it seems that if trek really wanted to, they could have done more to create a niche for the lemond brand if they wanted to-maybe cyclocross.

 

[Hugh Januss]

When are you guys gonna start bagging on Sarah Palin?

That is off topic of the off topic, she doesn't look like a man. She looks like the oldest waitress at Hooters.
Edit: should have said "looks and talks"

 

[gregod]

When are you guys gonna start bagging on Sarah Palin?

how about now? when she opens her mouth she shows that she is factually challenged. is this a consequence of her being intellectually challenged?

ask and ye shall receive...

 

[Hugh Januss]

how about now? when she opens her mouth she shows that she is factually challenged. is this a consequence of her being intellectually challenged?

ask and ye shall receive...

Ha, beat ya to it!

 

[Race Radio]

When are you guys gonna start bagging on Sarah Palin?

I love the "$lutty Airline Stewardess" Look. I would hit it.

 

[gregod]

Ha, beat ya to it!

drat... foiled again...

 

[BroDeal]

When are you guys gonna start bagging on Sarah Palin?

Don't have to. The mere mention of her name is enough to elicit howls of laughter from all thinking people.

 

[gregod]

Don't have to. The mere mention of her name is enough to elicit howls of laughter from all thinking people.

+1

Touche'

it looks like scott (inadvertently?) hijacked the thread...

 

[BroDeal]

do any of you have any experience with an exclusive trek dealer? in my town, we have a dealer that only sells trek and its associated brands. for years, i have wondered why lemond bikes were sort of treated as an afterthought. they were not prominently displayed and were often discounted. there may be a logical market-based reason, but at the retail level, where i live, i felt the lemond brand was not given much support.

Trek was caught in a conflict of interest that is common for deals like this. They had a responsibility to make a reasonable attempt to market Lemond's bikes but at the same time they would rather build the Trek brand. These sorts of lawsuits are common in situations like this. Lemond may very well have had a case even if he had never said a thing about Armstrong.

 

[gregod]

Trek was caught in a conflict of interest that is common for deals like this. They had a responsibility to make a reasonable attempt to market Lemond's bikes but at the same time they would rather build the Trek brand. These sorts of lawsuits are common in situations like this. Lemond may very well have had a case even if he had never said a thing about Armstrong.

isn't that what the lawsuit about? i thought the stuff about armstrong was just trek's excuse for not keeping up their end of the deal.

 

[Galic Ho]

I'm not saying that the ad dollars will influence the case just the coverage. Sure we get Lemond's side but right along with it we get the media spin from his PR hacks, Greg is nuts, he's sue happy, he hates Armstrong because he won the tour more times. That is the crap that the average person believes, and even a number of below average people on here. Betsy has already told what she knows in court, Ashenden has already gone on record with what he knows, when all is said and done it will be pushed into the back ground again. Like it was in the past, and the spin machine of Armstrong will go on making Lemond out to be the jealous whinney beotch of the whole situation.

All those testimonies you mentioned brought no bearing or weight on the final judicial decision at the time. The judge has warned in this case that they may well count this time because Trek's defense relies heavily on the concept that Lemond was too vocal on doping issues. If a doping matter plays a part in the final ruling (a favourable one for the Lemonds) he will have a solid grounding to refute any claims of prejudice and anti-Armstrong sentiment on his behalf. This has never happened to Lance before, a court ruling supporting the concept of his fraudulent behaviour in character and chemical forms. We've all heard the stories, the court cases and the Vrijman Report. Nothing concrete. This case could set that precedent and then the authorities would have to investigate or risk massive fallout. As I said, Lance has a lot to loose. Greg as you pointed out only looks at worst, like a nutter to those lacking knowledge and background information. Lance could find himself up $h!t creek without a paddle. He will do everything he can to not appear in court, as he has done in the past.

 

[blackcat]

I love the "$lutty Airline Stewardess" Look. I would hit it.

I reckon Scott Palin looks like he is out of a "male on male" feature. Got the haircut, and the facial hair sometimes I think.

 

[Hugh Januss]

All those testimonies you mentioned brought no bearing or weight on the final judicial decision at the time. The judge has warned in this case that they may well count this time because Trek's defense relies heavily on the concept that Lemond was too vocal on doping issues. If a doping matter plays a part in the final ruling (a favourable one for the Lemonds) he will have a solid grounding to refute any claims of prejudice and anti-Armstrong sentiment on his behalf. This has never happened to Lance before, a court ruling supporting the concept of his fraudulent behaviour in character and chemical forms. We've all heard the stories, the court cases and the Vrijman Report. Nothing concrete. This case could set that precedent and then the authorities would have to investigate or risk massive fallout. As I said, Lance has a lot to loose. Greg as you pointed out only looks at worst, like a nutter to those lacking knowledge and background information. Lance could find himself up $h!t creek without a paddle. He will do everything he can to not appear in court, as he has done in the past.

I have a feeling that LA might own a much bigger chunk of Trek when this is over. An amount equivilent to however many millions he has to lend Trek to pay off Lemond, if Greg agrees to settle.
What you say makes a lot of sense. I don't know if Lemond agrees to settle at this point, he may just want to go for it. This could be, as they say, a $hit storm of epic proportion.

 

[BroDeal]

I have a feeling that LA might own a much bigger chunk of Trek when this is over. An amount equivilent to however many millions he has to lend Trek to pay off Lemond, if Greg agrees to settle.
What you say makes a lot of sense. I don't know if Lemond agrees to settle at this point, he may just want to go for it. This could be, as they say, a $hit storm of epic proportion.

Lemond will take the money. Everyone does in the end. The Montana resort went bankrupt before they could complete his $39.5M settlement, and the resort is trying recoup the money already paid. A $10 - 20M offer will be hard to turn down.

The closer the case gets to trial and the more speculation appears in the press, the more money Trek will be willing to pay to stop the bleeding. Articles appearing in mainstream magazines like Men's Journal will exert a lot of pressure on Trek.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I too think that's possible, but only if Greg feels he signs something that doesn't bind him in any way to not speak out, and he can somehow counter, or at least alter, the Trek PR spin machine who will rejoice any settlement, no matter how bad, as a victory for Trek, in volumes of press reports and such.

 

[blackcat]

not really turned out the way Public Strategies enivisioned? Do they have a success fee?

Tags
banprocycling=sproket01, bpc loves meth, guilder = tarnished metal, hard to sleep on meth, i gave sprocket a blowjob, i see trolls, la/gl-separated at birth?, lance in my pants, lemond, lets wish bad aids on bpc, my ego loves tags, race radio for president, race radio has aids, sock it to sprocket, sockpuppet tag-fest, sprocket = unbiased, sprocket being a genius, sprocket sucks la's côck, sprocket/bp speaks for me, sprocket=truth, stop censoring sprocket, tag-you're it

 

[Hugh Januss]

I too think that's possible, but only if Greg feels he signs something that doesn't bind him in any way to not speak out, and he can somehow counter, or at least alter, the Trek PR spin machine who will rejoice any settlement, no matter how bad, as a victory for Trek, in volumes of press reports and such.

If Trek pays to end this business dispute do they have any right to stipulate that Lemond can't voice his opinions about a fellow pro racer, or do they only have the right to insist that he not talk about the terms of the settlement and the facts of the case. If Armstrong hasn't been called to testify then how involved is he at this point, or can Trek include in the settlement that Greg is not allowed to even discuss the weather in Madison in the future.

 

[poupou]

if Greg wanted to go to trial, is it possible for Trek to play guilty and accept all requests of Greg's side therefore avoiding Lance's testimony?

 

[ggusta]

Way to Stay Classy.

 

[350Watts]

I have a feeling that LA might own a much bigger chunk of Trek when this is over. An amount equivilent to however many millions he has to lend Trek to pay off Lemond, if Greg agrees to settle.
What you say makes a lot of sense. I don't know if Lemond agrees to settle at this point, he may just want to go for it. This could be, as they say, a $hit storm of epic proportion.

Maybe if it goes to trial and Trek loses badly and all the dirty laundry is aired we'll see them in court versus Armstrong shortly thereafter. That would be ironic.

 

[podilato]

I think Greg is really determined to get some of the Lance BS heard in a court of law. Even if a lot of the LA spin is shown up for what it is then he has won.
In a lot of court cases that involve corporations, even when they lose they say they won.

For example, in the famous McLibel case in the UK, two people representing themselves had 3 of the 5 legal accusations of McDonald's dismissed in their favor. After the case McDonald's still claimed victory.

 

[HoustonHammer]

Lemond will take the money. Everyone does in the end. The Montana resort went bankrupt before they could complete his $39.5M settlement, and the resort is trying recoup the money already paid. A $10 - 20M offer will be hard to turn down.

The closer the case gets to trial and the more speculation appears in the press, the more money Trek will be willing to pay to stop the bleeding. Articles appearing in mainstream magazines like Men's Journal will exert a lot of pressure on Trek.

This range of settlement has been thrown out here in a few posts. Did that amount appear in the press somewhere? Looking at the sums involved in the underlying contract, that appears to be a big number. It doesn't appear in the lawsuit, but does anybody know if the Lemond side have given any estimates anywhere of what their actual damages might be? Remember that the damages alleged by the two sides are not symmetrical: Lemond alleges that Trek damaged the Lemond brand, but Trek alleges that Lemond damaged both the Lemond brand and the Trek brand (which has a demonstrably greater value).

Clearly, Trek would like to keep this whole thing as quiet as possible from a business standpoint, but I don't see much foundation for the apparent consensus here that they are in a weak legal position. The judge's question about 'if LA tested positive would Trek still have a case' is a brilliant one, and it goes right to the heart of the case. Obviously, Trek will say, 'yes'. But as the judge may have surmised in formulating the question, if a jury can be convinced of that, and it does seem at least plausible when you look at their actual claim, then they will have won the lawsuit, and the doping issue becomes moot.

In this scenario, it comes down to a complicated argument on the Lemond side about whether or not Trek tried hard enough to promote the Lemond brand, which will I suppose involve a very technical side-argument over what 'best efforts' means in Wisconsin law, and an argument on the Trek side over whether Greg's behavior hurt sales of Lemond and Trek. Trek might be inclined to settle rather than roll the dice, but as has been said repeatedly here, if Greg's object is air his information about Lance's doping and other dirty tricks, he will not settle.

 

[Anonymous]

I was talking with one of my sock puppet friends this evening, and we were discussing how you are holding your own in this thread. I admire that. Alot of the stuff you have posted has only been refuted with name calling.

But, you seem to be a very confused individual. If you can watch all of that in one setting then I suggest therapy.

That isn't "holding your own" it is Trollkraft 101: Never give credence to the challenges made to your statements, and you will frustrate and continue the stream of comments aimed at your postulations.

Seriously, it is almost as if you guys see what is going on, but somehow think that bombarding it with comments will change it. He is mentally ill. No sane person goes to the lengths he does for a cause such as this. It isn't like he is trying to cure cancer. This guy couldn't care less about Armstrong or anything that surrounds him. He just wants to garner response to fulfill his sick need to frustrate people (allows him to feel superior to all of the fools who fall into his game), and need for attention. Without response, he dies on the vine, and for some reason too many of you will just not accept this fact. You make his game possible. You cannot really blame him for doing this because you play just as much a part of it as does he. The only difference is that he is holding your strings. If being a puppet to someone is your thing, then keep at it.

 

[BroDeal]

This range of settlement has been thrown out here in a few posts. Did that amount appear in the press somewhere? Looking at the sums involved in the underlying contract, that appears to be a big number. It doesn't appear in the lawsuit, but does anybody know if the Lemond side have given any estimates anywhere of what their actual damages might be? Remember that the damages alleged by the two sides are not symmetrical: Lemond alleges that Trek damaged the Lemond brand, but Trek alleges that Lemond damaged both the Lemond brand and the Trek brand (which has a demonstrably greater value).

I think I would start with the $5M that was generated for Lemond from the deal. If Trek did not do a reasonable job of promoting the brand then the brand should have generated more than $5M. The brand is now worthless and generates zero dollars. It would take significant resources to restart production, distribution, and marketing of a new Lemond brand. The damage done by Armstrong's smear campaign may make that a practical impossibility. So you could take the what the brand may have generated in the future and discount it back to the present. This could easily be $5 - 10M.

Lemond is claiming that the smear campaign affected his other ventures. No idea what the damages to value of those businesses are, but it is probably a small fraction of the $5M generated by his bike brand.

If Trek wants to make the case disappear then offering a reasonable estimate of what Lemond thinks he has lost would be a starting point. Add an additional sum to make the offer attractive enough that Lemond will let the issue die. In Lemond's case, that additional sum may have to be fairly substantial compared to the damages.