Lemond - Trek lawsuit

[filipo]

Please, filipo, people don't want the thread diverted.

Yeah -- and you don't want anyone calling you out as a liar.

 

[Race Radio]

Yeah but Armstrong made LeMond's sales go up 100%. Does LeMond really believe it would have done that without LA?

I shouldn't respond to the troll but your numbers are incorrect. Lemond bikes sold almost $10 million in 99, their highest year was $15 million. That is not 100%

 

[Race Radio]

That's pretty much what I was thinking, but who knows.

You may have missed my edit

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/m...11_lemond_open_to_trek_settlement.html?page=1

The judge made it clear today whose side is valid, and it is not Trek.

 

[350Watts]

Yeah but Armstrong made LeMond's sales go up 100%. Does LeMond really believe it would have done that without LA?

On what numbers do you base that statement? Sales had already reached over $9 million before any help from Armstrong and topped out at $15 million so on a year over year percentage basis sales actually declined once Armstrong came on board.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You may have missed my edit

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/m...11_lemond_open_to_trek_settlement.html?page=1

The judge made it clear today whose side is valid, and it is not Trek.

Sorry Race Radio - I have a question, when was the info you posted released to the public? As I noticed something in it that makes BPC/Sproket01 either well informed or psychic.

 

[thehog]

You may have missed my edit

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/m...11_lemond_open_to_trek_settlement.html?page=1

The judge made it clear today whose side is valid, and it is not Trek.

Interesting paragraph:

Trek's current position may demonstrate the high costs of doing business in a sport wracked by doping, creating a climate of suspicion and defensiveness. Last month, LeMond deposed Armstrong's ex-wife, who complied with instructions from her attorney, who also represents Armstrong, and declined to answer several questions about doping. And in 2001, the company's CEO, John Burke, appealed to LeMond to retract statements and refrain from criticizing Armstrong.

 

[350Watts]

I would be keen to read the lawsuit and Trek's response if anyone knows where they can be found.

To be clear, the link above was to the Lemond team's pleadings in opposition to Trek's request for a protective order on its Public Strategies files. It's worth pointing out, as Kennf1 did earlier in this thread, that the court ruled in favor of Trek, allowing Trek to keep its PS files secret from Lemond for the purposes of the trial.

Trek's
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2472821/Trek-Bikes-lawsuit-vs-cyclist-Greg-Lemond

Lemond's
http://www.trekbikes.com/pdf/media/en/03202008_Lemond.pdf

 

[350Watts]

Interesting paragraph:

Trek's current position may demonstrate the high costs of doing business in a sport wracked by doping, creating a climate of suspicion and defensiveness. Last month, LeMond deposed Armstrong's ex-wife, who complied with instructions from her attorney, who also represents Armstrong, and declined to answer several questions about doping. And in 2001, the company's CEO, John Burke, appealed to LeMond to retract statements and refrain from criticizing Armstrong.

She really didn't answer much of anything but if you were in her position would you?

 

[thehog]

They could have asked her the about the size and details of Lance's penis at that point and it would have been as relevant and appropriate.

That information came from the Olsens and Kate Hudson.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

That information came from the Olsens and Kate Hudson.

Hog - you owe me a new keyboard!

 

[thehog]

She really didn't answer much of anything but if you were in her position would you?

In what position?

If my husband dumped me and my two kids after I supported him for years for a rockstar then proceeded to parade my children around with her on TV I'd expose the *******!

 

[350Watts]

In what position?

If my husband dumped me and my two kids after I supported him for years for a rockstar then proceeded to parade my children around with her on TV I'd expose the *******!

The position of a mother testifying against their children's father.

 

[Race Radio]

In what position?

If my husband dumped me and my two kids after I supported him for years for a rockstar then proceeded to parade my children around with her on TV I'd expose the *******!

An $11 million divorce settlement, Armstrong's personal lawyer sitting in the room interrupting every hard question might have something to do with it.....this is also a women that said that EPO was a "Necessary Evil' of Pro cycling, no Mother Teresa.

 

[British Pro Cycling]

I shouldn't respond to the troll but your numbers are incorrect. Lemond bikes sold almost $10 million in 99, their highest year was $15 million. That is not 100%

Why are you missing out 1998 when sales were 8 million? It's the second time you've tried to spin these numbers I'm afraid. LA came along and within a couple of years sales had doubled for LeMond's bikes and stayed there until recently. So yes, LA did make them go up 100%.

 

[Race Radio]

Why are you missing out 1998 when sales were 8 million? It's the second time you've tried to spin these numbers I'm afraid. LA came along and within a couple of years sales had doubled for LeMond's bikes and stayed there until recently. So yes, LA did make them go up 100%.

It appears that someone does not understand the bike industry or math

90% of all sales to dealers happen prior to the end of July. In 1999 Lemond bikes sales were $9.5 million. I am sure we can all agree this had little to do with Armstrong. The highest number they reached was $15 million.

Not sure what short bus school you attended but that is not a 100% increase.

 

[British Pro Cycling]

It appears that someone does not understand the bike industry or math

90% of all sales to dealers happen prior to the end of July. In 1999 Lemond bikes sales were $9.5 million. I am sure we can all agree this had little to do with Armstrong. The highest number they reached was $15 million.

Not sure what short bus school you attended but that is not a 100% increase.

We only have your asserted word for that. I tend to believe the interview posted above that said it went from under 8 million in 98 to over 15 million, down to Armstrong's amazing story and popularity. I don't see why they would lie about it - unlike you, they are a neutral party. That's 100% increase.

But even if you're right, that's still a 50% increase thanks Armstrong. And that is but one of the areas where LeMond benefited financially because of the huge boost in cycling interest. His own company shot up as well.

 

[British Pro Cycling]

Sorry Race Radio - I have a question, when was the info you posted released to the public? As I noticed something in it that makes BPC/Sproket01 either well informed or psychic.

Well thank you. I suppose that's a backhanded compliment. I wonder what you are refering to?

Anyhow, given yourself and RR have dropped the claim that it was wrong for me to say LeMond would have liked to speak out against Armstrong but was stopped by Trek and their contracts, I will take it you have seen the video of LeMond admitted this and thus conceded the point.

Anyway, I'm off to bed.

 

[Race Radio]

We only have your asserted word for that. I tend to believe the interview posted above that said it went from under 8 million in 98 to over 15 million, down to Armstrong's amazing story and popularity. I don't see why they would lie about it - unlike you, they are a neutral party. That's 100% increase.

But even if you're right, that's still a 50% increase thanks Armstrong. And that is but one of the areas where LeMond benefited financially because of the huge boost in cycling interest. His own company shot up as well.

It is not my word, it is Trek's own numbers that are in the Powerpoint presentation they gave when they filed the suit they are about to settle for millions of $$$

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

You may have missed my edit...The judge made it clear today whose side is valid, and it is not Trek.

Good link. The whole thing really does look like one side having a fairly logical presentation (Lemond) and the other a lot of PR spin (Trek). I won't be surprised if Trek really ups the ante to a settlement and tries to buy their way out of this. I can't see them wanting to go to trial no matter what. Greg on the other hand, I don't know what he really wants here, other than he knows he has nothing to fear no matter what happens.

 

[Race Radio]

RR have dropped the claim that it was wrong for me to say LeMond would have liked to speak out against Armstrong but was stopped by Trek and their contracts,

No surprise, you are lying again. I never said this I think we can all agree that this only hurts peoples perception of you and increases the perception that you are mentally unstable.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Well thank you. I suppose that's a backhanded compliment. I wonder what you are refering to?

Anyhow, given yourself and RR have dropped the claim that it was wrong for me to say LeMond would have liked to speak out against Armstrong but was stopped by Trek and their contracts, I will take it you have seen the video of LeMond admitted this and thus conceded the point.

Anyway, I'm off to bed.

Actually - I am busy checking in to something - so please wait up a few minutes (I think you will be able to put in for some overtime)

 

[British Pro Cycling]

No surprise, you are lying again. I think we can all agree that this only hurts peoples perception of you and increases the perception that you are mentally unstable.

Uh oh. You called me a liar. It's very unfortunate that you would lower the thread to this level. You should get a warning for that, like I did. This is where I tend to get sucked into something I get the blame for, you know. Well not this time. This will be my last post tonight.

Look, I understand it contradicts one of your main arguments on this thread, or at least makes it look lawyeristic, so you don't like me highlighting it. You're going around saying that LeMond had not criticised Armstrong to the degree some people claim, but you omit the fact the only reason for this was because of Trek stopping him from doing so. We have LeMond on tape admitting this. This is doubtless why you and the Dr were dodging and weaving on this question. You think it hurts the credibility of LeMond's legalistic case. You're all over the place spinning.

 

[British Pro Cycling]

Actually - I am busy checking in to something - so please wait up a few minutes (I think you will be able to put in for some overtime)

Dope, can't wait. Computer is going off....need to hit the pillow. It's 4am here! I'll drop by tomorrow.

 

[Race Radio]

Uh oh. You called me a liar. It's very unfortunate that you would lower the thread to this level. You should get a warning for that, like I did. This is where I tend to get sucked into something I get the blame for, you know. Well not this time. This will be my last post tonight.

Look, I understand it contradicts one of your main arguments on this thread, or at least makes it look lawyeristic, so you don't like me highlighting it. You're going around saying that LeMond had not criticised Armstrong to the degree some people claim, but you omit the fact the only reason for this was because of Trek stopping him from doing so. We have LeMond on tape admitting this. This is doubtless why you and the Dr were dodging and weaving on this question. You think it hurts the credibility of LeMond's legalistic case. You're all over the place spinning.

I called you a liar, because you are lying again.

You are free to show us the post where I wrote what you claimed and prove me wrong.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I called you a liar, because you are lying again.

You are free to show us the post where I wrote what you claimed and prove me wrong.

Too late, he's pecked mum g'nite on the cheek and stumbled off to his basement room to sleep.