Lemond/Trek new thread

[Race Radio]

If anyone wants to know the power behind mobilization of the Armstrong fan base just talk to Bill Mitchell, founder of Cyclingnews.com.

Bill made the mistake of reporting that several European newspapers were questioning Armstrong's sudden climbing ability in the 99 Tour. Armstrong does not like anybody questioning the myth and posted Bill's contact info and that of his employer on his website. Bill was soon bombarded with harassing phone calls and emails. His employer, the University of Newcastle, received similar notes demanding that Bill be fired. It eventually became too much and he had to sell his labor of love to Knapp Communications in order to escape the abuse. Certainly this loss was made even worse when Knapp sold Cyclingnews for $5,000,000 7 years later.

 

[BroDeal]

No - the squabbling frustrates me probably as much as it frustrates you.

I enjoy good debate - and in particular an informed one.
BPC often posts 'irrelevant and off-topic' pieces, which is trolling. That 'hook' can be easily avoided.
However when they post inaccurate or unfounded comments then I believe it is necessary to point out those inaccuracies - as often on online forums uncontested mistaken information is taken as fact.

The problem - I believe - is not the obvious 'trolling' it is the concerted effort to misrepresent the facts.

If the CN forum is to be taken as a serious place to discuss all matters cycling related - and I believe it does - then I do not see why unsubstantiated claims should go uncontested.

I radically reduced my posting and stopped putting much effort on my posts that I do make because I know posts will be buried under an avalanche of crap that is not worth reading. 95% of that crap comes from Sprocket/BPC.

 

[Race Radio]

Hey, what's up?

You and I see this the same way.

I think the only question on this issue is how Armstrong is going to minimize the damage. I really believe there is a fair chance this could be his downfall.

I think that Armstrong will do what he always does, settle. He and Trek have put themselves into a no win situation.

 

[ChrisE]

I think that Armstrong will do what he always does, settle. He and Trek have put themselves into a no win situation.

I think he will settle too. All this talk about GL wanting blood will turn to green soon enough.

 

[Race Radio]

You were the 5th post in this thread. None of the previous 4 said anything about you. You jumped in so now you are fair game. Sorry but those seem to be the rules, but I may be trolling here since you are one of the good guys.

Why don't you explain your unique ability to pop up on obscure forums thoughout the internet when things "concern" you. You sure do surf alot, and have good luck.

As you know other posters are not "Fair game". Ideally we are here to discuss the sport and all its various issue, not to attack other posters.

 

[Galic Ho]

Political rally anyone? Is there were a donation to a putative "cancer" charity should be spent?

NNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!

Those B@STARDS have converted Peter Petrelli!

The world is doomed! This can't be happening can it? It is a sad, sad day.

 

[BroDeal]

Very common in the Hotel and restaurant business as well.
http://current.newsweek.com/budgettravel/2009/06/tripadvisor_tries_to_respond_t.html

I suspect that astroturfing goes on a lot more than people suspect.

Message boards and such are often dominated by a very small number of posters. Influencing the content and tone of a debate would not require many resources for many small subjects like cycling.

 

[buckwheat]

I think that Armstrong will do what he always does, settle. He and Trek have put themselves into a no win situation.

If part of the terms of any settlement are that LeMond can't discuss the case, I don't believe there is any chance he will settle.

I think he's out for blood here.

 

[buckwheat]

I think he will settle too. All this talk about GL wanting blood will turn to green soon enough.

No, there is no way LeMond's settling. You may be projecting onto him, but the guy has gone through too much to have his silence purchased at this point.

I don't believe you have a clue as to what makes some of these guys tick. This thing is about annihilation now.

This is about LeMond stepping on their throats.

 

[Greg Johnson]

If part of the terms of any settlement are that LeMond can't discuss the case, I don't believe there is any chance he will settle.

Hard to imagine an out of court settlement in any circumstances which doesn't include such a clause.

Cheers
Greg Johnson

 

[buckwheat]

As you know other posters are not "Fair game". Ideally we are here to discuss the sport and all its various issue, not to attack other posters.

That's really a great point and gets to the heart of the issue. There are a lot of LA defenders with an agenda here and only GOD knows why.

The truth in this matter and all matters concerning Armstrong is fairly obvious. To put it bluntly, he's an abominable human being.

There are two reasons people defend Armstrong. The first is that they aren't informed. I'm not going to discuss the most likely second reason.

 

[buckwheat]

Hard to imagine an out of court settlement in any circumstances which doesn't include such a clause.

Cheers
Greg Johnson

Exactly which is the reason Greg won't settle.

He likes talking as much as he likes breathing.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

No, there is no way LeMond's settling. You may be projecting onto him, but the guy has gone through too much to have his silence purchased at this point.

I don't believe you have a clue as to what makes some of these guys tick. This thing is about annihilation now.

This is about LeMond stepping on their throats.

Well Lemonds own lawyer has said "We're certainly not averse to settling it".

While I think his case against Trek is strong he is well within his rights to want to put this behind him, move on with his life and have the shadow of Trek or Lance removed.

 

[pedaling squares]

If anyone wants to know the power behind mobilization of the Armstrong fan base just talk to Bill Mitchell, founder of Cyclingnews.com.

Bill made the mistake of reporting that several European newspapers were questioning Armstrong's sudden climbing ability in the 99 Tour. Armstrong does not like anybody questioning the myth and posted Bill's contact info and that of his employer on his website. Bill was soon bombarded with harassing phone calls and emails. His employer, the University of Newcastle, received similar notes demanding that Bill be fired. It eventually became too much and he had to sell his labor of love to Knapp Communications in order to escape the abuse. Certainly this loss was made even worse when Knapp sold Cyclingnews for $5,000,000 7 years later.

An example of Armstrong's vindictiveness is his public response to the rude, but private, emails he received from Andrew Hogg after Armstrong's email address was revealed on Twitter. He released a video to the public reading these emails, which is fine, and reading out Hogg's email address twice, which is not. The intent is pretty obvious, he ensures that his viewers know that Hogg is spelled with two g's. Why would he do that if not to motivate his fans to send Hogg messages? Video is here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-nwp1qk1Lg

A journalist tried to contact Hogg thereafter, but his email account was apparently closed. http://www.slate.com/id/2222407/pagenum/all/

My point is that Lance Armstrong can hardly claim that he would not have participated in a smear campaign several years ago when in 2009 he very publicly rallied his supporters against a man who had made no public critique of him.

 

[Race Radio]

Hard to imagine an out of court settlement in any circumstances which doesn't include such a clause.

Cheers
Greg Johnson

Like the SCA case. None of that ever was made public.....oh, wait. Maybe not a good example.

As Google likes to say, Information wants to be free

 

[Kennf1]

Well Lemonds own lawyer has said "We're certainly not averse to settling it".

While I think his case against Trek is strong he is well within his rights to want to put this behind him, move on with his life and have the shadow of Trek or Lance removed.

Agreed. And I think an adverse jury verdict would be devastating to him. That's a lot of mental wear and tear through the next five months.

To me, the biggest disappointment in the case has been the door slamming shut on the inner workings of Public Strategies.

 

[BroDeal]

No, there is no way LeMond's settling. You may be projecting onto him, but the guy has gone through too much to have his silence purchased at this point.

I don't believe you have a clue as to what makes some of these guys tick. This thing is about annihilation now.

This is about LeMond stepping on their throats.

I think he will settle because pretty much everyone does when push comes to shove. The risks to Lemond are substantial. Aside from what he has already spent, he will have to pay for his new legal team to come up to speed on top of continuing the case. If he made $5M from his deal with Trek then he is looking at risking a large percentage of that on legal costs. Lemond has done some things that do not put him in a good light. The taping incidents, although understandable, are sordid. Maybe he feels that his reputation has been so trashed by Armstrong and his PR effort that he has nothing lose but there are stories about Lemond...

 

[Polish]

stupid is as stupid does

So the only time something is morally or ethically justifiable is if it's meant to help the homeless or those with cancer? That's a really stupid statement.

Who said anything about those being the ONLY somethings?

And you forgot about the-soon-to-be-laid-off bicycle factory workers too

 

[buckwheat]

Well Lemonds own lawyer has said "We're certainly not averse to settling it".

While I think his case against Trek is strong he is well within his rights to want to put this behind him, move on with his life and have the shadow of Trek or Lance removed.

I think his lawyer has to say that.

I agree with you that he's well within his rights to settle it, unfortunately for him, he'll never be able to put it behind him unless Armstrong is very publicly brought down in the manner of a Clemens, McGwire, Bonds, or Jones.

How does LeMond put a price on his reputation which has suffered irreparably?

 

[scribe]

Well Lemonds own lawyer has said "We're certainly not averse to settling it".

While I think his case against Trek is strong he is well within his rights to want to put this behind him, move on with his life and have the shadow of Trek or Lance removed.

Didn't Trek give him the opportunity to move on twice via moving his brand to another company?

 

[scribe]

I think he will settle because pretty much everyone does when push comes to shove. The risks to Lemond are substantial. Aside from what he has already spent, he will have to pay for his new legal team to come up to speed on top of continuing the case. If he made $5M from his deal with Trek then he is looking at risking a large percentage of that on legal costs. Lemond has done some things that do not put him in a good light. The taping incidents, although understandable, are sordid. Maybe he feels that his reputation has been so trashed by Armstrong and his PR effort that he has nothing lose but there are stories about Lemond...

I don't know. Doc has said in the first closed thread that GL is worth about $100m, so money is not really a problem. While reading his complaint vs Trek I was struck by the amount of detail they put forth regarding LA's suspicion with doping. I don't think settlement is the goal with this complaint.

 

[Kennf1]

Didn't Trek give him the opportunity to move on twice via moving his brand to another company?

I'm pretty sure they didn't offer him millions to end the contract, which is the only way your comment would be relevant. Trek may have offered a mutual walk-away, but that is not what Lemond's lawsuit seeks (although it may be Trek's ultimate goal).

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Didn't Trek give him the opportunity to move on twice via moving his brand to another company?

Yes - but Trek and in particular Lance would still have had the resources to make any move difficult or unviable for any interested party.

With a settlement in the case we can assume that any deal will include a provision that Trek & LA -through Public Strategies - will not leak information or continue any campaign against Lemond.
That is a massive difference from what Trek was trying to do in accommodating Lemond to move.

 

[scribe]

I'm pretty sure they didn't offer him millions to end the contract, which is the only way your comment would be relevant. Trek may have offered a mutual walk-away, but that is not what Lemond's lawsuit seeks (although it may be Trek's ultimate goal).

Trek's complaint asserted that they offered LeMond an 'out' of their agreement on more than one occasion, but LeMond insisted on remaining in contract with full force.

 

[Kennf1]

Trek's complaint asserted that they offered LeMond an 'out' of their agreement on more than one occasion, but LeMond insisted on remaining in contract with full force.

Correct. Your point?