Should be noted that the Fed is not wildly popular these days. And LA exempliflies the neoliberal/neocon bootstrap story if spun well.
Armstrong offered $5m way back when and it was rejected. The government has deep pockets and strong investigative powers. Regardless most civil suits settle just before trial. Nothing unusual at the end of the day.Merckx index said:Mike McCann, SI's legal analyst, had a lot of articles on LA preceding and right after the Reasoned Decision. Here's his take on the settlement:
No matter the rebuttals Armstrong raised, he knew that the government usually wins its false claim cases or at least negotiates a settlement in which the defendant must pay a great deal of money. According to one recent analysis of false claim cases where the government has intervened, approximately 95% lead to a favorable judgment or settlement. These realities likely played a motivating force in Armstrong’s decision to settle in spite of his rebuttals and in spite of the fact that so few qui tam defendants possess the level of resources necessary to retain a legal team of top attorneys as Armstrong had assembled.https://www.si.com/cycling/2018/04/21/lance-armstrong-settled-us-government-lawsuitFor its part, the Justice Department also had plenty of reason to settle after six years of going after Armstrong. As explained above, the government’s case was by no means airtight, particularly in regard to proving that Armstrong harmed USPS. A de facto loss in a trial this fall would have been a setback for the federal government. After all, the government had pursued Armstrong to stress that those who do business with the federal government must fulfill the contractual obligations. Losing to Armstrong would have sent the wrong message in a high-profile trial.
Don't need it. Clinic can just make it up.thehog said:Armstrong offered $5m way back when and it was rejected. The government has deep pockets and strong investigative powers. Regardless most civil suits settle just before trial. Nothing unusual at the end of the day.Merckx index said:Mike McCann, SI's legal analyst, had a lot of articles on LA preceding and right after the Reasoned Decision. Here's his take on the settlement:
No matter the rebuttals Armstrong raised, he knew that the government usually wins its false claim cases or at least negotiates a settlement in which the defendant must pay a great deal of money. According to one recent analysis of false claim cases where the government has intervened, approximately 95% lead to a favorable judgment or settlement. These realities likely played a motivating force in Armstrong’s decision to settle in spite of his rebuttals and in spite of the fact that so few qui tam defendants possess the level of resources necessary to retain a legal team of top attorneys as Armstrong had assembled.https://www.si.com/cycling/2018/04/21/lance-armstrong-settled-us-government-lawsuitFor its part, the Justice Department also had plenty of reason to settle after six years of going after Armstrong. As explained above, the government’s case was by no means airtight, particularly in regard to proving that Armstrong harmed USPS. A de facto loss in a trial this fall would have been a setback for the federal government. After all, the government had pursued Armstrong to stress that those who do business with the federal government must fulfill the contractual obligations. Losing to Armstrong would have sent the wrong message in a high-profile trial.
Bruyneel is fighting his ten year ban and has a book on the way as does Armstrong. I think everyone is exhausted by it all, not really much more to know about what transpired unless LA/JB want to give us the truth on he UCIs collusion.
Let's play math:Benotti69 said:'End of an Error'
https://pvcycling.wordpress.com/2018/04/23/end-of-an-error-2/#comments
Seth Davidsons take on the settlement. I would say he is pretty damn close to the bone.
The $125m starting point is frequently quoted. Doesn't mean it's right, but it's generally accepted. So let's pretend. He started with $125m.If Lance started with something around $125M, and lost $100M including legal fees, it’s easy to see that the only money he has left are his two homes ($9.25M in Aspen, $7.5M in Austin), and the balance that he has stuck away in retirement accounts to insulate himself from bankruptcy should he really lose all the marbles. In fact, in his settlement agreement, he promises to make the payments within one year and to put a lien on his Austin home as collateral, guaranteeing that he will make the payments. Should the home sell before his settlement payments are made, he will collateralize his home in Aspen, again as a guarantee. I don’t think that Bill Gates would have to put a lien on his home to pay a $6M fine.
We can assume he has at least $5m.fmk_RoI said:Let's play math:Benotti69 said:'End of an Error'
https://pvcycling.wordpress.com/2018/04/23/end-of-an-error-2/#comments
Seth Davidsons take on the settlement. I would say he is pretty damn close to the bone.The $125m starting point is frequently quoted. Doesn't mean it's right, but it's generally accepted. So let's pretend. He started with $125m.If Lance started with something around $125M, and lost $100M including legal fees, it’s easy to see that the only money he has left are his two homes ($9.25M in Aspen, $7.5M in Austin), and the balance that he has stuck away in retirement accounts to insulate himself from bankruptcy should he really lose all the marbles. In fact, in his settlement agreement, he promises to make the payments within one year and to put a lien on his Austin home as collateral, guaranteeing that he will make the payments. Should the home sell before his settlement payments are made, he will collateralize his home in Aspen, again as a guarantee. I don’t think that Bill Gates would have to put a lien on his home to pay a $6M fine.
The $100m lost. There's two sources for that. The oldest is the claim that, on the day he accepted defeat, he threw away $100m in sponsorship contracts. In other words, he threw away $100m in future earnings. Not $100m of the $125m we're pretending he started with.
A second source for the $100m is LA himself, saying that over the last five years this thing has cost him $100m. What he means there, you decide. Actual cost or opportunity cost.
So, is it easy to see that the only money he has left is wrapped up in two houses? I think there is room for a difference of opinion. But it does help that, by the magic of maths, $125m minus $100m is close to the value of the two properties. The Lord works in mysterious ways. So does math.
WRT the lien and the year to pay: we're supposed to believe that this is out of the ordinary. It doesn't sound extraordinary to me. It sounds perfectly normal. But, maybe someone with some knowledge of these things would like to chime in and say how extraordinary it really is.
None of us know what sort of money LA has left. We can all think of a number, multiply it by three, subtract our age, divide it by the amount of change in our pocket and then multiply it by our height in inches. We could all be writing the Sunday Times rich list, if we wanted to. Point is, we're all going to bring our own biases to the calculation. Those of us who want LA to have suffered, we're going to come up with one figure. Those of us who want LA to still be a winner, we're going to come up with another number. Those of us who think it's possible to be rational about all this and sit somewhere in the middle, we're going to come up with another number.
But. Until someone releases the guy's tax files, none of us can have a **** clue what he's really worth. All we can do is play math.
How many of the Tailwind people worked in stocks and shares? Which one was it is supposed to have made a fortune for Verbruggen in return for the backdated prescription? Funny how those who need LA to be down to peanuts forget all about this...Scott SoCal said:Iirc, he was a pretty savvy investor when he was racing. He’s probably better now than then. Depending on his portfolio - for a guy his age - he’s likely done reasonably well.
no need.fmk_RoI said:How many of the Tailwind people worked in stocks and shares? Which one was it is supposed to have made a fortune for Verbruggen in return for the backdated prescription? Funny how those who need LA to be down to peanuts forget all about this...Scott SoCal said:Iirc, he was a pretty savvy investor when he was racing. He’s probably better now than then. Depending on his portfolio - for a guy his age - he’s likely done reasonably well.
Tailwind sorta settled already. The remains are out of jurisdiction. It’s over.Benotti69 said:Slight aside
Apparently the USPS settlement is with Armstrong only. The other defendants in the case are Johan Bruyneel and Tailwind sports.
Flat earth society better look away nowBenotti69 said:'End of an Error'
https://pvcycling.wordpress.com/2018/04/23/end-of-an-error-2/#comments
Seth Davidsons take on the settlement. I would say he is pretty damn close to the bone.
He will be clickbait for a long long time.RedheadDane said:I had hoped that the news of the settlement would have meant that we wouldn't hear anymore news about him.
Instead there's now a story on the CN front page about how Armstrong will have to go watch the Giro as a regular guy...
Over.Benotti69 said:'End of an Error'
https://pvcycling.wordpress.com/2018/04/23/end-of-an-error-2/#comments
Seth Davidsons take on the settlement. I would say he is pretty damn close to the bone.
Sounds like Tygart is offering Lance a chance at "redemption.""Tygart wants Armstrong to join him on the noble crusade to cleanse sport of doping."
Boy and I glad I registered just to read that vapid piece of nonsense. "Tygart is a righteous nemesis", "Tygart wants Armstrong to join him on the noble crusade to cleanse sport of doping", "Armstrong, the ultimate doper, could transform into Armstrong, the ultimate warrior against doping", "Tygart can offer redeeming terms. Tygart can rescue Armstrong from pariah-hood". Donnez-moi le sick bag.PPAR-delta said:Interesting article in Colorado Springs newspaper about Lance and Tygart (the head of the USADA). Sounds like they have buried the hatchet and are now buddies. Favorite quote in the articleSounds like Tygart is offering Lance a chance at "redemption.""Tygart wants Armstrong to join him on the noble crusade to cleanse sport of doping."
http://gazette.com/david-ramsey-travis-tygart-head-of-u.s.-anti-doping-in-colorado-springs-offers-lance-armstrong-chance-at-redemption/article/1624849
I've never understood why Armstrong didn't appeal the decision to CAS to get a lighter sentence. I think he would have won and possibly also kept the two Tours which were outside the statutes of limitations.fmk_RoI said:Boy and I glad I registered just to read that vapid piece of nonsense. "Tygart is a righteous nemesis", "Tygart wants Armstrong to join him on the noble crusade to cleanse sport of doping", "Armstrong, the ultimate doper, could transform into Armstrong, the ultimate warrior against doping", "Tygart can offer redeeming terms. Tygart can rescue Armstrong from pariah-hood". Donnez-moi le sick bag.PPAR-delta said:Interesting article in Colorado Springs newspaper about Lance and Tygart (the head of the USADA). Sounds like they have buried the hatchet and are now buddies. Favorite quote in the articleSounds like Tygart is offering Lance a chance at "redemption.""Tygart wants Armstrong to join him on the noble crusade to cleanse sport of doping."
http://gazette.com/david-ramsey-travis-tygart-head-of-u.s.-anti-doping-in-colorado-springs-offers-lance-armstrong-chance-at-redemption/article/1624849
The only quote of note from Tygart seems to be: "It’s never too late.”
So is Tygart inviting LA in from the cold? Or is the journalist asking Tygart whether LA can come in from the cold?
What did we actually learn? That LA's Peace and Reconciliation Tour included a 2015 meeting in Denver with Tygart and now the two text or talk "once in a while." And they've hooked up somewhere else - somewhere "in the mountains" - since. Welcome to season 94 of The Bachelor.
Arrogance?Parker said:I've never understood why Armstrong didn't appeal the decision to CAS to get a lighter sentence. I think he would have won and possibly also kept the two Tours which were outside the statutes of limitations.
Yep. Those seven MJ’s are still hanging up in his trophy room somewhere.fmk_RoI said:Arrogance?Parker said:I've never understood why Armstrong didn't appeal the decision to CAS to get a lighter sentence. I think he would have won and possibly also kept the two Tours which were outside the statutes of limitations.
Or he was still stuck at the denial stage of grief.
But I'd go with arrogance.
LA as the new Mystic Meg. Which'll come next, the newspaper column or a premium-rate phone line?70kmph said:Armstrong saying Froome ban is coming and he will lose the Giro![]()
https://www.flobikes.com/articles/6188006-lance-armstrong-believes-chris-froome-will-be-banned-after-giro-ditalia