Official Lance Armstrong Thread **READ POST #1 BEFORE POSTING**

[Louison]

Analyze the criteria on which all nominees are judged.

The first criteria - "the popularity and viewing audience of their sports" - was never a game winner in the US for cycling. No movement for or against LA

The second - "endorsement earnings" - is a shoe-in for Armstrong as all his sponsors have stuck by him and he runs at circa $20m pa, substantially more than most others on the list.

The third - "their reach on social media" - as of today LA has 3,236,047 followers on Twitter (plus 22,000 + for Juan Pelota). This makes him the first sportsman on the Twitter list at #100 preceded only by popstars, TV/moviestars, reality stars, news bureaus & a US President. He has, like this forum, numerous forums specifically and vigorously debating his triumphs and flaws.

Armstrong fails in the next segment which is a measure of his endorsement potential - "name and face awareness, appeal, influence, and trustworthiness, were also included to measure athletes’ endorsement potential".

Armstrong has lost potential for new endorsements. He is fortunate the old brigade has stuck by him but there will be no new blood.

Yes and that makes the point I was making...very few retired athletes maintain or increase their endorsement potential. Sports fans are a fickle bunch.

Four words; "reach on social media". A retired Lance Armstrong found it neccessary to have a lackey tweet on his behalf 24/7, making him the number one twit. This only changed when the average person new what a real twit, not the tweeting kind, he really is. Has nothing to do with his active status. Has everything to do with his a**hole status.

I knew when I posted something that spoke about a basic concept of sport business I would get a response like this. Are you guys completely incapable of leaving out your personal dislike for Armstrong when it comes to discussing things like this?

 

[thehog]

Yes and that makes the point I was making...very few retired athletes maintain or increase their endorsement potential. Sports fans are a fickle bunch.




I knew when I posted something that spoke about a basic concept of sport business I would get a response like this. Are you guys completely incapable of leaving out your personal dislike for Armstrong when it comes to discussing things like this?

But is he not raising awareness & refusing to let anything distract him from the "fight" against cancer? Raising awareness by hiding?

So he goes and drops off the list......

Do you think if Floyd hadn't come out with his revelations tat Armstrong would be hiding away?

Methinks not...

He has officially become irrelevant.

 

[Louison]

But is he not raising awareness & refusing to let anything distract him from the "fight" against cancer? Raising awareness by hiding?

So he goes and drops off the list......

Do you think if Floyd hadn't come out with his revelations tat Armstrong would be hiding away?

Methinks not...

He has officially become irrelevant.

You clearly do not understand how endorsements and athletes work. You do not hire ex-athletes to do endorsements unless you are doing a specific campaign using ex-athletes (like the old beer commercials) or your product is something directly to do with that athlete.

If he is hiding away then why do we constantly hear about his tweets and the sporting events he is competing in? That is not hiding in any sense of the word.

If he is irrelevant then why do you and your buddies constantly talk about him? This thread is over 1000 pages. You guys attack and insult anyone who does not agree with everything you say in threads about Armstrong but don't do that in other doping threads. It sure doesn't sound like he is irrelevant...at least in the minds of you and your buddies.

 

[The Plediadian]

But is he not raising awareness & refusing to let anything distract him from the "fight" against cancer? Raising awareness by hiding?

So he goes and drops off the list......

Do you think if Floyd hadn't come out with his revelations tat Armstrong would be hiding away?

Methinks not...

He has officially become irrelevant.

Who speaks of Armstrong in the Lance thread more than anyone? Who is second, third, or fourth are they irrelevant also?

 

[Race Radio]

at least it will make it easier for Michalob when they dump him in a few months

selling the jet, selling the house, legal bills, Wonderboy's life not so wonderfull

 

[Velodude]

Yes and that makes the point I was making...very few retired athletes maintain or increase their endorsement potential. Sports fans are a fickle bunch.

I knew when I posted something that spoke about a basic concept of sport business I would get a response like this. Are you guys completely incapable of leaving out your personal dislike for Armstrong when it comes to discussing things like this?

If there was a similar top 100 power sports in Armstrong's hiatus years 2006-2008 (search indicated zilch) the retired Armstrong would have been included.

In 2008, in his third year of retirement, Forbes Magazine listed Armstrong as one of the 10 most influential athletes on branding. Only one other athlete was retired.

2011 and re-retired he was off the radar as continuing revelations and scrutiny made him damaged goods.

 

[thehog]

Who speaks of Armstrong in the Lance thread more than anyone? Who is second, third, or fourth are they irrelevant also?

Thank-you. I take that as a compliment as I'm getting my own brand of awareness out there. It's obvisously working! Yay! Think I might need to congratulate my own post!

 

[thehog]

You clearly do not understand how endorsements and athletes work. You do not hire ex-athletes to do endorsements unless you are doing a specific campaign using ex-athletes (like the old beer commercials) or your product is something directly to do with that athlete.

If he is hiding away then why do we constantly hear about his tweets and the sporting events he is competing in? That is not hiding in any sense of the word.

If he is irrelevant then why do you and your buddies constantly talk about him? This thread is over 1000 pages. You guys attack and insult anyone who does not agree with everything you say in threads about Armstrong but don't do that in other doping threads. It sure doesn't sound like he is irrelevant...at least in the minds of you and your buddies.

You're right I have no idea. I'll get a memo to every athlete in the world - message from theHog: don't retire because you don't earn any money and you get forgotten the day you finish.

Thanks for the tip.

Mate get real! He dropped off the list! Not just fell a few spots because of retirement.

As for attacking & insulting; I'm ok but nowhere near as good as Lance is/was at crushing people. He's the master when it comes to p1ssing on people. I have a lot to learn.

 

[doolols]

As for attacking & insulting; I'm ok but nowhere near as good as Lance is/was at crushing people. He's the master when it comes to p1ssing on people. I have a lot to learn.

Speaking of which - the Bill Gifford interview is available at:

http://www.cbc.ca/q/blog/2012/01/26/is-livestrong-more-about-lance-than-cancer/#socialcomments

And a Tweet from the Tweetmeister this morning?

"some people, for their own sake, just shouldn't do radio interviews."

Perhaps it's a coincidence?

 

[sniper]

Speaking of which - the Bill Gifford interview is available at:

http://www.cbc.ca/q/blog/2012/01/26/is-livestrong-more-about-lance-than-cancer/#socialcomments

And a Tweet from the Tweetmeister this morning?

"some people, for their own sake, just shouldn't do radio interviews."

Perhaps it's a coincidence?

Interesting comment at the bottom of that page that you linked, from a certain Dave:

I have the impression that Lance Armstrong considers his will to live as triumphing over the cancer that had infected him. He battled cancer and won. This position implies that those who die did not fight hard enough, were weak and allowed cancer the upper hand. How cruel it is to regard the victims of incurable cancer as losers.

 

[Berzin]

"I have the impression that Lance Armstrong considers his will to live as triumphing over the cancer that had infected him. He battled cancer and won. This position implies that those who die did not fight hard enough, were weak and allowed cancer the upper hand. How cruel it is to regard the victims of incurable cancer as losers."

This is one of the reasons why Armstrong became such a corporate darling on the speaking circuit, and was able to charge such exorbitant speaking fees.

People who are either willfully ignorant or just plain mean-spirited feed off this type of rotting chum. In such circles, they think cancer is a "battle" you can win with iron will and laser-like focus, making those who "win" the battle extraordinary, while those who succumb are viewed as weak.

 

[TourOfSardinia]

"I have the impression that Lance Armstrong considers his will to live as triumphing over the cancer that had infected him. He battled cancer and won. This position implies that those who die did not fight hard enough, were weak and allowed cancer the upper hand. How cruel it is to regard the victims of incurable cancer as losers."

This is one of the reasons why Armstrong became such a corporate darling on the speaking circuit, and was able to charge such exorbitant speaking fees.

People who are either willfully ignorant or just plain mean-spirited feed of this type of rotting chum. In such circles, they think cancer is a "battle" you can win with iron will and laser-like focus, making those who "win" the battle extraordinary, while those who succumb are viewed as weak.

I always thought that the BIG C in this forum was Cycling.

 

[thehog]

"I have the impression that Lance Armstrong considers his will to live as triumphing over the cancer that had infected him. He battled cancer and won. This position implies that those who die did not fight hard enough, were weak and allowed cancer the upper hand. How cruel it is to regard the victims of incurable cancer as losers."

This is one of the reasons why Armstrong became such a corporate darling on the speaking circuit, and was able to charge such exorbitant speaking fees.

People who are either willfully ignorant or just plain mean-spirited feed of this type of rotting chum. In such circles, they think cancer is a "battle" you can win with iron will and laser-like focus, making those who "win" the battle extraordinary, while those who succumb are viewed as weak.

In fact the entire common tis serene. It really resonates well:

I am a survivor of an extremely rare cancer and I'm grateful for the excellent care I received at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester Minnesota. I have never bought into the almost universal imagery of "battling" cancer. My argument about this position deserves an evening of beer and discussion. My cancer was part of my body and, in a larger sense, part of nature. While plenty of people battle the sea, conquer a mountain (and all the other human engagements with the natural world). The true adventurers engages in a relationship with nature. We must accept the indifference of the universe. As Edward Abbey says, "Nature is indifferent to our love, but never unfaithful".

I have the impression that Lance Armstrong considers his will to live as triumphing over the cancer that had infected him. He battled cancer and won. This position implies that those who die did not fight hard enough, were weak and allowed cancer the upper hand. How cruel it is to regard the victims of incurable cancer as losers.

I have been an outdoor enthusiast for many years primarily sea kayaking on Lake Superior (and hiking the canyons of southern Utah). Lake Superior is one of the most dangerous and unforgiving places on Earth. I consider the time I spent on Lake Superior as engaging nature and as an orientation for living. These experiences prepared me for my encounter with cancer and I will always be indebted to those lessons for my equanimity in the presence of cancer.

Battles must result in winners and losers. I will not go there. My best wishes for all of you.

 

[Oldbiker]

What is the situation today

What is the current status of the Amstrong investigation? Would someone give a synopsis of the current situation.
I have tried to read the thread, but after many pages I could not tell what the situation really is from all of the bickering. I think it would help if someone could give us a baseline of where things stand.

 

[MarkvW]

What is the current status of the Amstrong investigation? Would someone give a synopsis of the current situation.
I have tried to read the thread, but after many pages I could not tell what the situation really is from all of the bickering. I think it would help if someone could give us a baseline of where things stand.

Somewhere between Lance is off the hook and Lance is going to prison. That's the baseline. Trying to start a flamewar?

 

[palmerq]

What is the current status of the Amstrong investigation? Would someone give a synopsis of the current situation.
I have tried to read the thread, but after many pages I could not tell what the situation really is from all of the bickering. I think it would help if someone could give us a baseline of where things stand.

I think no one really knows :S You can look in the sticky threads here in the clinic in the links only thread about lance, the last thing that seems to have happened is in the last post here http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=15654

 

[BillytheKid]

Who is this Lance Armstrong-guy anyway?

Perhaps I've calculated wrong, but I believe this to be the 10,000 post on this thread!

How ironic that it sums up what I feel is a waste of time. Maybe more aptly, who cares anymore?

Carry on if you must.

10,000 posts!

Congrats: You've won absolutely nothing.

 

[Velodude]

Perhaps I've calculated wrong, but I believe this to be the 10,000 post on this thread!

How ironic that it sums up what I feel is a waste of time. Maybe more aptly, who cares anymore?

Carry on if you must.

10,000 posts!

Congrats: You've won absolutely nothing.

Billy, welcome back. We have missed your infusions of unknown facts.

 

[Neworld]

You clearly do not understand how endorsements and athletes work...

Try this Louis.

Retired athletes still have endorsement juice
http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/4832994

When it comes to product endorsements by athletes, it doesn't hurt to be retired. Opportunities for greats of the past in that arena are nearly as bountiful as for current stars.

Michael Jordan, for example, ranks No. 2 among sports figures with about $33 million in annual income from endorsements, according to Forbes magazine. That figure is topped only by Tiger Woods' $80 million per year.

"It goes back to the Miller Lite ads of the 1970s," which included retirees such as football greats **** Butkus and Bubba Smith, said Paul Swangard, director of the University of Oregon's Warsaw Sports Marketing Center. "The bottom line is that these athletes tend to be safer investments because they really value their marketing opportunities. They don't make as much money as during their active careers."

Moreover, retired athletes are more likely to steer clear of scandal. "They don't do stupid things for the most part," Swangard said. "What has been the biggest problem area for the endorsement business lately is people you thought were upstanding citizens doing something stupid."

John McEnroe recently signed a lucrative deal with Travelex. For instance, basketball star Kobe Bryant caused great consternation for the companies he promoted when he was charged with rape two years ago. However, the charges were later dropped.

As for the retirees, just last month, tennis legend John McEnroe signed another deal. The London-based foreign-exchange firm Travelex chose the 46-year-old as its global ambassador. Travelex has a $10 million-$15 million marketing campaign centered around the New York native to raise its profile in the U.S....

NW

 

[Mambo95]

10,000 posts!

Congrats: You've won absolutely nothing.

On the contrary. Armstrong is no longer on some 'most marketable' list. That's apparently a big victory.

There's rumours that with another 5,000 posts, E! might to consider him for their best (or worst) dressed list.

 

[Race Radio]

What is the current status of the Amstrong investigation?

Which one?

Armstrong faces the Qui Tam case, a USADA sanction, Federal charges, and investigations in France, Switzerland, Italy, and Belgium. Once he is done with those he is facing civil cases from SCA, The Times of London, and multiple former sponsors.

The next few years will be filled with serious , costly, legal entanglements. Sponsors will flee, speaking engagements will dry up.

I can see why he is selling the jet, the house, etc.

 

[Neworld]

Interesting comment at the bottom of that page that you linked, from a certain Dave:

In reference to Mr. Schnell's comments

have the impression that Lance Armstrong considers his will to live as triumphing over the cancer that had infected him. He battled cancer and won. This position implies that those who die did not fight hard enough, were weak and allowed cancer the upper hand. How cruel it is to regard the victims of incurable cancer as losers.

...it reminds me of the (lance) fundraiser I attended in Calgary years ago. A young women stricken with a soft-tissue sarcoma (unbeatable as usual) stood up at the end of the Mum and Son Armstrong autostroking dialogue and asked Lance about 'what he was thinking in order to help him try to survive with all those other cancer patients around him?'

Lance replied..."those other people may die from cancer but not me." This reinforces the ultimately selfish regard he has for himself, even in respect, years later, to an audience of 500 people. Very telling indeed.

NW

 

[Louison]

Try this Louis.

Retired athletes still have endorsement juice
http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/4832994

When it comes to product endorsements by athletes, it doesn't hurt to be retired. Opportunities for greats of the past in that arena are nearly as bountiful as for current stars.

Michael Jordan, for example, ranks No. 2 among sports figures with about $33 million in annual income from endorsements, according to Forbes magazine. That figure is topped only by Tiger Woods' $80 million per year.

"It goes back to the Miller Lite ads of the 1970s," which included retirees such as football greats **** Butkus and Bubba Smith, said Paul Swangard, director of the University of Oregon's Warsaw Sports Marketing Center. "The bottom line is that these athletes tend to be safer investments because they really value their marketing opportunities. They don't make as much money as during their active careers."

Moreover, retired athletes are more likely to steer clear of scandal. "They don't do stupid things for the most part," Swangard said. "What has been the biggest problem area for the endorsement business lately is people you thought were upstanding citizens doing something stupid."

John McEnroe recently signed a lucrative deal with Travelex. For instance, basketball star Kobe Bryant caused great consternation for the companies he promoted when he was charged with rape two years ago. However, the charges were later dropped.

As for the retirees, just last month, tennis legend John McEnroe signed another deal. The London-based foreign-exchange firm Travelex chose the 46-year-old as its global ambassador. Travelex has a $10 million-$15 million marketing campaign centered around the New York native to raise its profile in the U.S....

NW

I think you need to read my initial post in response to this aspect of the thread as it backs up pretty much everything I said, including using one very specific example I used.

You're right I have no idea. I'll get a memo to every athlete in the world - message from theHog: don't retire because you don't earn any money and you get forgotten the day you finish.

Thanks for the tip.

Mate get real! He dropped off the list! Not just fell a few spots because of retirement.

As for attacking & insulting; I'm ok but nowhere near as good as Lance is/was at crushing people. He's the master when it comes to p1ssing on people. I have a lot to learn.

1) Why do you feel the need to stoop to trying to make it sound like I posted things I did not post? Where did I say anything about not being able to earn any money or that you are forgotten the day you finish? That's amateurish, childish and hypocritical as you are doing exactly what you rip anyone who does not agree with you guys 100% for.

2) He retired nearly a year ago...from a very low rated niche sport in the US. A huge drop is nothing special.

3) What does Armstrong's behavior have to do with what I posted? Nothing, it is simply a way for you to avoid the truth. You and your buddies constantly talk about him This thread is over 1000 pages. You guys attack and insult anyone who does not agree with everything you say in threads about Armstrong but don't do that in other doping threads. It sure doesn't sound like he is irrelevant...at least in the minds of you and your buddies.

 

[fatandfast]

In reference to Mr. Schnell's comments

...it reminds me of the (lance) fundraiser I attended in Calgary years ago. A young women stricken with a soft-tissue sarcoma (unbeatable as usual) stood up at the end of the Mum and Son Armstrong autostroking dialogue and asked Lance about 'what he was thinking in order to help him try to survive with all those other cancer patients around him?'

Lance replied..."those other people may die from cancer but not me." This reinforces the ultimately selfish regard he has for himself, even in respect, years later, to an audience of 500 people. Very telling indeed.

NW

I always find these kind of comments kind of funny, and normally from people have never done lots of high level bike racing. Look at some of the latest CN coverage on 6 day racing or the Aussie track championships. You see little coverage about the athletes that puke their guts out after extreme efforts. It's all part of racing culture, but hardly mentioned .Lots of the sports behaviors that Armstrong and other pro racers live through are like no other. He applies his 40k TT mindset to everything and when he stands up and says nothing can kill him it may come off brash but it's what pro bike racers think like.

From his outlook your mind has to be the strongest tool you have, never cracking . Lance's biggest problem is that he talks to regular people that have no idea of the intense mental anguish that he goes through for a normal days work. Test yourself sometime get on your bike and try and ride all out for 20 minutes, lets say at 25mph. Your mind will make you stop not your legs. Pro riders pedal through pain that is unhuman. I have witnessed how bad people can hurt and keep going. The pros hurt just like you and me but they ride through it, accept it as normal. A sick lady standing up asking what mental exercises Armstrong used while being treated for cancer deserves an answer but coming from a guy that suffers for a living the answers may be very, very extreme. The amount of suffering and pain that has registered in Armstrong's body in a season of racing would have most people getting an EKG or an emergency room visit. Ride your bike up Alpe d'Huez full throttle and when your legs and back start on fire and it feels like somebody is jamming a knife in the nape of your neck, just imagine that's your job and being used to the feeling. Just a regular day for Armstrong. Lance trying to overlay pro bike rider thoughts over a sick soccer moms life is bound to come out wrong. He should have taken over for Chris Farley .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxm3fqmRtQc

 

[Louison]

In reference to Mr. Schnell's comments

...it reminds me of the (lance) fundraiser I attended in Calgary years ago. A young women stricken with a soft-tissue sarcoma (unbeatable as usual) stood up at the end of the Mum and Son Armstrong autostroking dialogue and asked Lance about 'what he was thinking in order to help him try to survive with all those other cancer patients around him?'

Lance replied..."those other people may die from cancer but not me." This reinforces the ultimately selfish regard he has for himself, even in respect, years later, to an audience of 500 people. Very telling indeed.

NW

Does it?

1) Is it really selfish to be thinking about only your own fight when it comes to having a disease like cancer? I don't think I have heard a doctor who does not say to focus on your own fight.

2) He was a world class athlete in a sport that, when it comes down to crunch time, is all about focusing on yourself, how much effort to make, when to save energy, when to attack, how to make others do more work then you, how to take the pain and keep going. All about climbing that mountain and saying "you guys may crack but I won't." It sounds to me like he had the attitude he should have had and that any other athlete would have.

3) Look, Armstrong can be as big of an a-hole as anyone in this world. He has a big ego, like any successful athlete at the national or international level. He has stepped on people along the way, like anyone who has great success. Like him or dislike him knowing that but don't try to read bad things in anything you can find in order to make him out to be horribly evil. I mean, let's be honest, would you rather have an athlete who doped, had a big ego and could be an a-hole, or those same traits but raped someone or shot someone?