Tailwind Sport 2005

[Granville57]

Cool links Dr. Maserati

Here’s where I’m still a bit unclear though:
The quote below is from the NY Times article, but where are the specifics of the paragraph coming from? The only word they specifically quote in this paragraph is “absolutely.” But what’s the basis for the rest of the content (of that same paragraph)? A different conversation they had with LA or what? I’m unclear on that. Are those Lance's actual assertions?

Armstrong, a seven-time winner of the Tour, said he did not know the people who issued his paychecks when the team was sponsored by the Postal Service through 2004, only that they were signed by the company that owned the team, Tailwind Sports. He said he had “absolutely” no knowledge of how Tailwind used its funds during that time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/15/sports/cycling/15armstrong.html

We know from the Champions Club stories, etc, that all these guys at Tailwind were hanging with the team, riding with the team (on occasion), so to suggest (in the NYT article) that Lance “did not know the people who issued his paychecks” is patently absurd. Especially when acknowledging that they were signed by Tailwind.

Tailwind investors and Champions Club members had close access to the team during the Tour de France.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704457604576011490820993006.html

My other comment/observation is that you couldn't have laid out that filing document any better had you tried. Scrolling to page two and the first things that leap off the page are Bruyneel's and Burke's names! I was unaware of the Burke connection so directly to Tailwind. Has that been common knowledge or am I just late to the party on that one?

 

[BroDeal]

Here is something interesting. A post from Richard Sachs on another forum:

" the rumor (fact) is that when zabriskie took a bad hit at redlands as
a young postal rider, lance and company decided to not pay any of
the hospital/medical bills as Z nursed his leg back into shape atmo.
yeah. by then the team owed lance so much money that they made
him an owner. fact atmo."

http://www.velocipedesalon.com/forum/f2/why-i-think-ball-dbag-8463.html

 

[Granville57]

Reading through the entire SCA deposition was fun. I've seen most of the key elements before (from Walsh, etc) but not the entirety of it. I would really love to see that video tape.

I have a few observations on the Q & A but sleep is long overdue at the moment. Here's one of my favorite exchanges though:

JT: It’s not that you don’t remember whether that--the Indiana hospital room incident occurred. It affirmatively did not take place.

LA: No, it didn’t. How could it have taken place when I’ve never taken performance-enhancing drugs?

JT: Okay.

LA: How could that have happened?

JT: That was my point. You’re not...it’s not just simply you don’t recall. Just...

LA: How many times do I have to say it?

JT: I’m just trying to make sure your testimony is clear.

LA: Well, if it can’t be any clearer than I’ve never taken drugs, then incidents like that could never have happened.

JT: Okay.

LA: How clear is that?

JT: Okay. I think it’s clear. Let me...can I ask you some additional questions as a followup on that?

LA: Sure.

JT: You have never taken any performance-enhancing drugs in connection with your cycling career?

LA: Correct.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

See, THIS is where I actually have the biggest problem with the whole thing.

IBM, for example, has 12 members of their board of directors. They also have 20 executive officers. That's 32 individuals, spread all over the country. The potential for "management" versus non executive board roles is quite good (and in fact is).

Tailwaind had a total of 7 board members, but only 3 executive officers (Stapleton was on the board AND the CEO). It's a relatively small company and the likelihood of that distinct separation of roles, and whatever lack of communication that may arise from it, is severly diminished.

....

If a board is making decisions about ownership stakes, anyone with voting rights better be taking it seriously and making sure they are properly informed. It's an entirely pathetic excuse from LA IMO.

Your elegant, simple and straightforward summary (paragraph 4, post #66) was good reading. Cheers.

 

[Velocentric]

Two out of the three officers, Stapleton and Knaggs, stand to make $2.25M from the Demand Media IPO. I wonder why Laura Hundley did not get a cut. Did she refuse Armstrong's advances or did Velocentric leave her out of his "Blurred" post.

I didn't leave her out, she wasn't included in the cash hand-out.

I have seen her name mentioned in the Livestrong paperwork recently though over a couple of years. Her & her firm still get payments from the foundation for miscellaneous legal services (if I'm interpreting the entry correctly, which I believe I am).

 

[thehog]

Lance has told plenty of lies in his life.
White lies to some really big whoppers lol...

But for the life of me, i still can not see the "Lance Lie" during SCA.
Or the "Lance Lie" to Bonnie...

Saying to Ms Macur that he "did not have a seat on the board...just a rider" is misleading, but BFD - he has done a lot worse than that. Maybe he gave her The Look ouch.

I find myself agreeing with you. What’s in the lie? To what is the intent? To cover up something? To lie for the sake of lying?

Why is Armstrong so intent in diminishing his management/board level involvement with Tailwind? This has been a prevailing theme since 2005. Why sign on if you're just another rider?

I've not seen any evidence outside the lie to suggest that’s its something more clandestine. Time will tell, time will tell.

 

[sniper]

I find myself agreeing with you. What’s in the lie? To what is the intent? To cover up something? To lie for the sake of lying?

Why is Armstrong so intent in diminishing his management/board level involvement with Tailwind? This has been a prevailing theme since 2005. Why sign on if you're just another rider?

I've not seen any evidence outside the lie to suggest that’s its something more clandestine. Time will tell, time will tell.

It's not evidence, it's rumors such as these:

"Earlier this month, the Wall Street Journal ran a story in which Floyd Landis alleged that Tailwind Sports acquired Trek bikes and sold them on to help finance a doping programme."

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...ng-own-a-stake-in-tailwind-sports-or-not.html

 

[theswordsman]

There is a new generation, and it's time to support them.

We try. But that same statement was made prior to the 2008 Tour de France, in reference to Riccardo Ricco, Bernhard Kohl and Stefan Schumacher, all of whom got busted for CERA. I don't quite believe that there's a new generation popping up every couple of years. Thomas Frei was 25 when he got busted for EPO microdosing last Spring.

Some people who follow the sport closely have followed the Lance doping story since what, 1999? Since then there have been articles and books and discoveries, but he got away with everything. He also made life nasty for a lot of people. Now Landis and others have helped create a situation where a lot of things can come to light, some people can be vindicated, and hopefully the war will finally be won. If you're not interested in it, it's easy to not click on the Clinic, or on Armstrong links. But don't expect people (doesn't include me) who have watched him dodge bullets for more than a decade not pay attention, or discuss it. It's way bigger than a story of one guy cheating to win a race. But fresh information is pretty scarce, so when someone puts in an effort to come up with a new piece of the puzzle, like Dr. Maserati did, expect people to discuss it.

Now I really am gone. Cheers

 

[thehog]

It's not evidence, it's rumors such as these:

"Earlier this month, the Wall Street Journal ran a story in which Floyd Landis alleged that Tailwind Sports acquired Trek bikes and sold them on to help finance a doping programme."

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...ng-own-a-stake-in-tailwind-sports-or-not.html

Nah thats not it. Way too simplistic.

Armstrong was bait. He was used to draw in the serious cash from Wall St and other US business investors. Sold Treks may have been used to fund the dope but the real money was in the hundreds and hundreds upon thousands of dollars that was defrauded from investors. They would lure them in with the promise of riding with Lance. On those long rides Lance would seduce them with the promises of some riches and business trips to France. This was 2005 and no investment could fail. John Bucksbaum comes to mind. I'm sure he's fessed up to the Feds on what went down..... poor bast1rd.

Its my belief when it comes to Tailwind the dope part is a small element. The bigger story is the money and the investors who piled millions into it…. Where’s that money now? Who spent it and where did it go? That’s the story.

As I’ve said before. Lance kept on winning and winning. But there was little return for anyone bar Armstrong, Bruyneel and Weisel (and some others). Go figure that one out and this was 2005!..... Perhapds Tailwind was the orginal Demand and it was meant to go public at somepoint with a connection to Livestrong?

 

[auscyclefan94]

Ok, aside from the obvious stupidity of a "Gee officer, I see plenty of people driving much faster than me" argument (and the fact that it still doesn't make it ok to speed), exactly which sports have "far more doping"?

Which sports have:

1. Had multiple winners of their premier event stripped of their title as a result of doping.
2. Had multiple multi-national doping rings busted.
3. Had multiple competitors banned from participating in their premier event?
4. Been forced to develop "biological passports" in an effort to stem rampant doping.
5. Had to initiate rigorous random anti-doping controls at their premier events, including late night and early morning surprise testing.
6. Lost numerous sponsors due to doping scandals.
7. Lost national television exposure due to doping scandals.
8. Had a significant (as in more than a dozen) or their top-level competitors banned for some sort of doping.


Remember, not one or two of the above, ALL of the above....

That is not a fair question especially as you can't compare testing in cycling to any other sport.

 

[sniper]

Nah thats not it. Way too simplistic.

Armstrong was bait. He was used to draw in the serious cash from Wall St and other US business investors. Sold Treks may have been used to fund the dope but the real money was in the hundreds and hundreds upon thousands of dollars that was defrauded from investors. They would lure them in with the promise of riding with Lance. On those long rides Lance would seduce them with the promises of some riches and business trips to France. This was 2005 and no investment could fail. John Bucksbaum comes to mind. I'm sure he's fessed up to the Feds on what went down..... poor bast1rd.

Its my belief when it comes to Tailwind the dope part is a small element. The bigger story is the money and the investors who piled millions into it…. Where’s that money now? Who spent it and where did it go? That’s the story.

As I’ve said before. Lance kept on winning and winning. But there was little return for anyone bar Armstrong, Bruyneel and Weisel (and some others). Go figure that one out and this was 2005!..... Perhapds Tailwind was the orginal Demand and it was meant to go public at somepoint with a connection to Livestrong?

You do seem to be on the right track.
So then I still don't see why in your previous post you lined up with Polish in trivializing the importance of Dr. M's finding.
LA's 2010 lying about his Tailwind-involvement only strengthens the suspitions of a big scam, doesn't it?

 

[thehog]

You do seem to be on the right track.
So then I still don't see why in your previous post you lined up with Polish in trivializing the importance of Dr. M's finding.
LA's 2010 lying about his Tailwind-involvement only strengthens the suspitions of a big scam, doesn't it?

Apologies. My poor writing style. What I was trying to say was that the story is not in the lie but in the reason behind lying. Why would Armstrong so readily wanting not to be associated with Tailwind? Why did he want to portray himself as "just another rider"?

Dr. M's findings are brilliant. But the lie is not the story. That’s why I agree with Polish. Its not the lie but the story behind the lie.

Its fairly obvious Armstrong knows that being a Tailwind board member and seducing clients to donate and spending their money on all sorts of things which never saw the returns means he can be labelled chief architect and instigator of fraud.

Which can only mean one thing…

He’s avoiding being sued by said investors…… Lance probably told them all sorts of things on those rides. That he didn’t dope. How the French want to get him. How he beat cancer and rode clean. And how there would be great returns for all of them if he kept on winning. Imagine dinner after those rides. The cheque books would have been opening up like a h0okers legs and they would have been signing cheques over to Tailwind quicker than you can say EPO.

It was deception...... lying to investors to garnish money from them.

 

[sniper]

Apologies. My poor writing style. What I was trying to say was that the story is not in the lie but in the reason behind lying. Why would Armstrong so readily wanting to not be associated with Tailwind? Why did he want to portray himself as "just another rider"?

Dr. M's findings are brilliant. But the lie is not the story. That’s why I agree with Polish. Its not the lie but the story behind the lie.

Its fairly obvious Armstrong knows that being a Tailwind board member and seducing clients to donate and spending their money on all sorts of things which never saw the returns means he can be labelled chief architect and instigator of fraud.

Which can only mean one thing…

He’s avoiding being sued by said investors…… Lance probably told them all sorts of things on those rides. That he didn’t dope. How the French want to get him. How he beat cancer and rode clean. And how there would be great returns for all of them if he kept on winning. Imagine dinner after those rides. The cheque books would have been opening up like a h0okers legs and they would have been signing cheques over to Tailwind quicker than you can say EPO.

It was deception...... lying to investors to garnish money from them.

Ok, capisco. Plausible reasoning.
btw, nice metaphor.

 

[gillan1969]

Anyone know who Terry Lee is (and what he does)?

yup..he was in (post Bow Wow Wow) Adam and the Ants..

"marco, merrick, Terry lee, Gary tibbs and yours truly...in the naughty north and the.....etc etc etc

 

[nevada]

Ok, capisco. Plausible reasoning.
btw, nice metaphor.

How they gonna prove he said any of that ?

 

[AussieGoddess]

Great find Dr M

Seriously impressed.

Apologies. My poor writing style. What I was trying to say was that the story is not in the lie but in the reason behind lying. Why would Armstrong so readily wanting not to be associated with Tailwind? Why did he want to portray himself as "just another rider"?

Dr. M's findings are brilliant. But the lie is not the story. That’s why I agree with Polish. Its not the lie but the story behind the lie.

Its fairly obvious Armstrong knows that being a Tailwind board member and seducing clients to donate and spending their money on all sorts of things which never saw the returns means he can be labelled chief architect and instigator of fraud.

Which can only mean one thing…

He’s avoiding being sued by said investors…… Lance probably told them all sorts of things on those rides. That he didn’t dope. How the French want to get him. How he beat cancer and rode clean. And how there would be great returns for all of them if he kept on winning. Imagine dinner after those rides. The cheque books would have been opening up like a h0okers legs and they would have been signing cheques over to Tailwind quicker than you can say EPO.

It was deception...... lying to investors to garnish money from them.

I really think that is a stretch. Misleading and deceptive conduct is (I assume in the US as well as in Aus) a serious issue .... but with LA it was all talk. Pretty hard to sue over claims such as that.

I also think the fiduciary duty thing is a stretch as well. He has not defrauded Tailwind of anything .... he acted in the best interests of Tailwind in his role as a Director (at least as far as anything I have read has said). His actions whilst riding where not anything to do with his role as a director, but as his role as an employee.

He HAS lied to the journalist .... and I believe lied by omission in the SCA testimony. When ask directly 'what is your relationship?' to say only that he is an athlete on the team is a serious omission .... but not really a smoking gun IYKWIM

 

[thehog]

Great find Dr M

Seriously impressed.




I really think that is a stretch. Misleading and deceptive conduct is (I assume in the US as well as in Aus) a serious issue .... but with LA it was all talk. Pretty hard to sue over claims such as that.

I also think the fiduciary duty thing is a stretch as well. He has not defrauded Tailwind of anything .... he acted in the best interests of Tailwind in his role as a Director (at least as far as anything I have read has said). His actions whilst riding where not anything to do with his role as a director, but as his role as an employee.

He HAS lied to the journalist .... and I believe lied by omission in the SCA testimony. When ask directly 'what is your relationship?' to say only that he is an athlete on the team is a serious omission .... but not really a smoking gun IYKWIM

You missed the point.

I didn't say he defrauded Tailwind but its investors. I've read way that he and Bruyneel had assured everyone there was no doping going on.

The deception and fraud was at an investor level not to Tailwind itself.

 

[BotanyBay]

All this shows is that Armstrong may have told a small lie to a journalist. That's not really a big deal.

I think the Feds will hope to find something a little stronger.

They can always use it on the witness stand to show that he has a history of willful deception.

 

[sniper]

They can always use it on the witness stand to show that he has a history of willful deception.

correctemundo!

 

[BotanyBay]

correctemundo!

 

[Race Radio]

Here is something interesting. A post from Richard Sachs on another forum:

" the rumor (fact) is that when zabriskie took a bad hit at redlands as
a young postal rider, lance and company decided to not pay any of
the hospital/medical bills as Z nursed his leg back into shape atmo.
yeah. by then the team owed lance so much money that they made
him an owner. fact atmo."

http://www.velocipedesalon.com/forum/f2/why-i-think-ball-dbag-8463.html

This is essentially correct. It was always my understanding that Armstrong had a piece of the team early on.

Armstrong is looking for "Plausible Deniability". Given The Hog and Wonderboy's willingness to push the envelop in other areas that they might have had some questionable accounting is a high possibility. Add Weisel into the mix and it becomes almost guaranteed.

To be fair most cycling teams have very questionable business practices. If someone were to look into GM Bicicletas or Esperanza it could be rather easy to find financial irregularities.

If you are an officer of an "Ongoing Criminal Enterprise" pretending you knew nothing is the common stratgy when faced with a RICO charge. I wonder if Lance will start wearing a bathrobe and pretending to be nuts like Vinny "The Chin" Gigante?

 

[Monte Zoncolon]

*** edited by mod ***

 

[Monte Zoncolon]

*** edited by mod ***

 

[Anonymous]

I hope youve sent a copy of that to Juliet Macur

 

[BotanyBay]

*** edited by mod, as it quoted deleted material ***