• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

The blurred lines of Livestrong - the spin bike sham

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 6, 2009
5,270
2
0
Visit site
BotanyBay said:
Thank you Beech Mtn. OK, so the LAF owns the "Livestrong" trademark name as well as the "Livestrong.com" trademark name. All nice and sheltered.

But this does not mean that the LAF is not allowing DemandMedia to send a separate check to Lance Armstrong himself. Are they? Anyone?

LAF owns Livestrong, but remember that Lance's name and likeness would also be trademarked/protected. You can't just design a product that has nothing to do with LA and put his face on it and sell it as if he's endorsing it without his permission. In addition to saying "Livestrong," how many shoes/shirts/trainers/etc also have LA's name or face on the marketing materials or product? And who gets paid for use of that particular trademark?
 
kurtinsc said:
It's business... things are often dodgy.

By the letter of the agreement, I'm sure that the LAF recieved 100% of the compensation for granting use of the "livestrong" brand in every case. But I'm betting much of the time Lance signed a sponsorship deal that also got him some cash.

I think this is the way Lance profits from the LAF almost exclusively. It's not extremely moral, but in terms of legalities he's not even near the line. It's completely above board. He trades on the connection to livestrong to set up speaking engagements and endorsement deals.

The LAF doesn't mind because it's just advertising and added fundraising for them... and probably gets them opportunities to lease their brand that would otherwise not be present.

Lance profits... but not directly from the charity, instead getting paid by companies who also pay the charity.


My biggest issue with the conspiracies about Lance getting things like jet fuel or pushing dollars to demand media from the LAF is it makes very little sense. He's profiting so much by simply leaching off the companies who associate with the LAF through sponsorship deals and speaking engagments... why risk that over something relatively small?

why risk a return to competition after winning 7 tours and getting off scott-free? i don't think risk/reward works the same for the dude as it does for regular folks. i'm not saying the LAF is totally corrupt but i wouldn't be the least bit surprised if abuses are found.
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
lean said:
why risk a return to competition after winning 7 tours and getting off scott-free? i don't think risk/reward works the same for the dude as it does for regular folks. i'm not saying the LAF is totally corrupt but i wouldn't be the least bit surprised if abuses are found.

My personal opinion is that his endorsement profits were just starting to slack off, and he thought he'd skate through drug tests like he did before, win another Tour, and extend his profit earning potential another 5 years or so. He based the idea of winning on how weak the 2008 tour was.

The problem was:

1. He didn't win.
2. The Novitsky stuff.

I think 2 probably would have happened anyway.
 
kurtinsc said:
My personal opinion is that his endorsement profits were just starting to slack off, and he thought he'd skate through drug tests like he did before, win another Tour, and extend his profit earning potential another 5 years or so. He based the idea of winning on how weak the 2008 tour was.

The problem was:

1. He didn't win.
2. The Novitsky stuff.

I think 2 probably would have happened anyway.

agree, but my point was that applying the rules that govern your or my decision making to celebrities is sometimes misleading. his endorsements were slacking off to what? 10x what i make annually. :rolleyes:

LA's decision making is more analogous to someone who has a gambling addiction. contentment might not even exist for them.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
It's business... things are often dodgy.

By the letter of the agreement, I'm sure that the LAF received 100% of the compensation for granting use of the "Livestrong" brand in every case. But I'm betting much of the time Lance signed a sponsorship deal that also got him some cash.

I think this is the way Lance profits from the LAF almost exclusively. It's not extremely moral, but in terms of legalities he's not even near the line. It's completely above board. He trades on the connection to Livestrong to set up speaking engagements and endorsement deals.

The LAF doesn't mind because it's just advertising and added fundraising for them... and probably gets them opportunities to lease their brand that would otherwise not be present.

Lance profits... but not directly from the charity, instead getting paid by companies who also pay the charity.


My biggest issue with the conspiracies about Lance getting things like jet fuel or pushing dollars to demand media from the LAF is it makes very little sense. He's profiting so much by simply leaching off the companies who associate with the LAF through sponsorship deals and speaking engagments... why risk that over something relatively small?

It's business??? I though it was a charity.

You say you're "sure" and you're "betting"...... pity you didn't read the IPO I linked earlier as it shows you are wrong.

Lance got an extra $1,000,000 from Demand Media for 'services' - this is on top of the issue of warrants which he personally received 42.5%.


The yearly travel bill for the LAF is almost $2,000,000, this is 10 times other charities travel, and we know that LA traveled to all these Global events in his own aircraft.
Where does the exclusive content like videos or blogs go, the .com or the .org? Correct the for profit .com.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
why risk that over something relatively small?

The same reason he can never leave well enough alone. Never could. Being a world champ, TDF stage winner and extremely lucky cancer survivor was not enough for him. He always needs to go back and squeeze that extra self-fulfilling drop out of whatever he's squeezing.

It's bad enough that people who want associations with the LAF have to "Pay to Play", but to attach a blood-sucking hose to the relationship just speaks to his "It'll never be enough" personality.

Dude couldn't even let Greg's daughter alone for defending her dad against Graham Watson's idiocy. He had to stalk her Twitter page, just to twist the knife. He always needs to get the last word in.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
My biggest issue with the conspiracies about Lance getting things like jet fuel ... why risk that over something relatively small?

Relatively small for most.
Relatively small for slackers for sure.

Lance, however, DOES sweat the details. Champion Quality.
He weighed his food during training fcol. Trained and trained some more.
And more. Aero dimples on his lycra. Details details details.

You can be sure Lance personally interviewed the Accountants who would do the books for the LAF. Probably interviewed a hundred or more before he found one who would handle deductions for jet fuel the way he wanted.
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
It's business??? I though it was a charity.

For the business that is brokering a deal with a charity... it's buisness. Charitable donations aren't about charity... they're about marketing.

You know this, I think you've moved to where you're trying to score points rather then actually discuss.

You say you're "sure" and you're "betting"...... pity you didn't read the IPO I linked earlier as it shows you are wrong.

Lance got an extra $1,000,000 from Demand Media for 'services' - this is on top of the issue of warrants which he personally received 42.5%.

I did miss your post of this. But I'm not sure why you think this is somehow different from what I stated. The LAF gets compensated for the brand. Lance gets compensated for marketing the product (which in the case of livestrong.com would include providing content).

They pretty much spell it out that way:

"In January 2008, the Company entered into a license agreement with the Lance Armstrong Foundation, Inc. (the "License Agreement") and an Endorsement and Spokesperson Agreement with Lance Armstrong (the "Endorsement Agreement"). "

License agreement = "livestrong.com" name
Endorsement agreement = marketing

I've stated many times before... this is how I believe Lance profits off of the LAF. He ties personal endorsement deals to the licensing of the "livestrong" brand. I don't think it's particularly noble... but it is what it is. I just don't believe he's going to jeopardize THAT cash cow for the conspiricay theory type stuff others suggest.

The yearly travel bill for the LAF is almost $2,000,000, this is 10 times other charities travel, and we know that LA traveled to all these Global events in his own aircraft.
Where does the exclusive content like videos or blogs go, the .com or the .org? Correct the for profit .com.

The travel bill for the LAF was a bit over a million in 2006. 900,000 for "program travel", 30,000 for administrative, 120,000 for fundraising.

The travel bill for the LAF in 2009 was 1.9 million, 1.65 million for program travel, 80,000 for administrative and 190,000 for fundraising.

Should they be spending as much as they are for travel to programs? I don't know. But to me, a 700K increase in program travel expenses when starting a global cancer initiative doesn't sound unreasonable... even if you aren't paying for Lance's private jet fuel. Wouldn't you expect some form of increase given that?

Look, I'm not claiming the choices they make are good... I just don't see the straight line connection between travel cost and Lance's travel that you do. I bet he DID get some travel compensation from the LAF... but I'm betting it's abot the same as it was in 2006. Essentially when he was being sent somewhere where he wasn't going to be already, the LAF paid for the travel. I'm betting he didn't get travel paid for in a case like Australia and Ireland... particularly to avoid legal complications.

And I know... I'm using words like "assume" and "betting"... but the fact is that's what you are doing to. You're assuming the travel budget went primarily to fund Lance's travel to bike races. We don't know either way.
 
Dec 14, 2010
154
0
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
The travel bill for the LAF was a bit over a million in 2006. 900,000 for "program travel", 30,000 for administrative, 120,000 for fundraising.

The travel bill for the LAF in 2009 was 1.9 million, 1.65 million for program travel, 80,000 for administrative and 190,000 for fundraising.

Should they be spending as much as they are for travel to programs? I don't know. But to me, a 700K increase in program travel expenses when starting a global cancer initiative doesn't sound unreasonable... even if you aren't paying for Lance's private jet fuel. Wouldn't you expect some form of increase given that?

I don't see a whole lot of "bang" coming out of these bucks being spent.

Making a "difference" in 2010 cancer 'support' programs

"In 2010 we:

* Trained 365 Promotores (Hispanic health care workers) through the LIVESTRONG Cancer Survivorship Training

* Added 20 new cities to the LIVESTRONG at the YMCA program

* Began work in South Africa to build a global model for fighting stigma and dispelling myths about cancer so that survivors and communities no longer have to live in fear, and can get the services and support they need.

* Delivered LIVESTRONG at School resources to over 65,000 school professionals across the country, giving them the tools they need to talk to students about cancer in a way that is age-appropriate and inspiring.

* Brought successful cancer support programs to more than 75 communities in the US through the Community Impact Project

In 2011 we will:

* Create relationships with national/local organizations and key leaders in each priority community that will lead to increased engagement and awareness among Hispanic/Latinos

* Spread the LIVESTRONG at the YMCA program to 40 new cities

* Bring the anti-stigma campaign to Mexico

* Connect cancer survivors with support services in even more areas through our Community Impact Project

We would not be able to maintain these efforts without your support. Please consider a tax deductible donation to LIVESTRONG this year so that we may continue to make a difference in the cancer community in 2011. "

YAWN....

but I do love the final plug for even MORE donations at the end of this "puff piece".
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
jimbob_in_co said:
I don't see a whole lot of "bang" coming out of these bucks being spent.

Making a "difference" in 2010 cancer 'support' programs

" stuff "

YAWN....

but I do love the final plug for even MORE donations at the end of this "puff piece".

I don't disagree. I think they've moved in a bad direction the past few years.

That's different then saying I believe they're secretly spending dollars donated for their (admittedly less then ideal) goals to instead fund Lance's jet fuel.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
For the business that is brokering a deal with a charity... it's business. Charitable donations aren't about charity... they're about marketing.

You know this, I think you've moved to where you're trying to score points rather then actually discuss.



I did miss your post of this. But I'm not sure why you think this is somehow different from what I stated. The LAF gets compensated for the brand. Lance gets compensated for marketing the product (which in the case of livestrong.com would include providing content).

They pretty much spell it out that way:

"In January 2008, the Company entered into a license agreement with the Lance Armstrong Foundation, Inc. (the "License Agreement") and an Endorsement and Spokesperson Agreement with Lance Armstrong (the "Endorsement Agreement"). "

License agreement = "livestrong.com" name
Endorsement agreement = marketing

I've stated many times before... this is how I believe Lance profits off of the LAF. He ties personal endorsement deals to the licensing of the "livestrong" brand. I don't think it's particularly noble... but it is what it is. I just don't believe he's going to jeopardize THAT cash cow for the conspiricay theory type stuff others suggest.



The travel bill for the LAF was a bit over a million in 2006. 900,000 for "program travel", 30,000 for administrative, 120,000 for fundraising.

The travel bill for the LAF in 2009 was 1.9 million, 1.65 million for program travel, 80,000 for administrative and 190,000 for fundraising.

Should they be spending as much as they are for travel to programs? I don't know. But to me, a 700K increase in program travel expenses when starting a global cancer initiative doesn't sound unreasonable... even if you aren't paying for Lance's private jet fuel. Wouldn't you expect some form of increase given that?

Look, I'm not claiming the choices they make are good... I just don't see the straight line connection between travel cost and Lance's travel that you do. I bet he DID get some travel compensation from the LAF... but I'm betting it's abot the same as it was in 2006. Essentially when he was being sent somewhere where he wasn't going to be already, the LAF paid for the travel. I'm betting he didn't get travel paid for in a case like Australia and Ireland... particularly to avoid legal complications.

And I know... I'm using words like "assume" and "betting"... but the fact is that's what you are doing to. You're assuming the travel budget went primarily to fund Lance's travel to bike races. We don't know either way.

My view has always been based on information, your viewpoint (up until this post) was plucked out of the air.


Here is part of the Global itinerary:
Australia (x3), South Africa, Mexico, Monaco, Italy, France (x2), Ireland .... whats the common denominator? Armstrong had other events to go at the exact time of these Global events.

How did he get to all these events? Car, train, horse & cart, maybe by bike, or in his own personal Gulfstream Jet?

As you are agreeing that he is compensated by the LAF to travel then it is correct to say that it is going on Jet Fuel.
 
Oct 6, 2009
5,270
2
0
Visit site
jimbob_in_co said:
* Added 20 new cities to the LIVESTRONG at the YMCA program

* Spread the LIVESTRONG at the YMCA program to 40 new cities

<snipped for brevity>

What exactly is the Livestrong at the YMCA program, and what does it have to do with cancer? Is it a special fitness class for cancer survivors? A regular fitness class for anybody? A senior citizens' program? An excuse to sell Livestrong trainers for spin classes?

I've never heard of this, and wonder if it is a cancer-specific program, or just a general healthy living program?
 
Dec 14, 2010
154
0
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
I don't disagree. I think they've moved in a bad direction the past few years.

That's different then saying I believe they're secretly spending dollars donated for their (admittedly less then ideal) goals to instead fund Lance's jet fuel.

This money, which was hard earned and donated in good faith by people who want help cancer patients and their families, was wasted either way.

Unless they ever have to actually release expense item by expense item details about this subject to prove otherwise, I'm going to assume some of that money did go into fueling Armstrong's private jet. I know too much of it went into wasted, needless travel by LAF staffers.

"Innocent until proven guilty" does not apply when the parties in question are spending other people's money.
 
Dec 14, 2010
154
0
0
Visit site
Beech Mtn said:
What exactly is the Livestrong at the YMCA program, and what does it have to do with cancer? Is it a special fitness class for cancer survivors? A regular fitness class for anybody? A senior citizens' program? An excuse to sell Livestrong trainers for spin classes?

I've never heard of this, and wonder if it is a cancer-specific program, or just a general healthy living program?

LIVESTRONG at the YMCA

It looks like a way to boost YMCA membership around the USA.
 
kurtinsc said:
The travel bill for the LAF was a bit over a million in 2006. 900,000 for "program travel", 30,000 for administrative, 120,000 for fundraising.

The travel bill for the LAF in 2009 was 1.9 million, 1.65 million for program travel, 80,000 for administrative and 190,000 for fundraising.

Should they be spending as much as they are for travel to programs? I don't know. But to me, a 700K increase in program travel expenses when starting a global cancer initiative doesn't sound unreasonable... even if you aren't paying for Lance's private jet fuel. Wouldn't you expect some form of increase given that?

Look, I'm not claiming the choices they make are good... I just don't see the straight line connection between travel cost and Lance's travel that you do. I bet he DID get some travel compensation from the LAF... but I'm betting it's abot the same as it was in 2006. Essentially when he was being sent somewhere where he wasn't going to be already, the LAF paid for the travel. I'm betting he didn't get travel paid for in a case like Australia and Ireland... particularly to avoid legal complications.

But they werent STARTING a new global cancer initiative ... the LAF/Livestrong has been around for a while (he started it in 97 I beleive).

The travel expenses almost doubled between 06 and 09. The major difference is - in 09 Armstrong made a cycling comeback and had to travel more ....

I dont doubt whatsoever that Livestrong has benefited substantially from Lance's comeback, and if it was using his comeback to make more money to actually DO things I wouldnt have an issue. But thats not the case.


Basically Livestrong and Lance's own private financial dealings are just too close to be able to seperate, and that is NOT good. Charity is all about transperancy - and Livestrong does not have that.
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
My view has always been based on information, your viewpoint (up until this post) was plucked out of the air.


Here is part of the Global itinerary:
Australia (x3), South Africa, Mexico, Monaco, Italy, France (x2), Ireland .... whats the common denominator? Armstrong had other events to go at the exact time of these Global events.

How did he get to all these events? Car, train, horse & cart, maybe by bike, or in his own personal Gulfstream Jet?

As you are agreeing that he is compensated by the LAF to travel then it is correct to say that it is going on Jet Fuel.

YOU ARE GUESSING THAT THE LAF PAID.

That's what it comes down to. An equally possible explanation is that his team paid for his travel to races he was participating in as a member of the team... and the LAF scheduled events where their biggest PR guy was going to be racing to tag onto the media attention.

Why do you think the LAF paid? What information shows they paid? It's simply your ASSUMPTION.

And I'm not even saying that your assumption is wrong... but you seem to think it's a fact when there's nothing other then an increase in travel expenses (while entering into a global campaign), and events matching his race schedule. There IS an alternative ASSUMPTION matching the same data... they scheduled events around his schedule, didn't pay his travel but rather paid the travel of the others involved with those events to go to those same places.

Ah... but that's GUESSING. Your's are FACT.


He's a doping jerk. He's tying his endorsements to Livestrong to make more money. He's narcissistic. He's kind of an odd looking hump back.

But he's not guilty of every little thing you can imagine that could possibly fit in with what facts you have available. Some people on this message board (possibly you) were arguing with me when I "GUESSED" that his ownership stake in Demand was likely less then 10%... probably closer to 5%. People argued that he might own 30% or more of Demand after the livestrong deal.

What do the facts say? The IPO states that they have over 37 million shares of stock outstanding including potential options coming into the IPO. That equals... less then 3%. And it's not ownership... it's an option that will take over 6 million dollars to execute... so his profits will subtract that amount.

Sometimes common sense is right. The guy's going to get hammered by Novitsky and he deserves it, but the whole jetfuel thing is just not reasonable. He's making TONS of money through his link with livestrong and the positive press that generates. It would be stupid to risk that with them paying for him to travel to races when he can charge a company like Radioshack for the same trip.

Perhaps he did charge them for travel when he didn't have a race at the same location as the event. But most people wouldn't have a problem with that... the problem was if the LAF's funding his racing schedule and personal vacations. That doesn't seem to be realistic. I could be wrong, and your ASSUMPTIONS might be right... but sometimes common sense is right.
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
AussieGoddess said:
But they werent STARTING a new global cancer initiative ... the LAF/Livestrong has been around for a while (he started it in 97 I beleive).

The travel expenses almost doubled between 06 and 09. The major difference is - in 09 Armstrong made a cycling comeback and had to travel more ....

I dont doubt whatsoever that Livestrong has benefited substantially from Lance's comeback, and if it was using his comeback to make more money to actually DO things I wouldnt have an issue. But thats not the case.


Basically Livestrong and Lance's own private financial dealings are just too close to be able to seperate, and that is NOT good. Charity is all about transperancy - and Livestrong does not have that.

The initiative began in 2008. It's at the beginning of their 2008 report. Prior to that their efforts were US based.

Travel in 2006 was about a million dollars.
Travel in 2007 was about a million dollars.
Travel in 2008 was 1.5 million dollars.
Travel in 2009 was 2 million dollars.

2008 and 2009 were when they started their global initiative.

That IS a major difference. Yes, it's possible Lance got the lions share of that increase in travel. It's also possible that he got little to none of that increase, and that it instead went to Livestrong people travelling in relation to their silly "global initiative".

I don't think their global awareness thing was a good idea. But I also am doubting that lance is siphoning money off to pay for his jet fuel.
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
Beech Mtn said:
What exactly is the Livestrong at the YMCA program, and what does it have to do with cancer? Is it a special fitness class for cancer survivors? A regular fitness class for anybody? A senior citizens' program? An excuse to sell Livestrong trainers for spin classes?

I've never heard of this, and wonder if it is a cancer-specific program, or just a general healthy living program?

Per the LAF:

http://www.livestrong.org/What-We-Do/Our-Actions/Programs-Partnerships/LIVESTRONG-at-the-YMCA

The actual program offered:

http://www.livestrong.org/What-We-D...ESTRONG-at-the-YMCA/YMCA-Program-Descriptions

"LIVESTRONG at the YMCA is a 12 week small group program designed for adult cancer survivors who have become de-conditioned or chronically fatigued from their treatment and/or disease. The program is offered without cost to the participants and YMCA membership is free to participants and their family for the full 12 weeks of the program.

The goal of the program is to help patients build muscle mass and muscle strength, increase flexibility and endurance, and improve functional ability. Additional goals include reducing the severity of therapy side effects, preventing unwanted weight changes, and improving energy levels and self esteem. A final goal is to assist participants in developing their own physical fitness program so they can continue to practice a healthy lifestyle, not only as part of their recovery, but as a way of life.

Certified YMCA fitness instructors give personal individualized instruction to the participants. The instructors are trained in the elements of cancer, post rehab exercise and supportive cancer care."
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
YOU ARE GUESSING THAT THE LAF PAID.

That's what it comes down to. An equally possible explanation is that his team paid for his travel to races he was participating in as a member of the team... and the LAF scheduled events where their biggest PR guy was going to be racing to tag onto the media attention.

Why do you think the LAF paid? What information shows they paid? It's simply your ASSUMPTION.

And I'm not even saying that your assumption is wrong... but you seem to think it's a fact when there's nothing other then an increase in travel expenses (while entering into a global campaign), and events matching his race schedule. There IS an alternative ASSUMPTION matching the same data... they scheduled events around his schedule, didn't pay his travel but rather paid the travel of the others involved with those events to go to those same places.

Ah... but that's GUESSING. Your's are FACT.


He's a doping jerk. He's tying his endorsements to Livestrong to make more money. He's narcissistic. He's kind of an odd looking hump back.

But he's not guilty of every little thing you can imagine that could possibly fit in with what facts you have available. Some people on this message board (possibly you) were arguing with me when I "GUESSED" that his ownership stake in Demand was likely less then 10%... probably closer to 5%. People argued that he might own 30% or more of Demand after the livestrong deal.

What do the facts say? The IPO states that they have over 37 million shares of stock outstanding including potential options coming into the IPO. That equals... less then 3%. And it's not ownership... it's an option that will take over 6 million dollars to execute... so his profits will subtract that amount.

Sometimes common sense is right. The guy's going to get hammered by Novitsky and he deserves it, but the whole jetfuel thing is just not reasonable. He's making TONS of money through his link with livestrong and the positive press that generates. It would be stupid to risk that with them paying for him to travel to races when he can charge a company like Radioshack for the same trip.

Perhaps he did charge them for travel when he didn't have a race at the same location as the event. But most people wouldn't have a problem with that... the problem was if the LAF's funding his racing schedule and personal vacations. That doesn't seem to be realistic. I could be wrong, and your ASSUMPTIONS might be right... but sometimes common sense is right.
What you keep missing is that you are constantly proving the point when you say things like this..........
"they scheduled events around his schedule".

If this Global campaign was all about cancer awareness/education/fund raising, then LA should be visiting lots of different countries not one's that have an event that LA personally profits from.

Are the Australians really struggling with what cancer is that Lance has to go back there for a third time so they get the message?

Also - what 'staff' went to Mexico or Australia or France with LA? It appears as though it was Ulman and one or 2 others, who (for the most part) went in LA's private jet.

Common sense would say that is why there was an increase of $700,000 in the LAF travel expenses.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Visit site
2lwwqqp.jpg


Just sayin.
 
Dec 14, 2010
154
0
0
Visit site
BotanyBay said:
2lwwqqp.jpg


Just sayin.

Exactly right BB. Until they are forced to make public all the detailed expense information, we have no real proof. I just know about all the needlessly travel I saw (and they still 'Tweet Out') in that organization.