The Hog admits Treks sold on eBay

[theswordsman]

First of all, Trek admitted a few weeks ago in either NYTimes or WSJ that during the Postal days, they did see bikes popping up for sale online when they shouldn't have.

Just from what I've read lately, at least some teams are expected to return bikes at the end of the year, or pass them down to their junior development teams. I've got no practical knowledge of that, but Landis complained about the bike that broke on him during the Dauphine, a June race, and of not having a TT bike available to train on.

But Trek has been subpoenaed for documents, and I imagine other riders will back Landis up about the bikes, and there will be some sort of paper (or web) trail. Maybe a Paypal account?

I think this small admission is a big deal, especially after Bruyneel's previous total denial.

Bruyneel's "I don't know where he got that from" was the exact same thing he said about Contador when Lance accused him of lying to La Gazzetta about buying his own TT wheels. Three months later, Bruyneel corrected that one, so I expect him to have to change his story here, too, again with spin so he personally doesn't look bad.

 

[sliceofpy]

Is RS short a bike now?

http://cgi.ebay.com/BRAND-NEW-TREK-...md=ViewItem&pt=Road_Bikes&hash=item3caf2038b8

 

[MacRoadie]

Heck, I would be suprised if even honest Greg accounted for all the INCOME from the Bro-deal bikes he sold. Novitzsky should ask Greg - this investigation is NOT only about Lance lol.

Would those be the very same "Bro-deal" bikes that even Trek admits (as laid out in fine detail in their court pleadings) were BOUGHT by Lemond (as opposed to bikes included in a sponsor deal and thus not paid for), and with which he was legally free to do with as he pleased?

 

[Anonymous]

Haha! Greg better watch it! I have this one and I will squeal like a pig to the feds!

Cool. I always wondered what happened to TKlasna's bikes.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

First of all, Trek admitted a few weeks ago in either NYTimes or WSJ that during the Postal days, they did see bikes popping up for sale online when they shouldn't have.

Just from what I've read lately, at least some teams are expected to return bikes at the end of the year, or pass them down to their junior development teams. I've got no practical knowledge of that, but Landis complained about the bike that broke on him during the Dauphine, a June race, and of not having a TT bike available to train on.

But Trek has been subpoenaed for documents, and I imagine other riders will back Landis up about the bikes, and there will be some sort of paper (or web) trail. Maybe a Paypal account?

I think this small admission is a big deal, especially after Bruyneel's previous total denial.

Bruyneel's "I don't know where he got that from" was the exact same thing he said about Contador when Lance accused him of lying to La Gazzetta about buying his own TT wheels. Three months later, Bruyneel corrected that one, so I expect him to have to change his story here, too, again with spin so he personally doesn't look bad.

Don't forget that Pat McQuaids brother Darach was boasting to an Irish times reporter that he had a 'USPS bike' for sale:

Then he says he’s got a bike for sale that Armstrong owned, that he’s going to put it on eBay but he’s willing to part with it for a decent price despite you dancing on Armstrong’s career.....
Lance Armstrong’s bike cutting through the Dublin traffic. Cool. Nice. Darach tells you how light it is. You ask will it break in half on a manhole cover. He says it’s super strong. You ask about the saddle – might it be bad for a gentleman who wishes to settle on a large family. Trying his patience you empty your entire cycling information locker on his head. He tells you the wheel size and frame spec. You ask him what colour it is.

He sent the article by Twitter with this interesting clarification:

I had told Irish Times journo that it was a USPS team bike, not Lance owned bike, but nice article nontheless

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Would those be the very same "Bro-deal" bikes that even Trek admits (as laid out in fine detail in their court pleadings) were BOUGHT by Lemond (as opposed to bikes included in a sponsor deal and thus not paid for), and with which he was legally free to do with as he pleased?

Maybe the USPS bike that Darach McQuaid had for sale was a 'Bro-deal'.

 

[goober]

First of all, Trek admitted a few weeks ago in either NYTimes or WSJ that during the Postal days, they did see bikes popping up for sale online when they shouldn't have.

Just from what I've read lately, at least some teams are expected to return bikes at the end of the year, or pass them down to their junior development teams. I've got no practical knowledge of that, but Landis complained about the bike that broke on him during the Dauphine, a June race, and of not having a TT bike available to train on.

But Trek has been subpoenaed for documents, and I imagine other riders will back Landis up about the bikes, and there will be some sort of paper (or web) trail. Maybe a Paypal account?

I think this small admission is a big deal, especially after Bruyneel's previous total denial.

Bruyneel's "I don't know where he got that from" was the exact same thing he said about Contador when Lance accused him of lying to La Gazzetta about buying his own TT wheels. Three months later, Bruyneel corrected that one, so I expect him to have to change his story here, too, again with spin so he personally doesn't look bad.

I think you are confused or did not understand the context of statements in previous things you read. I understand though as there are lots of things to read these days. Let me give you a context example: If you ask me did I give money to Greg to buy drugs and I say "no I did not do that" you cannot come along later when I say "I gave money to Greg" and say I gave money to Greg to buy drugs. The money I gave to Greg, which I formally indicated, was so he could take a taxi ride home after using illegal drugs. I was not involved in purchasing drugs in this whole transaction.

 

[Polish]

Would those be the very same "Bro-deal" bikes that even Trek admits (as laid out in fine detail in their court pleadings) were BOUGHT by Lemond (as opposed to bikes included in a sponsor deal and thus not paid for), and with which he was legally free to do with as he pleased?

I think it is up to Novitzsky, the leading investigator in the Balco Scandal, to determine what is legal or not.

Did Greg BUY those bikes at bro-deal prices with the purpose of RESELLING them at a tidy profit? Does his tax/fda records match up?

C'mon - not being able to account for bikes is an major offense that will put you IN JAIL if I am not mistaken. IN JAIL OMG.

 

[MacRoadie]

I think it is up to Novitzsky, the leading investigator in the Balco Scandal, to determine what is legal or not.

I'm thinking that's why Greg is a witness and not a subject of the investigation, but what do I know.

Did Greg BUY those bikes at bro-deal prices with the purpose of RESELLING them at a tidy profit? Does his tax/fda records match up?

C'mon - not being able to account for bikes is an major offense that will put you IN JAIL if I am not mistaken. IN JAIL OMG.

Good thing that very point was argued in the pleadings and that it was pointed out that there were no caveats to the Lemond PURCHASE agreement (sorta like the SCA deal come to thing of it).

Seems Trek has already hinted at an inability to account for all the bikes they GAVE to Postal/Discovery.

 

[Cal_Joe]

Here is a link to an article from 2007 about the sales on ebay -

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/348061/discovery-channel-bikes-on-ebay.html

Looking at the ebay feedback for tailwindsportscorp it appears that feedback was left only for helmets; hard to tell if any bikes were sold.

http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback2&userid=tailwindsportscorp&ftab=AllFeedback&seeallfeedback=See%20All%20Feedback&myworld=true

 

[ThaiPanda]

I think you are confused or did not understand the context of statements in previous things you read. I understand though as there are lots of things to read these days. Let me give you a context example: If you ask me did I give money to Greg to buy drugs and I say "no I did not do that" you cannot come along later when I say "I gave money to Greg" and say I gave money to Greg to buy drugs. The money I gave to Greg, which I formally indicated, was so he could take a taxi ride home after using illegal drugs. I was not involved in purchasing drugs in this whole transaction.

Huh?

 

[MacRoadie]

Huh?

It's part of a concerted effort by the Goober, across several threads, to suggest he has knowledge of recreational drug use by Lemond.

 

[Benotti69]

It's part of a concerted effort by the Goober, across several threads, to suggest he has knowledge of recreational drug use by Lemond.

of which he is failing miserably, poor goober has obviously done too many himself of the hallucinogenic kind .......

 

[Hugh Januss]

I think you are confused or did not understand the context of statements in previous things you read. I understand though as there are lots of things to read these days. Let me give you a context example: If you ask me did I give money to Greg to buy drugs and I say "no I did not do that" you cannot come along later when I say "I gave money to Greg" and say I gave money to Greg to buy drugs. The money I gave to Greg, which I formally indicated, was so he could take a taxi ride home after using illegal drugs. I was not involved in purchasing drugs in this whole transaction.

The more desperate you get the less sense you make (not that you made that much to begin with).

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Huh?

What part of 'goobers' excellent and accurate post don't you get?

Instead of using the taxi money to buy drugs Greg bought a Trek - which Polish will tell us is 8-10 in Federal prison.

 

[Oldman]

What part of 'goobers' excellent and accurate post don't you get?

Instead of using the taxi money to buy drugs Greg bought a Trek - which Polish will tell us is 8-10 in Federal prison.

And here I thought riding a Trek was the main offense.

 

[BroDeal]

Heck, I would be suprised if even honest Greg accounted for all the INCOME from the Bro-deal bikes he sold. Novitzsky should ask Greg - this investigation is NOT only about Lance lol.

I steadfastly deny that Lemond sold any of my bikes. And if he did then I have no knowledge of what the money was spent on. It certainly was not spent on buckets of KFC and Haagan Dazs.

 

[Benotti69]

And here I thought riding a Trek was the main offense.

actually it is, you could have had umpteen cooler bikes that one of them

 

[Benotti69]

I steadfastly deny that Lemond sold any of my bikes. And if he did then I have no knowledge of what the money was spent on. It certainly was not spent on buckets of KFC and Haagan Dazs.

your confusing your Ullrichs with your Lemonds now....

greg has spent the money on secondhand washing machines to make some kind of new uber trainer

 

[ThaiPanda]

What part of 'goobers' excellent and accurate post don't you get?

Instead of using the taxi money to buy drugs Greg bought a Trek - which Polish will tell us is 8-10 in Federal prison.

It seems to me that he is trying to implicate the people that bought the Treks off ebay in all of this. If they had prior knowledge that the money they spent on the used bikes was used to buy PEDs then they are screwed.

Is it OK if the $ used to buy the bikes was used to buy GL recreational drugs at Spicoli's birthday party? Is riding an ebay Trek while on drugs with GL against the law?

For the record, I've never bought anything off of ebay. I don't want to get dragged into this wide net he has tossed out.

 

[cyclestationgiuseppe]

Ebay

Simple....subpoena Ebay.

I have been buying and selling stuff for over 10 years and Ebay still has records of what was sold, who sold it, for how much, and who bought it.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It seems to me that he is trying to implicate the people that bought the Treks off ebay in all of this. If they had prior knowledge that the money they spent on the used bikes was used to buy PEDs then they are screwed.

Is it OK if the $ used to buy the bikes was used to buy GL recreational drugs at Spicoli's birthday party? Is riding an ebay Trek while on drugs with GL against the law?

For the record, I've never bought anything off of ebay. I don't want to get dragged into this wide net he has tossed out.

Its not as simpe as avoiding the internet - there are Trek dealers on most corners now.
Like you, for the record - they weren't strippers, they were 'dancers' and it was a warm night - I have never sold a USPS bike on ebay to buy drugs - I get a better price on Craiglist.

 

[ThaiPanda]

Its not as simpe as avoiding the internet - there are Trek dealers on most corners now.
Like you, for the record - they weren't strippers, they were 'dancers' and it was a warm night - I have never sold a USPS bike on ebay to buy drugs - I get a better price on Craiglist.

Should we avoid taxis now as well?

 

[MacRoadie]

Should we avoid taxis now as well?

I don't know about that, but you can ALL do me a fovor and avoid SoCal...

 

[Colm.Murphy]

First of all, Trek admitted a few weeks ago in either NYTimes or WSJ that during the Postal days, they did see bikes popping up for sale online when they shouldn't have.

Just from what I've read lately, at least some teams are expected to return bikes at the end of the year, or pass them down to their junior development teams. I've got no practical knowledge of that, but Landis complained about the bike that broke on him during the Dauphine, a June race, and of not having a TT bike available to train on.

But Trek has been subpoenaed for documents, and I imagine other riders will back Landis up about the bikes, and there will be some sort of paper (or web) trail. Maybe a Paypal account?

I think this small admission is a big deal, especially after Bruyneel's previous total denial.

Bruyneel's "I don't know where he got that from" was the exact same thing he said about Contador when Lance accused him of lying to La Gazzetta about buying his own TT wheels. Three months later, Bruyneel corrected that one, so I expect him to have to change his story here, too, again with spin so he personally doesn't look bad.

So...

Bruyneel first denies it.

Then, he says they sold bikes, but only after a racing season, and sometimes only years later.

Then, he states they ONLY sold bikes on ebay AFTER the disco team was shutting down. Also, that the "Team" did it.. Cue Bruyneel stating he was just "an employee" on the Team.

And, he has no idea about the money. Just like the UCI has no idea what happened to the Armstrong bribe <er> donation to the glorious fight against the doperz.

S - u - r -e....

The fact that Trek lead counsel has stated, on the record, that they'd been aware of the bikes being sold for years, contradicts the current version being spun by Bruyneel.

Here is the pertinent part: The fact that Trek and Greg Lemond are the first that are said to have been subpoenaed should make it easy to see that the bikes sold for drugs are critical to the prosecution.

If you are the US Feds, turning the screws on Trek, being that they need to either cooperate or be prosecuted for co-conspiracy, should persuade them to provide ALL documentary details as to contracts, bikes, serial numbers, shipping dates, etc. As well, there are probably a number of Trek employees who worked VERY closely with those teams, probably a wealth of info.

Bruyneel's changing versions are telling.

Let's do some thumbnail math on a doping budget.

60 Trek bikes @ $4k/per = $240,000 USD
60 DuraAce groups @ $1200/per = $72,000 USD

$312,000 to dope 9-15 of the 24 (or so) riders for a season.

My gut tells me there are probably other items they could have obtain more than they needed from sponsors as well. High ticket items like carbon wheels would be easy to sell out the back door and might bring more than a groupo.

For those that state it is normal for teams to sell the bikes from the race season, of course that is the norm. What is out of the ordinary, and the issue here is the volume of bike ABOVE what is needed in a season being sold DURING the season. Trek was either (A) "in" on it, (B) wink, wink, sending extra bikes and "not asking" why, or (C) had no idea and was just trying to be the "good sponsor".

I am curious how much Trek's business grew from 1999 to 2005?