The Official LANCE ARMSTRONG Thread 2010-2011

[Ripper]

Holy crap! One of the easier ways to spot troll disruption is when you log on and read something like 8 pages that have nothing to do with cycling! Good work Publicus in seeing it early on.

OK - on to the posts just above this one. Interesting piece by RadioShack (thanks Hog). Hard to buy into the whole spin put forth by the marketing folks, but given where RadioShack was in terms of exposure, I don't doubt they have experienced benefits. We'll have to see how it plays out over the year. Initial benefits can happen simply from the change and the association with LA. However, if the whole Astana/2009 TdF issue gets increasing negative pubicity, RadioShack may find their ROI to dwindle.

 

[Publicus]

Holy crap! One of the easier ways to spot troll disruption is when you log on and read something like 8 pages that have nothing to do with cycling! Good work Publicus in seeing it early on.

OK - on to the posts just above this one. Interesting piece by RadioShack (thanks Hog). Hard to buy into the whole spin put forth by the marketing folks, but given where RadioShack was in terms of exposure, I don't doubt they have experienced benefits. We'll have to see how it plays out over the year. Initial benefits can happen simply from the change and the association with LA. However, if the whole Astana/2009 TdF issue gets increasing negative pubicity, RadioShack may find their ROI to dwindle.

All my training with CC made it possible.

I assume you are referring to the IV transfusion equipment. That will only hit them if one of the seven is Lance Armstrong. If it is, they won't be the only one to take a major hit on that--SRAM, Nike, and LAF will take it square on the chin. That being said, I don't think anything will come of the transfusion equipment. There is far too much money at stake for it to do anything other than die on the vine--I wish it weren't the case.

 

[ravens]

All my training with CC made it possible. .

Dude, You need to get out and play. Being this bonded to an internet forum is probably how CC and P---gy got their start. It's like how Gollum was just like Frodo in the beginning. You don't like....call this forum... 'Precious' or anything.... ? creepy

I assume you are referring to the IV transfusion equipment. That will only hit them if one of the seven is Lance Armstrong. If it is, they won't be the only one to take a major hit on that--SRAM, Nike, and LAF will take it square on the chin. That being said, I don't think anything will come of the transfusion equipment. There is far too much money at stake for it to do anything other than die on the vine--I wish it weren't the case.

So far it's just a lot of smoke. But of course, I have already described these organizations' brothel like nature elsewhere. Someone just needs to write a check and ****...it's gone.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I've noticed a lot of people use them synonymously, so I'm not sure what to believe in articles, press releases, etc. Frankly, it's a bit frustrating. As a Foundation supporter, I wish there was a clearer distinction.

Yes - I find it frustrating too.
However I think in this case the proceeds do go to the LAF - or at least that is implied when RS said they were donationg $10 from the LA Comeback 2.0 book - which is part of the $1.3 million.

But I wonder how much of the $1.3 million was made of 'donations' added on unwittingly to peoples purchases?

 

[Publicus]

Dude, You need to get out and play. Being this bonded to an internet forum is probably how CC and P---gy got their start. It's like how Gollum was just like Frodo in the beginning. You don't like....call this forum... 'Precious' or anything.... ? creepy



So far it's just a lot of smoke. But of course, I have already described these organizations' brothel like nature elsewhere. Someone just needs to write a check and ****...it's gone.

I get out and play just fine. I just don't need as much sleep as some (most). Don't worry, I'm not that bonded to this forum that it is affecting my social and professional lives.

 

[kurtinsc]

No profits go to LIVESTRONG not LAF.

There is no such entity as LIVESTRONG.

Livestrong is a brand owned entirely by the Lance Armstrong Foundation.

And before you state it... yes, livestrong.com is run for profit. But demand media paid the LAF in stock for the right to use the name... the name is still owned by the LAF. Demand just gets to run a website using the name.

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

Yes - I find it frustrating too.
However I think in this case the proceeds do go to the LAF - or at least that is implied when RS said they were donationg $10 from the LA Comeback 2.0 book - which is part of the $1.3 million.

But I wonder how much of the $1.3 million was made of 'donations' added on unwittingly to peoples purchases?

That's interesting. When I worked retail many moons ago. We had metrics, sales goals, and quotas to meet. If not disciplinary action was taken (cue dramatic music). I think that is happening here; RS has donation quotas they want their employees to meet, and out of fear, these cashiers are just adding it to customer bills, hoping they wouldn't notice. I saw people do that sort of thing all the time, scanning fraudulant discount cards, etc.

This bothers me though. I agree with Race Radio's comment about the resource centers at the stores. If used properly, they could be invaluable, but if people are being forced to donate and they see LIVESTRONG stuff for sale all over the place, it will appear fishy. Hell, I wouldn't donate if I thought the charity were a business deal between an athlete and a multi-billion dollar corporation.

I haven't been in a Radio Shack store for years; maybe it's time I work a little recon mission. I do need some batteries and a universal TV remote.

 

[theswordsman]

All my training with CC made it possible.

It's probably similar to AC saying he gained three years experience in one

I assume you are referring to the IV transfusion equipment. That will only hit them if one of the seven is Lance Armstrong. If it is, they won't be the only one to take a major hit on that--SRAM, Nike, and LAF will take it square on the chin. That being said, I don't think anything will come of the transfusion equipment. There is far too much money at stake for it to do anything other than die on the vine--I wish it weren't the case.

My only glimmer of hope in this is that it's outside the realm of normal doping agencies and in the hands of the OCLAESP. There were things in Astana's trash that are illegal to possess in France. The police agency was motivated enough to go through the trash of Tour teams and sort through it all, and committed enough to do lab tests on it. All they need to carry on are some DNA samples to match so they know who to question.

That just popped another thought into my head - will the police be waiting to question riders and staff once they're on French soil?

Paris-Nice should be a great race, but with the UCI/AFLD situation, the HGH test, and the police investigation, there's a lot of off-road drama that could play out.

I wonder when Armstrong will visit France?

 

[El Oso]

Yes - I find it frustrating too.
However I think in this case the proceeds do go to the LAF - or at least that is implied when RS said they were donationg $10 from the LA Comeback 2.0 book - which is part of the $1.3 million.

But I wonder how much of the $1.3 million was made of 'donations' added on unwittingly to peoples purchases?

+1 to the article. Went to RadioShack the other week because I needed a random battery for my HRM. First impression was shock that they only had one shelf devoted to StrongArm and that only consisted of the LancePorn errr Comeback 2.0 book and bracelets. Then at checkout I got to that prompt for the $1 donation which was defaulted to making the "donation."

 

[El Oso]

If you don't donate you love cancer

Missed The Shack's press release on unauthorized charges:

Tens of thousands of customers have eagerly contributed to our point-of-sale collection for LIVESTRONG in just the first few weeks. As 100% of every $1 point-of-sale donation goes directly to LIVESTRONG, we believe it’s been tremendously successful so far. But RadioShack doesn’t intend for any customer to feel compelled to support the fight against cancer. It is a personal choice.

Looks like they're already going with the if you don't donate then you love cancer argument. WOW!

 

[bianchigirl]

What if I want to donate to a charity that I know will give 100% of my donation to cancer research?

sword, do you remember the 2000(?) Actovegin investigation? It was always claimed that the investigators found nothing - true enough, they found EPO levels that wouldn't have looked out of place in a newborn baby. You know why that investigation foundered? Because more samples were requested - and declined. Hopefully there won't be the same wriggle room in this investigation.

Quelle surprise that the first hgh positive comes in rugby - a sport where players have exploded in size due to 'better training and nutrition'

 

[ravens]

I get out and play just fine. I just don't need as much sleep as some (most). Don't worry, I'm not that bonded to this forum that it is affecting my social and professional lives.

OK, just trying to save you from losing a finger somewhere on Mount Doom. It's like 15 km at 10% and hot as hell.

 

[patricknd]

I've noticed a lot of people use them synonymously, so I'm not sure what to believe in articles, press releases, etc. Frankly, it's a bit frustrating. As a Foundation supporter, I wish there was a clearer distinction.

livestrong.org is foundation, and i agree it's frustrating.

 

[thehog]

I've noticed a lot of people use them synonymously, so I'm not sure what to believe in articles, press releases, etc. Frankly, it's a bit frustrating. As a Foundation supporter, I wish there was a clearer distinction.

I think the idea is that it remains confusing. ie if your buying a new pair of NIKE trainers and you think because there is a splash of yellow colour on them then the profit from the shoes goes to cancer patients then the marketing has worked. Its obvious they don't want to make the distinction between for profit Lance and LAF Lance.

 

[thehog]

There is no such entity as LIVESTRONG.

Livestrong is a brand owned entirely by the Lance Armstrong Foundation.

And before you state it... yes, livestrong.com is run for profit. But demand media paid the LAF in stock for the right to use the name... the name is still owned by the LAF. Demand just gets to run a website using the name.

I think you'll find its LAF that doesn't exist anymore. The former LAF.org website now translates to livestong.org which shortly links off to Livestrong.com........ I don't care who owns it but pushing unsuspecting people off to the "for profit" site is a misleading.. however thats the idea methinks.

 

[kurtinsc]

I think you'll find its LAF that doesn't exist anymore. The former LAF.org website now translates to livestong.org which shortly links off to Livestrong.com........ I don't care who owns it but pushing unsuspecting people off to the "for profit" site is a misleading.. however thats the idea methinks.

Look, you need to understand that a website is different then a legal entity.

THERE IS NO LEGAL ENTITY KNOWN AS LIVESTRONG.

It doesn't exist. You can't sue "livestrong". There simply is no such thing.

"Livestrong" is purely a brand. That brand is owned by a legal entity known as the "Lance Armstrong Foundation". To use the brand you have to get permission from the LAF.

Demand Media purchased the rights to use "livestrong" for a for profit website by giving the LAF stock in Demand Media. It doesn't mean there are now two "livestrong" entities... there are NONE. There are just two websites. Referring to a "livestrong" entitiy is simply a semantic mistake in referencing the entity that OWNS the LIVESTRONG brand... the Lance Armstrong Foundation.

This isn't complicated. A website address is simply that... an address. It's not a company, organization, or legal entity of any kind. Do you really think if I go and register "kurtinsc.com" that all of a sudden a legal being called "kurtinsc" comes into existence? Really?

 

[Polish]

LiveStrong gear is OK I guess....

But does anyone know when Alberto will release his FingerBang™©
line of clothing and accessories? Is it already available for purchase?

I can't wait I can't wait I can't wait

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

LiveStrong gear is OK I guess....

But does anyone know when Alberto will release his FingerBang™©
line of clothing and accessories? Is it already available for purchase?

I can't wait I can't wait I can't wait

Psst, while he's not looking, can you pull out the shoe I left in Lance's a$$?

 

[Prodigy]

kurtinsc,

so good to have you setting the record straight on this LiveStrong issue. Without your contributions on this matter a lot of false information would just be accepted as fact by everybody. Thanks.

 

[ravens]

Psst, while he's not looking, can you pull out the shoe I left in Lance's a$$?

Good one.

Originally Posted by Polish
LiveStrong gear is OK I guess....

I can't wait I can't wait I can't wait

I have already gone on record stating I don't really care about his business interests and ended up defending the fraud. Not gonna do it again, wouldn't be prudent....

I can't wait for Alberto's pistolero gear either, but he has been promising it for so long, I have given up waiting... Besides, I don't have any money any longer, so what's the point?

 

[ravens]

Psst, while he's not looking, can you pull out the shoe I left in Lance's a$$?

Good one.

Originally Posted by Polish
LiveStrong gear is OK I guess....

I can't wait I can't wait I can't wait

I have already gone on record stating I don't really care about his business interests and ended up defending the fraud. Not gonna do it again, wouldn't be prudent....

I can't wait for Alberto's pistolero gear either, but he has been promising it for so long, I have given up waiting... Besides, I don't have any money any longer, so what's the point?

 

[thehog]

Look, you need to understand that a website is different then a legal entity.

THERE IS NO LEGAL ENTITY KNOWN AS LIVESTRONG.

It doesn't exist. You can't sue "livestrong". There simply is no such thing.

"Livestrong" is purely a brand. That brand is owned by a legal entity known as the "Lance Armstrong Foundation". To use the brand you have to get permission from the LAF.

Demand Media purchased the rights to use "livestrong" for a for profit website by giving the LAF stock in Demand Media. It doesn't mean there are now two "livestrong" entities... there are NONE. There are just two websites. Referring to a "livestrong" entitiy is simply a semantic mistake in referencing the entity that OWNS the LIVESTRONG brand... the Lance Armstrong Foundation.

This isn't complicated. A website address is simply that... an address. It's not a company, organization, or legal entity of any kind. Do you really think if I go and register "kurtinsc.com" that all of a sudden a legal being called "kurtinsc" comes into existence? Really?

Yes Really. Excellent post which proves my point entirely.

Deception. There really is no way for a user to know which part of Livestrong is for Demand Armstrong and which is for LAF fundraising, cancer support foundation.

I conclude form his own website:

"The Lance Armstrong Foundation will continue to support cancer survivorship and call on our nation's leaders to wage a new war against cancer through LIVESTRONG.ORG. LIVESTRONG.COM is a practical resource to find a wealth of health-related information from a wide range of sources, and is a proactive way to have a daily conversation about being healthy and living an active lifestyle.

While LIVESTRONG.ORG remains a nonprofit, LIVESTRONG.COM is a for-profit that derives its revenue from advertising and member subscriptions."


It goes on:

"A strong and engaged community
Throughout the site, members are encouraged to interact with each other and provide their opinions and experiences. At LIVESTRONG.COM, we believe health is not just static information; rather it's an ongoing conversation between experts, doctors, caregivers and patients. Through user comments, reviews, groups, Q&A and message boards, LIVESTRONG.COM members complete the site with real-life experiences and ongoing peer support. Change is driven by daily action, and that's what the LIVESTRONG.COM community is here to do."

a lot of .com'ing going on in there and not a lot of .org'ing. You see my point. Livestrong .org and .com is of one to the consumer but the end game is much different. ie one goes to the pocket of Demand Armsrong and the other pays for the expenses on his jet.

Don't waste my time with a reply.

 

[ravens]

 

[progressor]

What if I want to donate to a charity that I know will give 100% of my donation to cancer research?

sword, do you remember the 2000(?) Actovegin investigation? It was always claimed that the investigators found nothing - true enough, they found EPO levels that wouldn't have looked out of place in a newborn baby. You know why that investigation foundered? Because more samples were requested - and declined. Hopefully there won't be the same wriggle room in this investigation.

Quelle surprise that the first hgh positive comes in rugby - a sport where players have exploded in size due to 'better training and nutrition'

Get your sports right, the positive was in Rugby League not rugby Union, theres a difference. Especially for young Australian Women

 

[kurtinsc]

Yes Really. Excellent post which proves my point entirely.

Deception. There really is no way for a user to know which part of Livestrong is for Demand Armstrong and which is for LAF fundraising, cancer support foundation.

I conclude form his own website:

"The Lance Armstrong Foundation will continue to support cancer survivorship and call on our nation's leaders to wage a new war against cancer through LIVESTRONG.ORG. LIVESTRONG.COM is a practical resource to find a wealth of health-related information from a wide range of sources, and is a proactive way to have a daily conversation about being healthy and living an active lifestyle.

While LIVESTRONG.ORG remains a nonprofit, LIVESTRONG.COM is a for-profit that derives its revenue from advertising and member subscriptions."


It goes on:

"A strong and engaged community
Throughout the site, members are encouraged to interact with each other and provide their opinions and experiences. At LIVESTRONG.COM, we believe health is not just static information; rather it's an ongoing conversation between experts, doctors, caregivers and patients. Through user comments, reviews, groups, Q&A and message boards, LIVESTRONG.COM members complete the site with real-life experiences and ongoing peer support. Change is driven by daily action, and that's what the LIVESTRONG.COM community is here to do."

a lot of .com'ing going on in there and not a lot of .org'ing. You see my point. Livestrong .org and .com is of one to the consumer but the end game is much different. ie one goes to the pocket of Demand Armsrong and the other pays for the expenses on his jet.

Don't waste my time with a reply.

Look... I'll make one more try then I'll give up.

100% of the Livestrong brand is owned by the LAF. Every... single... bit.

There are no "parts" of the livestrong brand. It really appears you don't know the difference between a brand and a company.

There is no way to buy anything with "livestrong" on it without the profits going to the LAF. There is no way to "accidentally" donate to Demand Media.

Is Demand profiting off the "livestrong" brand? Does it bring in advertising and sponsorships? Absolutely. And they paid the LAF for the right to use the brand with stock. The LAF recieves funds in the form of dividends from this exchange.


If you want to claim anyone has ever tried to donate a penny to the LAF and it's ended up with Demand Media... I'd be happy to see whatever proof you've got. But honestly I don't see Lance moving money to demand media being realistic. He's got an extreme minority stake in demand... it's not like he owns the company. He got paid a relatively small ownership stake in order to advertise and contribute content to the website. If he were stealing money from the LAF, he's probably doing it much more directly. I don't think he'd take dollars from the LAF to make RIchard Rosenblatt (the majority stakeholder in Demand Media) a bunch of money... he'd want to make LANCE money.

It almost sounds like you think Lance owns most of Demand. Demand Media owns 60 websites. Exactly how much of an ownership stake do you think a person associated with one of them would get?