Trek going going gone

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
purcell said:
Livestrong does not do, or contribute to, cancer research. It is about "awareness".

Publicly funded leads to the same thing anywhere in the world, increases in beauracracy to "administer" the funding with the result that less overall money end up in the hands of those doing research.

The beauracratic end is granted a dreadful problem, I will admit, and no doubt embedded within the system. However, at least in principle, public financing is non-exploitative in the commercialization sense. At any rate, I'll take beauracracy over private jets paid for by donors to assist to chronic doping practices at 30,000 feet any day. :D And not only...
 
knewcleardaze said:
Not to mention many times tax monies mysteriously disappear.

Not to mention how much overhead there is in management and publicity expenses, promos, investements, VIP dinners, events, executive costs (hotels, travel, salaries), product lines, etc. Other than vanishing taxes. :rolleyes:
 
Jun 16, 2012
210
0
0
Interesting timing by the ex sponsors, yes. And curious they all agreed to the same terms - we continue to support Livestrong. Did LA call around to sponsors with a deal to get in front of the UCI decision? With his ties there, surely he is the first to know with certainty what they will decide after reviewing the USADA filing.

No doubt with Patton Boggs involved in Washington, everything is on the table over the longer term, including a Presidential pardon.

Signed, a fearful cynic.
 
Sep 29, 2009
4
0
0
richwagmn said:
Wonder when Trek will scrub their website of LA's images?

http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/company/believe
At the dealer show in August, I looked long & hard and found one, just one, single image of Lance anywhere in the huge hall of everything-Trek. A different case in prior years.

You'll also discover that Trek has rarely used Lance as a spokesperson for the company, and just try and find quotes from him in prior catalogs or versions of their website. I think Trek has been pretty responsible in terms of a gradual withdrawal from Lance as a marketing tool, weighing the risks vs benefits.

For the conspiracy theorists, please note that, when Trek chose the "nuclear" defense against Greg LeMond when he sued the company, they put everything out in public, including the dirt. The goal of the nuclear defense option is to put everything forward so the other guy has nothing left to blackmail you with.

Please note that I'm a Trek dealer so you can assume everything I say is entirely biased, perhaps even more so since I was there, first hand, for 6 of Lance's 7 wins. Yet I, like most, had doubts from early-on. Just doubts, and based only on the one fact we thought we knew- that most of the peloton was doped, and how could one win a race whose outcome is often determined by seconds after hours on the bike, against a doped opposition if you were clean?
 
Jun 18, 2009
2,078
2
0
Mike Jacoubowsky said:
For the conspiracy theorists, please note that, when Trek chose the "nuclear" defense against Greg LeMond when he sued the company, they put everything out in public, including the dirt. The goal of the nuclear defense option is to put everything forward so the other guy has nothing left to blackmail you with.

I'm not sure it's a conspiracy. Yes, I read much of the documentation I could find.

The business case could be make for Trek to end their agreement with LeMond given Lemond's vocal criticism of Armstrong. Trek was certainly getting much more out of the association with LA than they were with Lemond.

The ethical case? Not as clear. Did the Burkes really believe LA was clean? How did they explain away Betsy Andrea and Emma and the retested 99 EPO samples? They simply bought into the LA story hook, line and sinker. And for that, they look silly.
 
Mar 17, 2009
1,863
0
0
Baroh1488 said:
Is France going to rename "Madone"?

I recently rode the Col de La Madone with a French friend. In the village at the top we got chatting to a local old guy, who was a bikie too.

He said "the record is held by Rominger but Armstrong went a minute quicker". It was said in such a way, you were left in no doubt that it is their mountain not Armstrong's!
 
ultimobici said:
I recently rode the Col de La Madone with a French friend. In the village at the top we got chatting to a local old guy, who was a bikie too.

He said "the record is held by Rominger but Armstrong went a minute quicker". It was said in such a way, you were left in no doubt that it is their mountain not Armstrong's!

According to Tyler, HE went quicker up than Lance......I certainly don't think Rominger should get any credit from Lances disgrace
 
Benotti69 said:
I suggest to rename them 'Nevermore'....:rolleyes:

How about just use the name of the OEM they buy from. One generation it'll be Giant, the next Trigon. Some of them don't have very translatable names though... That might be a problem..

Trek's using the same "bad rider" message to keep the whole anti-doping artifice alive and well.
 
May 12, 2011
241
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
Interesting how similar Aleajecteast and trolls are...

You forgot the "burn" at the end. ;-)

It's actually pathetic that anytime anyone on this board disagrees with the cogniscenti, they get called a troll.... Try harder.
 
Apr 7, 2009
176
0
0
86TDFWinner said:
Barry Sanders Vs The Detroit Lions(delusional Barry actually thought he'd be able to keep a huge part of his signing bonus, and/or cotract, when he abruptly "retired" on them). They won a judgement of like $9 mill against him, also see Lions Vs Charles Rogers.


Lance won't be sued for being a d bag, he'll be sued for misleading folks.

I bet there will be very few lawsuits. I'm sure his sponsors really knew what was going on or had some idea.

This is all just another case of the big fellah's riding the wave all the way to the beach and then jumping off and claiming they didn't know how to surf.