USADA - Armstrong

[JRTinMA]

I dont need to make up stuff, here is the link for you - http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/otl/news/story?id=5551242

You mention overheads, strange that you use a star rating rather than discuss dollar amount. Take a look at the wages of key personell.

Good talent is expensive. Charity Navigator looks at salaries, if they were out of line it would be reflected in the LAF rating.

 

[rhubroma]

Its a rating based on the charities program, administrative and marketing costs. You want these to be reasonable based on benchmarking vs other charities or a charity receives a bad or reduced rating. You don't want your charitable donations going to fund hookers and blow.

Well, then, so long as it isn't hookers and blow. We can all be satisfied, with the rating.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Good talent is expensive. Charity Navigator looks at salaries, if they were out of line it would be reflected in the LAF rating.

Can you show where it looks at salaries and would comment on them?

Because those salaries are bundled in as Program expenses - and Charitynavigator say:

This measure reflects what percent of its total budget a charity spends on the programs and services it exists to deliver. Dividing a charity's program expenses by its total functional expenses yields this percentage.

 

[thehog]

I dont need to make up stuff, here is the link for you - http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/otl/news/story?id=5551242

You mention overheads, strange that you use a star rating rather than discuss dollar amount. Take a look at the wages of key personell.

I've not read this article before but this paragraph stuck out and grabbed my attention:

Armstrong's lawyers have said they will refrain from lobbying politicians or policy makers to try to get the investigations quashed, although they acknowledge they hope to draw support for their contention that the allegations against Armstrong are not a matter for the government to explore.

Daly said that making a direct pitch to elected and appointed officials could easily backfire. "We have no plans to reach out to legislators, but if anyone has a question, we will answer it," Fabiani said.

From a crisis communications vantage point, Chamberlin agreed. "If that were to become public, it makes it look like he's trying to get out of something instead of facing the music,'' he said. But Chamberlin said he had no doubt that Armstrong has "naturally" made numerous connections in politics and policy circles through his foundation work and his celebrity.

 

[Oldman]

I've not read this article before but this paragraph stuck out and grabbed my attention:

Armstrong's lawyers have said they will refrain from lobbying politicians or policy makers to try to get the investigations quashed, although they acknowledge they hope to draw support for their contention that the allegations against Armstrong are not a matter for the government to explore.

Daly said that making a direct pitch to elected and appointed officials could easily backfire. "We have no plans to reach out to legislators, but if anyone has a question, we will answer it," Fabiani said.

From a crisis communications vantage point, Chamberlin agreed. "If that were to become public, it makes it look like he's trying to get out of something instead of facing the music,'' he said. But Chamberlin said he had no doubt that Armstrong has "naturally" made numerous connections in politics and policy circles through his foundation work and his celebrity.

And while some can donate alot during the campaign season you can't count on what you get for your money...or celebrity. Very few politicians are sticking their neck out on real issues right now and deflecting the tide coming Lance's way=bad politics.

 

[MarkvW]

And while some can donate alot during the campaign season you can't count on what you get for your money...or celebrity. Very few politicians are sticking their neck out on real issues right now and deflecting the tide coming Lance's way=bad politics.

Lance doesn't have much to offer a politician right now.

 

[patricknd]

It was reported so it must be? The fact that we now know it was not exclusive does not call into question the amount as well? Maybe it was 800k or 400k or 1.2MM, don't believe everything you read.

don't interfere with the urban myths, it was reported

 

[BotanyBay]

As I said before, don't believe everything you read and even less of what you read in a forum. Charity navigator gives LAF 4 stars for financials and transparency, and 4 stars overall.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=6570

Ah yes. The website where the non-profit industry all pitches-in and rates itself awesomely. Sort of like how the analysts for big investment banks never issue "sell" ratings on Fortune 1000 companies (lest they ruin their chances at future investment banking opps).

Charity Navigator is a feel-good website to get you to feel good about being charitable.

 

[Ninety5rpm]

Sorry if this is a repeat, but what happens next in the process?

The USADA sent the letter out, Armstrong responded. What about the others?

I presume the 3 members of the Review Board are already known, selected by the USADA, right?

Does the USADA show some or all of their evidence? Does the review board see the name of the witnesses, or do they remain anonymous?

About when does the Review Board makes it decision about whether to proceed or not?

 

[thehog]

Sorry if this is a repeat, but what happens next in the process?

The USADA sent the letter out, Armstrong responded. What about the others?

I presume the 3 members of the Review Board are already known, selected by the USADA, right?

Does the USADA show some or all of their evidence? Does the review board see the name of the witnesses, or do they remain anonymous?

About when does the Review Board makes it decision about whether to proceed or not?

Next they have to set up the star-chamber and not follow any process. They hide all the evidence and then convict Lance without showing him anything. He will be stripped of his titles by Travis Tygart and not by the arbritration panel.

Then they will gather up some tax payer money and set it on fire because they love to waste it.

USADA loves to be heinous and unconstitutional all at the same time.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Next they have to set up the star-chamber and not follow any process. They hide all the evidence and then convict Lance without showing him anything. He will be stripped of his titles by Travis Tygart and not by the arbritration panel.

Then they will gather up some tax payer money and set it on fire because they love to waste it.

USADA loves to be heinous and unconstitutional all at the same time.

GOLD!

Extra characters

 

[Microchip]

Okay...but what happens next? (Seriously.)

 

[MarkvW]

Okay...but what happens next? (Seriously.)

I expect notification of the charges that are approved by the review board comes next. Then we'll see if USADA is officially reaching back to the beginning of the Postie era.

 

[TechnicalDescent]

I expect notification of the charges that are approved by the review board comes next. Then we'll see if USADA is officially reaching back to the beginning of the Postie era.

Thanks.

Haven't been following all the detail, but there was a suggestion that the witnesses would remain anonymous and would not be testifying in public and be cross examined. This now seems to be spin from the Armstrong camp to make the process seem completely unfair.

Thank god it's not true. I'm sure even LA's harshest critics would be red faced with embarrassment if he was sanctioned on the basis of anonymous testimony. Nobody wants to see that. Can you imagine?

 

[Microchip]

This came out yesterday in a Dutch Newspaper.

The headline's literal translation is:

"Greg LeMond: Armstrong Confesses Why Not Just?"

I'm supposing it really means "Greg LeMond: Why Doesn't Armstrong Just Confess?"

 

[Microchip]

Greg LeMond on Armstrong

This came out yesterday in a Dutch Newspaper.

The headline's literal translation is:

"Greg LeMond: Armstrong Confesses Why Not Just?"

I'm supposing it really means "Greg LeMond: Why Doesn't Armstrong Just Confess?"

 

[Jeremiah]

Thanks.

Having been following all the detail, but there was a suggestion that the witnesses would remain anonymous and would not be testifying in public and be cross examined. This now seems to be spin from the Armstrong camp to make the process seem completely unfair.

Thank god it's not true. I'm sure even LA's harshest critics would be red faced with embarrassment if he was sanctioned on the basis of anonymous testimony. Nobody wants to see that. Can you imagine?

I think I'm starting to understand this whole trolling concept.

 

[Microchip]

Greg LeMond on Armstrong

From the Netherlands:

http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/1063/Tour-de...zijn-tourzeges-kwijt-hij-is-een-vergif.dhtml?

 

[MarkvW]

Thanks.

Haven't been following all the detail, but there was a suggestion that the witnesses would remain anonymous and would not be testifying in public and be cross examined. This now seems to be spin from the Armstrong camp to make the process seem completely unfair.

Thank god it's not true. I'm sure even LA's harshest critics would be red faced with embarrassment if he was sanctioned on the basis of anonymous testimony. Nobody wants to see that. Can you imagine?

Of course the witnesses will be disclosed. I posted the relevant rule upthread.

 

[70kmph]

Nice articles from the Dutch AD-nl- thanks

"LeMond expects Armstrong lose all his Tour victories. ' Yes, because there is so much evidence. I hope also, because once again: he deserves no special treatment. There are other riders who also Tour victories, big victories, lost. He is poison, he is toxic. It's not just cycling, it is also about abuse of power. Anyone who says something about him, something points out, is punished. That is why it is good that this happens. If USADA delivers good work, keren Armstrong and Johan Bruyneel (Belgian team leader and confidant of Armstrong, ed.) never go back in the sport. But the real problem remains that someone like Ferrari not criminal."

 

[JRTinMA]

Can you show where it looks at salaries and would comment on them?

Because those salaries are bundled in as Program expenses - and Charitynavigator say:

Thats not what it says at all, they are never mentioned under program expenses. In fact they are under Performance Metric 2 - Administrative expenses.

 

[thehog]

Nice articles from the Dutch AD-nl- thanks

"LeMond expects Armstrong lose all his Tour victories. ' Yes, because there is so much evidence. I hope also, because once again: he deserves no special treatment. There are other riders who also Tour victories, big victories, lost. He is poison, he is toxic. It's not just cycling, it is also about abuse of power. Anyone who says something about him, something points out, is punished. That is why it is good that this happens. If USADA delivers good work, keren Armstrong and Johan Bruyneel (Belgian team leader and confidant of Armstrong, ed.) never go back in the sport. But the real problem remains that someone like Ferrari not criminal."

Greg dialing up the heat!

 

[fatandfast]

Greg dialing up the heat!

Greg smoke the stuff with seeds.please. If they take two you are not close.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Of course the witnesses will be disclosed. I posted the relevant rule upthread.

That's the opening Team Wonderboy needs to tear down the witnesses. We can be fairly certain Wonderboy will coerce and intimidate after the hearing, for at minimum an attempted PR victory. Best of luck to all witnesses.

Maybe Pat will sue the witnessess...

 

[thehog]

Greg smoke the stuff with seeds.please. If they take two you are not close.

??

Sounds like you're licking the bag. Don't OD on us now.