The Shack only doing 2 GT's next year
Comments
-
Livestrong is one brand... one logo.
Plus this is a guy (regardless of whether he is/was a doper) that clearly takes an ANTI-anti-doping stance. He is no hero. What kind of prat would dominate a sport and then take no interest in taking a steadfast and clear stance against widespread cheating?0 -
someone has to pay for all those private jets to aspen, france, tour down under etc.. and those things are not cheap...
(I wonder does LA have to lodge his flight plans with the UCI / WADA?)
(I suppose it is difficult to test at 20,000 ft)0 -
iainf72 wrote:mfin wrote:
Is that true?? Can you buy stuff off .com and .org and one's (probably to some % which might be questionable) for charity where the other is profit?? If so, then that is absolutely disgusting that his charity bears the same name... makes me feel sick the thought of that. Can't be true surely?
That is indeed true.
.com is a money makin business. .org is the charity.
According to David Walsh, it's not uncommon in the US.
Not that true - the .com site has no direct "Donate" or "shop" functions - AFAIK, much of the revenue is from 3rd party advertising space sold on the site.
The .org site has the shop and donate buttons.'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'0 -
All conveniently obfuscated though.0
-
LangerDan wrote:iainf72 wrote:mfin wrote:
Is that true?? Can you buy stuff off .com and .org and one's (probably to some % which might be questionable) for charity where the other is profit?? If so, then that is absolutely disgusting that his charity bears the same name... makes me feel sick the thought of that. Can't be true surely?
That is indeed true.
.com is a money makin business. .org is the charity.
According to David Walsh, it's not uncommon in the US.
Not that true - the .com site has no direct "Donate" or "shop" functions - AFAIK, much of the revenue is from 3rd party advertising space sold on the site.
The .org site has the shop and donate buttons.
I thought that might be the case too but if the charitable stuff is branded livestrong.org and the other stuff is branded livestrong.com or livestrong, all of it with the same logo, then its still wrong. Very wrong to me.
It is profitting from peoples feelings towards cancer, he could claim that is not the intent and we could believe him or not but that wouldn't change what happens.
I assumed if you bought a pair of Oakley Livestrong shades for example then you'd be making a very clear charitable donation? ...as I would with all the stuff.
When he rides all the time does he wear Livestrong stuff or Livestrong.org or foundation stuff then??? ...if its the former then why the hell say he's returned to riding for cancer awareness.... I take it he wasn't wearing the commercial stuff though, tell me Ive got this bit wrong, Ive got a nasty feeling about it.0 -
Right... just looked up photos, first two 2009 tdf photos i saw show him with Liverstrong (nothing else) on his shorts and helmets. If he returned for cancer awareness he should have had Lance Armstrong Foundation written on it or at least .org ...cos everyone will type in .com.
He's wearing non-charitable branded products there right??? He is a sick individual IMO to say he's riding for cancer awareness and then do that. My mate had the same cancer as him and it turns my stomach.0 -
mfin wrote:Right... just looked up photos, first two 2009 tdf photos i saw show him with Liverstrong (nothing else) on his shorts and helmets. If he returned for cancer awareness he should have had Lance Armstrong Foundation written on it or at least .org ...cos everyone will type in .com.
He's wearing non-charitable branded products there right??? He is a sick individual IMO to say he's riding for cancer awareness and then do that. My mate had the same cancer as him and it turns my stomach.
Oh, c'mon, be honest and tell us how you really feel. You're "frenchfighters" evil twin brother, right?
0 -
There is no "stuff" branded "livestrong.com". The .com revenue comes from advertising and from selling memberships for their "wellness" programmes. However, the .com site does leverage the success of the LAF in selling advertising - the first reason they give to adverstise on the .com site is the 70 million wristbands sold, which is nominally a .org activity.
I tried to see there is any donation facilty via the .com site. Nothing. A search turned up five ways to donate sperm, how to donate eggs (probably not aimed at the same person) and how to donate a used car. It didn't turn up a big yellow button marked "give me your cash, now" It's flogging advertising space to pitch stuff at visitors to the "wrong" site that makes the money, as far I can see.
There also seems to be a divergence appearing in the content of the sites - the LAF .org site is cancer focussed, the .com site seems to pitch to a wider audience witha big emphasis on diet and exercise. Perhaps the "big-boned" offer a far larger voting audience that the cancer-afflicted?'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'0 -
dennisn wrote:mfin wrote:Right... just looked up photos, first two 2009 tdf photos i saw show him with Liverstrong (nothing else) on his shorts and helmets. If he returned for cancer awareness he should have had Lance Armstrong Foundation written on it or at least .org ...cos everyone will type in .com.
He's wearing non-charitable branded products there right??? He is a sick individual IMO to say he's riding for cancer awareness and then do that. My mate had the same cancer as him and it turns my stomach.
Oh, c'mon, be honest and tell us how you really feel. You're "frenchfighters" evil twin brother, right?
Well, hardly
...as a slight giveaway for you I think Contador is just another decent cyclist and not the utlimate-riding-machine-messiah! ...plus for a little balance I'll say one thing about Armstrong... even though I believe he doped along with pretty much all of the main contenders at his peak at least he attacked like hell when he was flying.
But, these views are nothing to do with him doping or not, I keep them totally separate from cancer issues. Like I said, my mate had testicular cancer, returned and spread to his stomach and thank god he survived it so I do feel close to the cancer issues (id feel the same if Lance was a footballist or a film star or... god help us... a politician)0 -
Dave_1 wrote:must be cause Lance is scared to dope in Italy...surely?? couldn't be anything innocent like setting priorities for his team e.g. strongest team as Cali
Oh do change the record ffs..
LA always said it was a toss-up between the Giro and TOC in prep for the TDF. It seems they've now decided on the TOC. Hardly a suprise. How many people have won the Giro then the TDF in the same year? Not many, and certainly not many over 30.
I wish people would get off LA's back sometimes, and no I'm not green and I suspect he has used PED at some stage.0 -
sampras38 wrote:Dave_1 wrote:must be cause Lance is scared to dope in Italy...surely?? couldn't be anything innocent like setting priorities for his team e.g. strongest team as Cali
Oh do change the record ffs..
LA always said it was a toss-up between the Giro and TOC in prep for the TDF. It seems they've now decided on the TOC. Hardly a suprise. How many people have won the Giro then the TDF in the same year? Not many, and certainly not many over 30.
I wish people would get off LA's back sometimes, and no I'm not green and I suspect he has used PED at some stage.
Dave_1 is being sarcastic here pete, and having a pop at other forum members.___________________
Strava is not Zen.0 -
calvjones wrote:sampras38 wrote:Dave_1 wrote:must be cause Lance is scared to dope in Italy...surely?? couldn't be anything innocent like setting priorities for his team e.g. strongest team as Cali
Oh do change the record ffs..
LA always said it was a toss-up between the Giro and TOC in prep for the TDF. It seems they've now decided on the TOC. Hardly a suprise. How many people have won the Giro then the TDF in the same year? Not many, and certainly not many over 30.
I wish people would get off LA's back sometimes, and no I'm not green and I suspect he has used PED at some stage.
Dave_1 is being sarcastic here pete, and having a pop at other forum members.
Ahh, if that's the case I'm sorry Dave..
It's just the Lance hating gets a bit tiresome after a while..;-)0 -
mfin wrote:dennisn wrote:mfin wrote:Right... just looked up photos, first two 2009 tdf photos i saw show him with Liverstrong (nothing else) on his shorts and helmets. If he returned for cancer awareness he should have had Lance Armstrong Foundation written on it or at least .org ...cos everyone will type in .com.
He's wearing non-charitable branded products there right??? He is a sick individual IMO to say he's riding for cancer awareness and then do that. My mate had the same cancer as him and it turns my stomach.
Oh, c'mon, be honest and tell us how you really feel. You're "frenchfighters" evil twin brother, right?
Well, hardly ...as a slight giveaway for you I think Contador is just another decent cyclist and not the utlimate-riding-machine-messiah! ...plus for a little balance I'll say one thing about Armstrong... even though I believe he doped along with pretty much all of the main contenders at his peak at least he attacked like hell when he was flying.
But, these views are nothing to do with him doping or not, I keep them totally separate from cancer issues. Like I said, my mate had testicular cancer, returned and spread to his stomach and thank god he survived it so I do feel close to the cancer issues (id feel the same if Lance was a footballist or a film star or... god help us... a politician)
I'd bet money on him becoming a politician. However, even after all that has been said about him, on this forum, it's still not enough to earn him a spot in politics. I feel he's got to
dig a whole lot deeper into the cesspool of life to become even a descent politician.
In case you didn't know, I think politics and politicians are pretty much lower life forms.
In truth politics have bored me since I was a child and I've always looked upon politicians
as people with, basically, no talent for anything really constructive.0 -
there is no way he will become a politican on the national stage.
maybe the mayor of austin, but what ever about sports writers digging into your background, I imagine that they have nothing on the woodward and berstein types that you get in politics. I dont think many people's image could stand up to that onslaught.0 -
intothe12 wrote:there is no way he will become a politican on the national stage.
maybe the mayor of austin, but what ever about sports writers digging into your background, I imagine that they have nothing on the woodward and berstein types that you get in politics. I dont think many people's image could stand up to that onslaught.
Worst-case scenario. Someone finds out LA took a medical product - i.e. not coke, not crystal meth - to beat some foreigners most people haven't heard of in a sport most voters wouldn't care about. Big woo.
Kinky Friedman is standing for Governor of Texas in 2010 and his background is considerably more, errr, colourful than Lances yet it hasn't stopped him getting the Democratic nomination.
LAs bigger problem is finding some general appeal that doesn't depend on solely being perceived as an advocate for the sick.'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'0 -
intothe12 wrote:there is no way he will become a politican on the national stage.
maybe the mayor of austin, but what ever about sports writers digging into your background, I imagine that they have nothing on the woodward and berstein types that you get in politics. I dont think many people's image could stand up to that onslaught.
Well, Arnold is the Govenor of California AND an admitted steroid user and has smoked pot on camera. So his past is "fairly colorful" yet there he is. I'm thinking that people are really getting tired of the "run of the mill" politician and their seeming inability to accomplish much of anything. At least an ex athelte has a record of accomplishments, is a proven hard worker, has lots of energy, is used to doing his best, etc., etc. Whereas most
people would be hard pressed to name a poltician with those qualifications.0 -
Poor old Dave.
A staunch "equality for Lance" supporter, gets a "hater" tag.
There's no winning around here......"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
dennisn wrote:intothe12 wrote:there is no way he will become a politican on the national stage.
maybe the mayor of austin, but what ever about sports writers digging into your background, I imagine that they have nothing on the woodward and berstein types that you get in politics. I dont think many people's image could stand up to that onslaught.
Well, Arnold is the Govenor of California AND an admitted steroid user and has smoked pot on camera. So his past is "fairly colorful" yet there he is. I'm thinking that people are really getting tired of the "run of the mill" politician and their seeming inability to accomplish much of anything. At least an ex athelte has a record of accomplishments, is a proven hard worker, has lots of energy, is used to doing his best, etc., etc. Whereas most
people would be hard pressed to name a poltician with those qualifications.
And Armstrong was in Dodgeball, which is funny, while Arnold made Jingle All the Way. How can you vote for someone who's judgement thought that was a good script.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:dennisn wrote:intothe12 wrote:there is no way he will become a politican on the national stage.
maybe the mayor of austin, but what ever about sports writers digging into your background, I imagine that they have nothing on the woodward and berstein types that you get in politics. I dont think many people's image could stand up to that onslaught.
Well, Arnold is the Govenor of California AND an admitted steroid user and has smoked pot on camera. So his past is "fairly colorful" yet there he is. I'm thinking that people are really getting tired of the "run of the mill" politician and their seeming inability to accomplish much of anything. At least an ex athelte has a record of accomplishments, is a proven hard worker, has lots of energy, is used to doing his best, etc., etc. Whereas most
people would be hard pressed to name a poltician with those qualifications.
And Armstrong was in Dodgeball, which is funny, while Arnold made Jingle All the Way. How can you vote for someone who's judgement thought that was a good script.
I think perhaps you might have a very dillusional view of the movie industry 0
