Forum home Road cycling forum Pro race

Armstrong's Sponsors

jerry3571jerry3571 Posts: 1,532
edited November 2015 in Pro race
Hi
Ha Ha! You might enjoy this one.

My Dad was talking and he thinks that our poor Lance Armstrong has been given a raw deal. The Sponsors are caning his censored wanting their Bucks back and LA will be left without a Dime and Landis will stand to make over $20 million.
My dad's point was simply that the Sponsors got in to bed with LA when the times were good and raked it in through the advertising and the branding which came from his 7 Tour wins (or not).

All the money was made whilst this was going on for over 7 years. The income to these companies must have been immense and as soon as the problems begin then these backers walk away with pockets brimming with cash. Some of them now are even trying to get their expenses back after making a mint.
Even USPS who have been called in by it's Government by backing a doped Cycling Team even must have increased it's value by being advertised all over the world. As a Governmental company the USPS must have had invested in the Team to make a buck somehow. LA brought home the bacon for these investors who all did very well out of the 7 years.
Shouldn't these Companies be partly responsible for what happened? LA happened just after the 1998 Tour where the race fell apart due to doping and the years prior were almost as bumpy so these Companies knew what the Sport was up to.

Typical of cycling to give Landis a packet for doping when he was in on the joke.

Also, the (alleged) collusion with the UCI and others meant this was a big thing. Maybe an idea dreamt up after the 1998 Tour of Disaster with all parties present to make the dream of the Cancer Survivor winning the Tour. This would surely bury the 1998 Tour.
“Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving”- Albert Einstein

"You can't ride the Tour de France on mineral water."
-Jacques Anquetil
«1

Posts

  • Your family get-togethers sound a riot
  • jerry3571jerry3571 Posts: 1,532
    edited November 2015
    Your family get-togethers sound a riot

    My Dad is now retired so I get my ears pinned back. He's got a point though. A lot of people got very rich off the back of our long lost Patron. ;)

    Not sure whether shooting the Golden Goose or the sponsors would work but maybe they should take some of the responsibility too.
    “Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving”- Albert Einstein

    "You can't ride the Tour de France on mineral water."
    -Jacques Anquetil
  • bristolpetebristolpete Posts: 2,255
    Interesting point and often touched upon in several books, websites and so on.

    From the top down, everyone was complicit on the lie, the cover up, the program as it has become known.

    However, if you actually stop and think about it, Armstrong has been made a global scapegoat for world wide sport. Everyone should let go, drop it and move on.

    Now, what about the fact Barcelona FC used to murder top level football teams juiced up on EPO ? Anyone going to make a movie about that !?!?!
  • If everyone had returned their Oakleys, Treks or Nike kit as a result of the Armstrong affair then those companies may have had a case. However, as mentioned above (and as we all know anyway) these companies made a mint and continue to thrive and so even if there were contractual breaches they remain a technicality and I would be surprised it there was anything other than token judgments in the end.
    Also action on many of the contracts will be time barred unless they were executed as specialties which i doubt.
    USPS might be a different beast purely because of its government owned nature and they probably would want an example made of him. Taking money off Lance and giving it to Floyd is just farcical. Give it to Lemond or anyone else who suffered financially as a result.
    @JaunePeril

    Winner of the Bike Radar Pro Race Wiggins Hour Prediction Competition
  • Wasn't this also the case with Rabobank, and when the sh¡t hit the fan, they pulled the plug?

    How do you prove, though, that the sponsors had known (or at least, suspected) what was going on? Watching this turn in to a bunch of rich assholes suing another rich censored is pathetic. They both got burned. Just walk away.
    Giant TCR Advanced II - Reviewed on my homepage
    Giant TCR Alliance Zero
    BMC teammachineSLR03
    The Departed
    Giant SCR2
    Canyon Roadlite
    Specialized Allez
    Some other junk...
  • ddraverddraver Posts: 19,554
    The flip side of this is that Oakley sponsor a lot of events or athletes that do not make a lot of money but which would die or not be able to compete professionally without that sponsorship. Oakley sponsor a lot of "extreme sports" (hate that phrase) for example which I doubt makes them much. Rabbobank also give buckets of money to local sport in The Netherlands which I would guess does not give them any significant return so I find it rather difficult to get too much in a lather about them making money off of Rasmussen/Boegard
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • jerry3571jerry3571 Posts: 1,532
    I did hear some Commentator some years ago talking about Cycling having one of the best returns in sport. Not sure what that multiples were but they were very good. So any Sponsor goes in to this sport with their eyes open.
    The Sponsor also dictates the races where they want to be seen. This is purely business. The team must perform in these particular races to maybe break in to new markets. When a team has to perform then the doping will follow as the pressure will be undeniable from the Company.
    It's a bit sad to think of our sport as a business sense but this is our sport.
    “Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving”- Albert Einstein

    "You can't ride the Tour de France on mineral water."
    -Jacques Anquetil
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 46,552 Lives Here
    Greater returns are usually a product of greater risk.

    In cycling for 15 years the risk was your brand being named after a doping scandal. That's fairly big.

    My gut tells me that Festina watches are somehow shonky, though they're probably not.
  • Greater returns are usually a product of greater risk.

    In cycling for 15 years the risk was your brand being named after a doping scandal. That's fairly big.

    My gut tells me that Festina watches are somehow shonky, though they're probably not.


    Yes you do think twice about them.

    An interesting point, would the perception about Nike or Oakley be the same as Festina if they had been the principle sponsor as in Team Oakley and it had all happened at the time LA was racing in a big race drug bust?
    @JaunePeril

    Winner of the Bike Radar Pro Race Wiggins Hour Prediction Competition
  • TheBigBeanTheBigBean Posts: 9,210
    Typical of cycling to give Landis a packet for doping when he was in on the joke.

    Landis may have doped, lied and lied some more, but from the point when he decided to tell the truth he seems to have done so. He is largely responsible for the USADA investigation starting and for playing a part in trying to clean up cycling. Few others have done as much or consistently told the truth, so I don't begrudge him a bob or two.
  • Typical of cycling to give Landis a packet for doping when he was in on the joke.

    Landis may have doped, lied and lied some more, but from the point when he decided to tell the truth he seems to have done so. He is largely responsible for the USADA investigation starting and for playing a part in trying to clean up cycling. Few others have done as much or consistently told the truth, so I don't begrudge him a bob or two.


    Landis doped, well yeah, join the party, but he can do one for the Fairness Fund alone

    Playing a part in cleaning up cycling? Ha. It was all about payback on Lance for not giving him a job.

    A bob or two? Fine. Here's 23p I found down the back of my sofa.
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 46,552 Lives Here
    Actions speak louder than motives RR...
  • TheBigBeanTheBigBean Posts: 9,210
    Typical of cycling to give Landis a packet for doping when he was in on the joke.

    Landis may have doped, lied and lied some more, but from the point when he decided to tell the truth he seems to have done so. He is largely responsible for the USADA investigation starting and for playing a part in trying to clean up cycling. Few others have done as much or consistently told the truth, so I don't begrudge him a bob or two.


    Landis doped, well yeah, join the party, but he can do one for the Fairness Fund alone

    Playing a part in cleaning up cycling? Ha. It was all about payback on Lance for not giving him a job.

    A bob or two? Fine. Here's 23p I found down the back of my sofa.

    No such thing as redemption in Richmond then?

    Name me another sportsman who has actually told the whole truth? Kimmage?
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 46,552 Lives Here
    Di Luca? ;)

    It's how his ban was shortened, no?
  • dish_dashdish_dash Posts: 4,723
    Typical of cycling to give Landis a packet for doping when he was in on the joke.

    Landis may have doped, lied and lied some more, but from the point when he decided to tell the truth he seems to have done so. He is largely responsible for the USADA investigation starting and for playing a part in trying to clean up cycling. Few others have done as much or consistently told the truth, so I don't begrudge him a bob or two.


    Landis doped, well yeah, join the party, but he can do one for the Fairness Fund alone

    Playing a part in cleaning up cycling? Ha. It was all about payback on Lance for not giving him a job.

    A bob or two? Fine. Here's 23p I found down the back of my sofa.

    No such thing as redemption in Richmond then?

    Name me another sportsman who has actually told the whole truth? Kimmage?

    err duh... David Millar... :roll:
  • TheBigBeanTheBigBean Posts: 9,210
    Di Luca? ;)

    It's how his ban was shortened, no?

    That means I get to post one of my favourite quotes
    "You can’t say what he said. I don’t know what he told the investigators – he must have said something if they reduced his ban – but compare Di Luca and Tom Zirbel. Zirbel was banned for two years by USADA having tested positive for DHEA. He didn’t know how it got into his body and he definitely didn’t take it intentionally. Nonetheless, he admitted that what enters an athlete’s body was his responsibility and he wasn’t able to prove that it was contamination, perhaps because he didn’t have the money and the lawyers. Anyway, he couldn’t prove it and he got banned for two years. There was another case - Zirbel heard about it - of an athlete who did manage to prove that he’d taken a contaminated supplement and the company got sued – but the athlete still only got a three-month reduction to his ban. Then along comes Di Luca, who’s already been charged twice - once for consulting a doctor who’s banned from cycling for life and now for this. Di Luca tests positive, admits he did it and then he provides the investigators with information, which he can do because he’s an expert in the field, and they give him a nine-month reduction. Then what? He throws his hands up in the air and says, “I didn’t name any names. I didn’t spit in the soup. I just explained my doping methods.” So as an expert in the field, he’s told the investigators how you go about doping. At this point Zirbel says, “Ah, it’s a shame that I’m not an expert in doping. I should have pretended to be one then I’d be able to start racing again next year. Because I’m an idiot, though, and I let this substance get into my system without knowing how, I’ve got two years and I’m stuck with it.”
  • TheBigBeanTheBigBean Posts: 9,210
    Insert winking smiling yellow blobby emoting face and Vaughters. I'm playing the game too.
  • Typical of cycling to give Landis a packet for doping when he was in on the joke.

    Landis may have doped, lied and lied some more, but from the point when he decided to tell the truth he seems to have done so. He is largely responsible for the USADA investigation starting and for playing a part in trying to clean up cycling. Few others have done as much or consistently told the truth, so I don't begrudge him a bob or two.


    Landis doped, well yeah, join the party, but he can do one for the Fairness Fund alone

    Playing a part in cleaning up cycling? Ha. It was all about payback on Lance for not giving him a job.

    A bob or two? Fine. Here's 23p I found down the back of my sofa.

    No such thing as redemption in Richmond then?

    Name me another sportsman who has actually told the whole truth? Kimmage?


    Not when Landis is hailed at some kind of hero and goes grubbing after a big slug of $$$ by initiating the Qui Tam case
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 46,552 Lives Here
    We all gotta get grubby to pay the bills RR.

    It's a luxury to not have to.
  • apreadingapreading Posts: 4,534
    I think the sponsors should actually be paying him more, for all the publicity they are now getting!

    They didnt sponsor him to compete - they sponsored him for advertising, TV time and other benefits. They got those benefits. Now that all the doping stuff has come to a head and there are films being made etc, USPS and others are getting shed loads of more publicity - and it isnt publicity that makes them look bad or blames them even, the publicity is around how much good they did for sport but how Armstrong cheated them as well as the world.

    Either way - (almost) all publicity is good publicity and they have had at least as much as they paid for.

    To get damages, surely they would need to demonstrate their losses - and I cant see that they have suffered any?
  • TheBigBeanTheBigBean Posts: 9,210
    We all gotta get grubby to pay the bills RR.

    It's a luxury to not have to.

    Bassons made the same point recently. No bitterness, just a simple reflection that he was lucky to be in a position where he could walk away. Classy chap.
  • We all gotta get grubby to pay the bills RR.

    It's a luxury to not have to.


    Look, I get that an SW6 wardrobe of coloured trews doesnt come cheap, Rick :wink:

  • Now, what about the fact Barcelona FC used to murder top level football teams juiced up on EPO ? Anyone going to make a movie about that !?!?!


    I think you need to read up on your Spanish football and doping controversies before singling out one club ;)
    Trail fun - Transition Bandit
    Road - Wilier Izoard Centaur/Cube Agree C62 Disc
    Allround - Cotic Solaris
  • deejaydeejay Posts: 3,138
    My Dad was talking and he thinks that our poor Lance Armstrong has been given a raw deal. The Sponsors are caning his censored wanting their Bucks back and LA will be left without a Dime
    My dad's point was simply that the Sponsors got in to bed with LA when the times were good and raked it in through the advertising and the branding which came from his 7 Tour wins (or not).
    All the money was made whilst this was going on for over 7 years. The income to these companies must have been immense and as soon as the problems begin then these backers walk away with pockets brimming with cash.
    Shouldn't these Companies be partly responsible for what happened? LA happened just after the 1998 Tour where the race fell apart due to doping and the years prior were as bumpy so these Companies knew what the Sport was up to.

    Also, the (alleged) collusion with the UCI and others meant this was a big thing. Maybe an idea dreamt up after the 1998 Tour of Disaster with all parties present to make the dream of the Cancer Survivor winning the Tour. This would surely bury the 1998 Tour.
    I agree with this edited version of Jerry's OP but your dad must be told that he is a Liar, Cheat, and resorted to Bullying and even Lying under Oath.
    The sponsors did benifit but so did the Media who peddled the sorry tale.

    I still say the biggest recipient of Cycle Race Sponsorship is Deutsche Telekom and now known as T-Mobile.
    A little Telephone/Mailing company whose PED Drug Team cleaned up the 1996 & 1997 Tour de France and they then were able to Brag that they were as well known worldwide as Cocoa Cola.
    The size of their company in the last ten years Justifies that claim.
    Sshush, keep it under your hat in case Merkel hears me.

    Didn't Landis suffer almighty penalties and abuse before he was able to have a little payment. :roll:
    Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 1972
  • ^only you could introduce Angela Merkel into the thread, deejay
  • bobmcstuffbobmcstuff Posts: 8,053
    Greater returns are usually a product of greater risk.

    In cycling for 15 years the risk was your brand being named after a doping scandal. That's fairly big.

    My gut tells me that Festina watches are somehow shonky, though they're probably not.


    Yes you do think twice about them.

    An interesting point, would the perception about Nike or Oakley be the same as Festina if they had been the principle sponsor as in Team Oakley and it had all happened at the time LA was racing in a big race drug bust?

    I reckon so - having a whole scandal named after you can't be good for sales. The "Nike Affair" isn't very catchy though. Oakleygate?
  • deejaydeejay Posts: 3,138
    ^only you could introduce Angela Merkel into the thread, deejay
    Yup, Mein Euro Führer has been very quiet for a few days.
    Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 1972
  • timoid.timoid. Posts: 3,133
    I still say the biggest recipient of Cycle Race Sponsorship is Deutsche Telekom and now known as T-Mobile.
    A little Telephone/Mailing company whose PED Drug Team cleaned up the 1996 & 1997 Tour de France and they then were able to Brag that they were as well known worldwide as Cocoa Cola.

    While the cycling world was getting all misty eyed for the good old clean days of Banesto...
    It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.
  • ProssPross Posts: 22,116
    [I agree with this edited version of Jerry's OP but your dad must be told that he is a Liar, Cheat, and resorted to Bullying and even Lying under Oath.

    That's harsh, do you even know Jerry's father? :shock: :lol:
  • ProssPross Posts: 22,116
    I assume any law suit would require two things:

    1. Proof of a breach of contract etc. to provide the basis to sue. In this case I assume there would be clauses in any deals about not doing anything naughty that might reflect badly on the sponsor and this would be covered.

    2. An ability to demonstrate that breaching the terms of the contract resulted in a material loss to the sponsor which would determine the level of compensation. In this instance I'm not sure they would be able to do this. They benefitted for years from the publicity whether knowing / suspecting he was doping or not (in the final few years they must have had at least enough suspicion that they knew there was a risk) whilst the negative impact on sales appears to have been negligible.
Sign In or Register to comment.