Professional Cycling For the Fans - Why Lance really came back (money & power)

The man has earned a high income for several years now and apparently enjoys the lifestyle that comes with it. Good for him! Hell, I'll even admit envy. He is under no obligation to give any of that money to anyone besides himself (and ex-wife and kids, I'd assume) so the fact that he channels at least some money to cancer research is gravy, so to speak.

I'm not a big LA fan but it seems to me that criticizing him for actually keeping some, or even most, of the money he earns while on a bike is over the top.

I still don't think he'd have a prayer in TX politics though.


:beer:

Governor Armstrong, I like the sound of that. Does this means that Greg Lemond would show up to his press conferences and heckle him about fiscal policy? I'd pay to see that.

who really cares? The reason why Ballester and Walsh wrote the book was to ride the coat tails of LA. They hoped to cash in on LA's alleged drug use and infamous popularity with the TDF. The authors claim they just want the truth to come out but then again why not make a buck or two also....

apparently quite a few people. :innocent:

Just thinking out loud here...did Armstrong campaign for appearance fees, or did the race organizers seek him out, offer the money, and gladly pay up when he said yes? The link botto posted claims Zomegnan showed up on Lance's doorstep the day after he announced his comeback, with an offer of $3 million to ride the Giro. This may be an exaggeration, as far as the "on the doorstep" part goes, but it probably is fairly close to the facts. What kind of fool would a guy have to be, to say no to that?

And who's to say he didn't put some, or even all of that money towards a worthy cause? And even if he kept every cent, so what? There were no stipulations, other than "show up, race, and give a decent interview here and there".

Lance haters will be Lance haters. Even if he donated everything he had to charity, someone would call it a publicity stunt.

He's not mother Teresa. He's a friggin cyclist for crying out loud. Why is this so hard to understand for so many people?

Think of it like the WWE but on bikes; it's just a big show with real-live suffering and soul crushing.

Pcad called, he wants his schtick back.

Seriously, I'm not saying he's Mother Teresa. He's placing himself in that situation by saying he's doing this solely for altruistic reasons. And I'm sure part of that is there.

But to say you're going to ride for free, then take millions in appearance fees, is worth some criticism in my opinion. If you seek out the press for the praise, you should accept the criticism as well.

Pcad called, he wants his schtick back.

Seriously, I'm not saying he's Mother Teresa. He's placing himself in that situation by saying he's doing this solely for altruistic reasons. And I'm sure part of that is there.

But to say you're going to ride for free, then take millions in appearance fees, is worth some criticism in my opinion. If you seek out the press for the praise, you should accept the criticism as well.

That was not Pcad's schtick; it's called the truth.

WWE vs. Pro Cycling
Grown men in tights? Yes
Juiced up? Yes
Bunch of grown-up fans taking it way too seriously? Yes
Suffering and Soul Crushing? Yes

Lighten up; seriously.

because he can

Pcad called, he wants his schtick back.

Seriously, I'm not saying he's Mother Teresa. He's placing himself in that situation by saying he's doing this solely for altruistic reasons. And I'm sure part of that is there.

But to say you're going to ride for free, then take millions in appearance fees, is worth some criticism in my opinion. If you seek out the press for the praise, you should accept the criticism as well.

He is riding for free. Is his team paying him?

Do you even have any remote idea how charities work?

apparently quite a few people. :innocent:

Obviously....

As for him taking appearance money, that is what it is. We don't know how much of that is funneled back into his foundation as cancer research or even operating costs. Athletes do not disclose appearance fees. It's none of our business. He doesn't take a paycheck from the team so he gets in other ways. This is no different from the biggest CEOs in the USA taking no pay or $1 for the year. In the end, they still get millions in some kind of bonus whether it's stock options, gifts or both.

Why? Armstrong was rumoured to receive $2M Australian to ride the Tour Down Under. Not paid to his Cancer Foundation, paid to Armstrong directly as an appearance fee. It was never denied by Armstrong or the South Australian state government. LA supposedly received a similar start fee for the Giro. Is it really all about 'fighting cancer'?
Don't construe lack of a denial with proof of anything. This strikes me as a lot of rumor and conjecture from people who clearly have an axe to grind with the guy.

Obviously....

As for him taking appearance money, that is what it is. We don't know how much of that is funneled back into his foundation as cancer research or even operating costs. Athletes do not disclose appearance fees. It's none of our business. He doesn't take a paycheck from the team so he gets in other ways. This is no different from the biggest CEOs in the USA taking no pay or $1 for the year. In the end, they still get millions in some kind of bonus whether it's stock options, gifts or both.

:roflmao2: fantastic analogy.

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/swl/lowres/swln67l.jpg

It rubs me the wrong way because Lance has this enormous press conference to start the year, discussing how he's doing it solely to raise cancer awareness, won't be taking a salary from the team, etc. etc. And Lance gets a lot of (deservedly so at the time) positive press about riding because he wants to further the awareness of cancer research.
Within your "etc. etc." does it point out where Lance said he would not be taking appearance fees?

Does anyone have Lance's financial statements showing what he has done with the appearance fees? Is there some slim possibility that he has given at least some of that money to his foundation or other charitable organizations? I don't know the answer, just asking a question.


Then he goes out and take multi-million personal appearance fees for races that hardly need to raise their profile. (Honestly, where does the Giro go from where it is now? Bigger than the Tour?)
I don't mind him racing for personal gain, and selling the need for cancer research on the coattails along the way, but he hasn't exactly been transparent about it.

I've talked to three people in past couple of weeks who had no idea that there were big tours in Italy or Spain. So, yes, the Giro wants more awareness of it's bike race and it got it by having LA in the race. Because the Giro is a business that is trying to make money....or are they supposed to donate all profits to some cause?

As for the Tour of Australia, I don't know the ins and outs of appearance fees and marketing but I didn't even know there was a big pro race until this year with LA's involvement. It wouldn't surprise me if they got acceptable return on their $2M investment in Lance's appearance fees.

Within your "etc. etc." does it point out where Lance said he would not be taking appearance fees?

Does anyone have Lance's financial statements showing what he has done with the appearance fees? Is there some slim possibility that he has given at least some of that money to his foundation or other charitable organizations? I don't know the answer, just asking a question.


I'm not an attorney but I don't think LA is under any legal obligation to pay out anything from his appearance fees unless the money was paid to his foundation. If this is the case, and assuming the foundation is based in the U.S., regulated under U.S. tax codes, he would have to pay out 5% of Net Investment Assets.

To me, this whole thing really is like watching everyone get all worked up over pro wresting.

Within your "etc. etc." does it point out where Lance said he would not be taking appearance fees?

Does anyone have Lance's financial statements showing what he has done with the appearance fees? Is there some slim possibility that he has given at least some of that money to his foundation or other charitable organizations? I don't know the answer, just asking a question.



I've talked to three people in past couple of weeks who had no idea that there were big tours in Italy or Spain. So, yes, the Giro wants more awareness of it's bike race and it got it by having LA in the race. Because the Giro is a business that is trying to make money....or are they supposed to donate all profits to some cause?

As for the Tour of Australia, I don't know the ins and outs of appearance fees and marketing but I didn't even know there was a big pro race until this year with LA's involvement. It wouldn't surprise me if they got acceptable return on their $2M investment in Lance's appearance fees.


This is America in 2009 haven't you heard...capitalism and profits are evil.....socialism is good...pay attention

This is America in 2009 haven't you heard...capitalism and profits are evil.....socialism is good...pay attention

Does that mean I have to share my stuff?

Does that mean Pcad has to share his Cervelo?

Whatever any one thinks of Armstrong, the continued hard on these guys are showing for him is not doing much for their credibility.

Why? They're both respected journalists and this is an ongoing issue.

My thoughts:

If you follow his twitter, watch his goings on in the press, the dude spends a lot of his "off the bike" time on cancer research. Like basically anything that isnt personal/training time. His training time is spent preparing for races. His races raise awareness just by being in the in race.

So, basically dude is a walking billboard for cancer awareness. His appearance fees raise the notice of general/non-cycling public about races (I have been cycling for almost a year, didnt follow anything other than the TdF, and didnt know about TdC, TdA, GdI, TdL, or anything else until Lance started being involved again). His fees pay the way for him to not take a salary, which clearly has to be helping keep Astana (barely) solvent right now. Plus his being part of that team has to sell Astana gear (I might even buy something).

So, lets assume he donates none of his personal income to the LAF directly. How much is his time worth? LAF and therefore cancer research benefits for every hour on the bike, training or race, every minute spent twittering about who he is riding for, advertising the latest limited edition Livestrong gear, and of course the sales of the gear he wears, advertises, allows his slogan on.

Maybe he juiced, maybe he didn't. Maybe he's a complete ******, maybe not. Maybe this is all a quest to bang every skinny blonde in hollywood (really, now, who can blame him for that?), maybe not.

In the end, if you throw in everything else, cancer research STILL benefits just by the dude being on the planet and in our collective thoughts.

Unless they're givng the book proceeds to cancer research, they need to STFU.

I love this phraseology!

Who are you to tell anyone what they need to do?

When did this nonsense phrase come into the vernacular?

Olson Twin? :D

Yes, please.



:love: :love:

But to say you're going to ride for free, then take millions in appearance fees, is worth some criticism...

So, you claim to have evidence of what he does with his appearance fees?

You (et al.) seem to making hidden assumptions, then criticizing them rather than the mere exchange of filthy lucre.



oops. I see invwnut already kinda made this point.

If this is the case, and assuming the foundation is based in the U.S., regulated under U.S. tax codes, he would have to pay out 5% of Net Investment Assets.


It goes beyond the tax codes...there's that little matter of complying with Sarbanes/Oxley...if Lance was pocketing appearance fees that were paid to the foundation, he'd be in some really sheep dit, legally speaking. The guy, whatever you think of him, just isn't that dumb.

Why? They're both respected journalists and this is an ongoing issue.

Well, they're both journalists.

This is America in 2009 haven't you heard...capitalism and profits are evil.....socialism is good...pay attention

obstinate, ignorant, and in the wrong forum. :thumb:

Well, they're both journalists.

Well, according to LA and his apologists they're part of the tabloid gutter press.:roflmao2:

Despite your slanted uninformed opinion, they are both respected journalists.

Well, according to LA and his apologists they're part of the tabloid gutter press.:roflmao2:

Despite your slanted uninformed opinion, they are both respected journalists.

Respected by who? Any cites to their accolades? Have they won 7 Pulitzers between them?

Respected by who? Any cites to their accolades? Have they won 7 Pulitzers between them?Chip, Walsh is a respected jouno, an award winner IIRC, is a long term sports writer for the Sunday Times and is an excellent writer.

For evidence of his qualities as a writer and journo I recommend you find a copy of his earlier books on Sean Kelly (Kelly) and his book 'Inside the Tour de France'.

Don't know much about Ballester as the only French I speak comes from the song 'Lady Marmalade'.

Just an observation, some of you are really cynical.

Frankly, I don't care why LA came back. It's good for cycling and his research foundation.

Chip, Walsh is a respected jouno, an award winner IIRC, is a long term sports writer for the Sunday Times and is an excellent writer.

For evidence of his qualities as a writer and journo I recommend you find a copy of his earlier books on Sean Kelly (Kelly) and his book 'Inside the Tour de France'.

Don't know much about Ballester as the only French I speak comes from the song 'Lady Marmalade'.

Again, respected by who? Respected by other journalists? Respected by groupies? Respected by governments?

What kind of awards? Journalist awards? Fiction awards? Knitting awards?

Lance is well respected and decorated in (and outside) his field too...yet that doesn't seem to prevent Reid Rothchild and others from not respecting him...so what have these fellers done that requires me or anyone else to respect them or give credence to the stuff they write over whatever respect and credibility I or anyone else might give to Lance?

Again, respected by who? Respected by other journalists? Respected by groupies? Respected by governments?

What kind of awards? Journalist awards? Fiction awards? Knitting awards?

Lance is well respected and decorated in (and outside) his field too...yet that doesn't seem to prevent Reid Rothchild and others from not respecting him...so what have these fellers done that requires me or anyone else to respect them or give credence to the stuff they write over whatever respect and credibility I or anyone else might give to Lance?

Lance? Are you on first name terms with him?

FFS. Walsh is the head sports writer for the friggin Sunday Times, not the Mussel Shoals Daily News. You know, the Sunday edition of the Times newspaper? They tend not to give you jobs like that in a tough business like the print media if you are considered a dud. If you are going to rip on him at least go and read some of his articles on-line or read one of his books before you do so. When you have an informed opinion about David Walsh's qualities as a journo and writer rather than a half-baked one please feel free to come back and rip on him all you want. It seems that all you are doing at the moment is getting all sooky-la-la about how Walsh hurt your feelings by paying out your hero.

David Walsh has been named Sports Writer of the Year four times in both the UK and Ireland (awards
not given out by Newspapers but by the British Press) among his other accolades.
Look, I don't necessarily agree with him, but he is a respected journalist. We can disparage him
all we like here but it won't negate the fact that he does raise some points worth considering.

Personally I have no reason to believe that Lance Armstrong returned to cycling as a stepping stone to
the Texas Governors mansion (now burned down and uninhabitable), and for someone to make that
prediction smacks of tea leaves, and ouija boards.

Marty

Lance? Are you on first name terms with him?

FFS. Walsh is the head sports writer for the friggin Sunday Times, not the Mussel Shoals Daily News. You know, the Sunday edition of the Times newspaper? They tend not to give you jobs like that in a tough business like the print media if you are considered a dud. If you are going to rip on him at least go and read some of his articles on-line or read one of his books before you do so. When you have an informed opinion about David Walsh's qualities as a journo and writer rather than a half-baked one please feel free to come back and rip on him all you want. It seems that all you are doing at the moment is getting all sooky-la-la about how Walsh hurt your feelings by paying out your hero.

If you had been paying attention for the last umpteen years in BF...I could really give a frack about Lance...the fact that I call him Lance rather than Mr. Armstrong, sir or God might be another indicator to a perceptive feller. Forgive me if I mistook you for one.

Again you have failed to answer the question. For one thing, I could give a frack about the Sunday Times...just another sensationalist rag to me. For another, again, what are his qualifications and accomplishments as an alleged journalist compared to Lance's qualifications, accomplishments as an alleged bike racer and philanthropist?

If you can't answer the question, just say so...rather than dancing around like a chicken playing schoolteacher and trying to turn the question into a homework assignment.

David Walsh has been named Sports Writer of the Year four times in both the UK and Ireland (awards
not given out by Newspapers but by the British Press) among his other accolades.
Look, I don't necessarily agree with him, but he is a respected journalist. We can disparage him
all we like here but it won't negate the fact that he does raise some points worth considering.

Personally I have no reason to believe that Lance Armstrong returned to cycling as a stepping stone to
the Texas Governors mansion (now burned down and uninhabitable), and for someone to make that
prediction smacks of tea leaves, and ouija boards.

Marty


See, now this is a straight answer. But it doesn't change anything. Being a respected sports writer ranks about as high as being a respected sports figure or a respected politician. Richard Nixon was a respected politician, Pete Rose a respected ball player and Judith Miller a respected journalist, so of course none of them could possibly be a crook, cheat or liar, right? :lol:

I am not a crook

just sayin

I am not a crook

just sayin

It's not convincing unless you jiggle your jowls and flash a couple of peace signs.

Chip, no way in hell am I jiggling jowls. The peace signs I can do.

Chip, no way in hell am I jiggling jowls. The peace signs I can do.

You can always get a Tricky Dicky mask. :D

Lance? Are you on first name terms with him?

FFS. Walsh is the head sports writer for the friggin Sunday Times, not the Mussel Shoals Daily News. You know, the Sunday edition of the Times newspaper? They tend not to give you jobs like that in a tough business like the print media if you are considered a dud. If you are going to rip on him at least go and read some of his articles on-line or read one of his books before you do so. When you have an informed opinion about David Walsh's qualities as a journo and writer rather than a half-baked one please feel free to come back and rip on him all you want. It seems that all you are doing at the moment is getting all sooky-la-la about how Walsh hurt your feelings by paying out your hero.

If I recall, the Times had a journalist or two that wrote articles that contained information that was not verified, yet the Times printed it anyway.

If you had been paying attention for the last umpteen years in BF...I could really give a frack about Lance...the fact that I call him Lance rather than Mr. Armstrong, sir or God might be another indicator to a perceptive feller. Forgive me if I mistook you for one.

Again you have failed to answer the question. For one thing, I could give a frack about the Sunday Times...just another sensationalist rag to me. For another, again, what are his qualifications and accomplishments as an alleged journalist compared to Lance's qualifications, accomplishments as an alleged bike racer and philanthropist?

If you can't answer the question, just say so...rather than dancing around like a chicken playing schoolteacher and trying to turn the question into a homework assignment.

I did answer the question. I stated his qualifications/resume and stated he was an award winning journo (thanks Lotek for stating the number - I new it was at least a couple of UK awards) And WTF does comparing Walshes accomplishments against Armstrongs prove? You are obviously completely unfamiliar with the bloke, know nothing about the paper that employs him (sensationalist rag LOL) yet feel you are qualfied to totally denigrate him and his work. Well done.

Kinky Friedman gave it a credible run.


I think that says more about Texas than anything else you wrote.

One only needs to look at LAF's CEO obsessing over getting tobacco legislature pushed that would give the FDA control over big tobacco. I think it is pretty obvious to everyone that Lance is a Lizardman and he is pushing his agenda so that Ron Paul and others can restore the Lizardmen's rule over earth. They are still sore about their loss of the US presidency to one of the Grays.

Be it Reptilians or Grays you're still all puppets of alien masters. Rise up and see the light it isn't too late...[CARRIER DISCONNECTED]
http://www.timboucher.com/images/they_live_obey.jpg

anyone who doesnt see the reasons Lance made a "comeback" is clearly a fool.
Nuff said.

... Plus his being part of that team has to sell Astana gear (I might even buy something).

Don't buy just yet!... the sponsorships will be changing. :)

Lance is well respected and decorated in (and outside) his field too...yet that doesn't seem to prevent Reid Rothchild and others from not respecting him...so what have these fellers done that requires me or anyone else to respect them or give credence to the stuff they write over whatever respect and credibility I or anyone else might give to Lance?

Marion Jones, Clemens, McGwire and others were well respected before the truth came out.

Lance Armstrong is a control freak.

There is no way he'd be happy if he got elected governor of Texas. Texas has a unique constitution - the Lt. Governor has all the power.

I think Armstrong would be more interested in getting elected as a Congressman or Senator, so that he could vote on NIH funding.

Let's see: The authors are hoping to sell lots of books and in the process make lots of money. Whilst accusing a guy of having the most unholy of motivations for returning to professional athletics: Money, Power and Ambition. Somehow, I think that if it were packaged differently Lance might agree to those being his motives. He's never stated that he's ever going to give his personal wealth to the Foundation. Just the opposite, he has publicly stated that his "small" fortune would be less than a drop in the bucket, with regard to cancer research. His greater contribution is to use his personality to cause others (read governments) to step up to the wicket with funds that will far outlast his. His personal contributions were merely the seed to get things started.

Botto suckers me in as well, oh well.

If you had been paying attention for the last umpteen years in BF...I could really give a frack about Lance...the fact that I call him Lance rather than Mr. Armstrong, sir or God might be another indicator to a perceptive feller. Forgive me if I mistook you for one.




You can call him PHARMSTRONG!

The reason why kids go to college is for money and power, so I don't think that makes Lance more evil than your average Joe on these forums, and the cat 3 posers. Everyone is racing to win and achieve some kind of recognition. Lance proved he still can compete in the Giro. I think he is looking to simply add more to his legacy, so good for him.

The reason why kids go to college is for money and power, so I don't think that makes Lance more evil than your average Joe on these forums, and the cat 3 posers. Everyone is racing to win and achieve some kind of recognition. Lance proved he still can compete in the Giro. I think he is looking to simply add more to his legacy, so good for him.
well said. Because the average Joe on these forums has million dollar businesses to capitalize on, not forgetting millions of more dollars being switched around under the table in very shady deals. and lets not forget tangled political webs that need to stay covered up.

well said. Because the average Joe on these forums has million dollar businesses to capitalize on, not forgetting millions of more dollars being switched around under the table in very shady deals. and lets not forget tangled political webs that need to stay covered up.

Have wallet envy?

I bet a lot of folks would do the same if they had the chance. That says what about him? He's human? I'm shocked! :eek: