KraneXL

This is why its best for those that derive their livelihood from the public to keep their extreme political views private. Actors and athletes come to mind more than corporate. Although actors are much more effected since people are less likely to boycott an entire team over the polarizing views of a single player.

British

Well, this thread has convinced me that I need to pay more attention to this stuff. My next helmet/gloves will definitely be Giro, and my next water bottle will definitely be a Camelbak. (Which it would have been anyway, their stuff served me quite well when I was in Iraq.) And I will definitely never shop at REI again (although I was never a big fan of theirs to begin with.)

I guess I don't really have much of an opinion about the Lance Armstrong thing. The thing about that I always thought was odd was: Who came in 2nd? Shouldn't they be the "rightful" winner? The fact that they simply "vacated" the titles and didn't even try to determine who LEGITIMATELY won basically proves to me that everyone (in the TDF was doping, and that this was pretty much common knowledge among everyone involved.

eboos

I have used Giro, Camelbak and Blackburn products for over 20 years. I am also a frequent consumer of many of Vista Outdoors' other products.

With all of the balls that were dropped in regard to the Parkland shooting, attacking a company that provides products that millions of Americans use responsibly in the exercise of their Constitutional rights, seems a little stupid and completely missing the point.

Nick Bain

He could have gone about it a better way. I think he could not wait to denigrate Lance once he got the chance to as his career was greatly overshadowed by the Lance story. If he was smart he should have went to Trek first to talk about the matter.

All Greg had was a licensing agreement it is not that he had a business that was destroyed. Lemond bikes would have naturally been destined to fizzle out anyways in the Shadow of Lance, perhaps he saw his sales tumbling and saw this as an opportunity to reverse that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LeMond_Racing_Cycles

After reading this I respect Lemond even less. He thoroughly breached his contract, twice. He must have an ego too with slapping his name on bikes from the start.

DiabloScott

Ironically, the owners of the rights to the Chris Farley estate have sued Trek for calling one of its bikes "The Farley".
Trek claims the suit is without merit; it's a fat bike.

Nick Bain

Agreed, shamless, indirect, insensitive, and subliminal marketing. I would not buy one based on that. They may not say it but you know everyone is thinking it.

Trek sued over use of the Farley name on fat bikes | Bicycle Retailer and Industry News

bruce19

Yeah. I guess he sucks compared to Lance.

Kontact 

I think boycotts have their place, but sometimes take on an unfortunate taint of coercion. I've heard of boycotts against companies who have executives that personally supported a GOP candidate - is that really the company's fault, and should we be attempting to get people to vote of donate a certain way by threatening their jobs? Can a company being boycotted for the political actions of an employee legally fire that person anyway?

There's too much fighting in general going on in American public life.

datlas 

Hi! What's this thread about?

Dirt Farmer

I want to shop at a retail outlet that sells bazookas and mortar guns; perhaps hand grenades, too. No more snowflakes for me.

Where can I find such a store?

Kontact 

The Khyber Pass.

Nick Bain

I almost forgot about this little gem. Full circle right here folks. What a two faced punk to (put it cleanly).

DiabloScott

OMG Pure gold.

Eddy sounds better in Flemish though.

jon c. 

I would agree to that to an extent. I am certainly pro choice. But boycotts don't take away our right to choose. In a free market, everyone makes their own choices for whatever reasons they may have. Rarely do the choices of others impact you in any way, except in those cases where enough people make the choice that it ceases to be profitable for that good or service to be offered in the marketplace. When that happens, it's just the free market at work. The government does restrict our choices in the market for moral reasons, but in my lifetime these limits haven't really increased.

There have always been boycotts across the political spectrum. The internet has just increased the noise they generate. But I don't think that boycotts are really impacting my right to choose any more than they ever have. Which isn't much.

indyfabz

Russia? Syria maybe?

Nick Bain

I generally think that people that ride bikes seriously are morally superior to say everyone except maybe vegans.

KraneXL

So does that mean this guy gets double superior points since he's a cyclist and vegan?

Nick Bain

no cause he annoying AF. The two probably cancel each other out.

Rcrxjlb

Wow, this thread is crazy!

Maybe i should boycott all cycling companies cause they don't sponsor enough black cyclists...?

noodle soup

I eat more meat than I usually would, just to combat his efforts. I hope he enjoys the photos he receives of me butchering animals.

Lazyass

You have to understand, LeMond retired when he did because the dopers had taken over. He couldn't be competitive unless he started doping so he retired a few years before his time. That's what he said. Armstrong was a jerk to him before anyone even knew who Armstrong was. Then when LeMond saw him going up HC climbs barely breathing he knew from experience that Armstrong was doping. Dopers like Armstrong drove him to retirement so he had a right to sound off.

But boycotting companies over social issues? That's stupid. Get a life. People today are poisoned with hate over this BS, then they lecture about tolerance. Sad to see.

kbarch

What kind of life do you suggest? Seems to me that what we're talking about is examining the things one does and making thoughtful decisions; the unexamined life is not worth living.

But yes, it's sad to see the gross oversimplification of issues and all the imitation mindfulness - not mere 'virtue signaling,' but the ridiculous broadcasting of it and bandwagon jumping-on. If you ask, I'll tell you whether I intend to buy anything from some controversial source, and if you ask why, I'll try to make a convincing case why others should follow suit - that's totally reasonable, isn't it? - but I'm not going to go around telling everyone about the things I will or won't do, especially when my decisions are based on something as weak and insubstantial as a handful of social media postings. Meanwhile, having a strongly expressed moral point of view does not preclude tolerance, and tolerance doesn't necessarily mean indifference. One can be tolerant of what one knows and proclaims to be wrong if there issues in mitigation, extenuation, and if one has a forgiving nature.

I wouldn't say the boycotters are particularly 'poisoned with hate.' Seems to me that those who take the other side out of spite are more so; it's certainly not amusing.

Shuffleman

I have Giro shoes, that I have not been happy with. I will now wear them with pride. I have 1 Bell helmet and many Camelback products. I will continue to buy them.
I truly hate when companies get political and will not buy products from them when the do.

bruce19

I often wonder about that. If I had trained my whole life for the TdF only to see someone cheat me out of a yellow jersey, I'd be pretty pissed. You may be right that everyone was doping and it was well known. If so, that says a lot about the governing body.

bruce19

I think you should do what you want to do and if your social concerns factor in, well, factor them in.