USADA now after Lance

Discussion in 'The Roadie Hangout' started by Pain Freak, Jun 13, 2012.

  1. strobe

    strobe resident noob

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2011
    Messages:
    1,796
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Moreno Valley
    Here is what p!sses me off... The federal government is in near administrative furloughs due to our financial crisis. Yet, they will spend more money to chase after an athlete? How about, save the money, let Lance move on in life as a doper, and allow federal employee's their proper pay.

    No wonder we are at a financial cliff. Government wants to spend our cash on crap that doesn't matter.
     
  2. jasonmason

    jasonmason inebriate savant

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,362
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Geologist when I have to work, which is too often.
    Location:
    Sacramento
    I have to disagree.

    The coming sequestration/furlough mess is ludicrous and a huge measure of dysfunction. This particular issue with Lance Armstrong, however, is the judicial system doing exactly what they are supposed to do. This is potential prosecution of the violation of a contract with the US government, and an attempt to recoup those monies that were given to him in sponsorship that he violated the terms of.

    If you don't prosecute what effectively was the theft of 31 million dollars in sponsorship, what is the point of the judicial system in the first place?
     
  3. Bullseye

    Bullseye New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    523
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Newbury Park, CA
    Absolutely... and whats more is the precedent it sets for all those who contract with the federal government. Billions and Billions of dollars... the Feds can't let this go and give the impression that it's OK to lie and cheat for that money. In this case, they are being good stewards of our tax dollars.
     
  4. ladera Dave

    ladera Dave New Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Messages:
    2,665
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Millwork project manager
    Location:
    Ladera Ranch
    i heard today the postal service wants their money back, good luck Lance.
     
  5. ManInAShed

    ManInAShed New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,631
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Destroyer of worlds.
    Location:
    Yellowknife / Windansea
    Heh, yea. The only reason Nike & Trek don't try to recoup some of their cash is because when you weigh just cutting your (even substantial) losses, against the furtherer PR losses that come with a protracted legal battle, you just try to distance your brand & stop associating with a liability like this as quickly as possible. ...but governments are more like the mob. They don't care about bad PR with things like this. They just want their %^&* money.

    To think, Lance's biggest concern on Oprah seemed to be convincing people that he should be allowed to race again.

    I wonder what prison I'd be in if I shorted the gov a few tens of millions of dollars with no way to pay it back...
     
  6. Bullseye

    Bullseye New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    523
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Newbury Park, CA
    Well now there's the rub... and I think it will come up in the Federal (USPS) case as well. Nike and Trek made tons of money from their association with Lance. You could argue that their involvement with Lance catapulted Trek into a worldwide bike brand. So in reality, if you do the math... these companies have no losses and in fact made millions. Agreed that they would not want the PR mess, but I'm not sure they would could reasonably prove any damages.
     
  7. mfoga

    mfoga Intense Whore

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2008
    Messages:
    8,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Moreno Valley
    How exactly did USPS get ripped off?
     
  8. Bullseye

    Bullseye New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    523
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Newbury Park, CA
    "Lance Armstrong and his cycling team took more than $30 million from the U.S. Postal Service based on their contractual promise to play fair and abide by the rules – including the rules against doping," said a statement from Ronald C. Machen Jr., U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C. "The Postal Service has now seen its sponsorship unfairly associated with what has been described as 'the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.' This lawsuit is designed to help the Postal Service recoup the tens of millions of dollars it paid out to the (Armstrong's) cycling team based on years of broken promises. In today's economic climate, the U.S. Postal Service is simply not in a position to allow Lance Armstrong or any of the other defendants to walk away with the tens of millions of dollars they illegitimately procured."

    I've said it before and I'll say it again..., this is not a frivolous suit... this is the Federal Government being good stewards of our tax dollars.
     
  9. ManInAShed

    ManInAShed New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,631
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Destroyer of worlds.
    Location:
    Yellowknife / Windansea
    That is a good point. Even with all the stewing over the loss of face from all this, fact is, Nike, Oakley, Trek, etc rode that gravy train hard for over a decade, and all did damn well on it.

    Though I do wonder if anyone actually used their local post office more because Lance was sponsored by them. Always seemed like an odd candidate to sponsor an international cycling team. How would they even show damages? Or maybe they don't have to, by going for breach of contract.


    Shame about the Lemond Bicycles brand though. That's one lawsuit that could actually right someone who was wronged.
    ...even if Lemond was a motormouth who should have known better than to attack his own parent company.
     
  10. jasonmason

    jasonmason inebriate savant

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,362
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Geologist when I have to work, which is too often.
    Location:
    Sacramento
    Because they were contributing millions of dollars of sponsorship money to a race team based upon a contract that the principal signatories violated.

    I don't understand how this can be a matter of dispute.
     
  11. mfoga

    mfoga Intense Whore

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2008
    Messages:
    8,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Moreno Valley
    I 100% disagree. First it wasn't tax dollars. Second If they were good stewards of our tax dollars they would have never made that agreement.

    What I still don't get is can Lance sue them for all of the free press and advertising they will have received for years if he has to repay them? Or is the USPS saying they made no gains from the partnership? If so then this makes me belive this is more about what they feel was a bad deal and now have the loophole to try and get that money back.

    I also don't remember the USPS complaining to much when he was winning about the doping accusations.
     
  12. Bullseye

    Bullseye New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    523
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Newbury Park, CA
    Doh! I completely forgot that... you are correct... just double checked and it looks like the USPS hasn't received tax dollars since the early 80's.
     
  13. dirtmistress

    dirtmistress AKA Roadiemistress

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,727
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    FedEx Courier
    Location:
    MDR adjacent
  14. Pickettt

    Pickettt New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2007
    Messages:
    848
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Anytown, CA
    Well, when the post office gets their money back from Armstrong, I'm going to sue them to get all the money I spent on postage back. After all, they led me to believe they were backing an honest athlete. In return, I bought their products and services. I never sent Armstrong one dime, I bought products and services from companies profitting from him. Same with Trek and Nike...I want my money back as soon as you collect yours! You greedy a$$ companies got what you paid for, and now that it's dried up, and you want to keep collecting. None of these companies have lost one dime!
     
  15. kioti

    kioti Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,233
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    I don't understand the question.
    Location:
    Trabuco Canyon
    If anyone could use Performance Enhancing Drugs, its the USPS.
     
  16. jasonmason

    jasonmason inebriate savant

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,362
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Geologist when I have to work, which is too often.
    Location:
    Sacramento
    This makes no sense.

    USPS and Armstrong (and team) entered a sponsorship agreement, where they paid an individual or team to represent their company because of the positive image of said team. After USPS paid the sponsorship monies out, to then find out that the agreement had been violated to the most basic degree, why should they not be able to recoup what was paid? Had they know of the violation at the time, the contract would have been negated back then.

    You bought products based on advertising; you had no contract with the company. Trek/Nike/USPS/et al did have a contract, with specific clauses (as reported) that specifically disallowed doping. Nike and Trek owe you nothing, and why should they? They sponsored an individual, and if what you say is true about your buying habits, their sponsorship worked. Are you arguing for truth in advertising with all this? Because I'm not sure how far you're going to get with that argument.
     
  17. nailknot

    nailknot Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    destruction of material
    Location:
    redlands, ca
    The thing that I was always surprised with was why USPS was even sponsoring a cycling team in the first place. Considering that the USPS has always operated in the red, why not use that money to help balance their budget. Was it to gain more exposure for USPS? Then why sponsor a cycling team that operates mainly outside of the U.S. Are they seeking exposure from the European Cycling community who never directly uses the USPS to ship items.
     
  18. Pickettt

    Pickettt New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2007
    Messages:
    848
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Anytown, CA
    I own several companies, once this reaches litigation, it will all make sense then.
     
  19. jae2460

    jae2460 Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,274
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I'm sorry to anyone that this may offend, but anyone who says that the US Postal Service was harmed because Lance Armstrong used performance enhancing drugs is either an idiot or a liar or both.

    However, my understanding is that it doesn't matter whether or not USPS was harmed legally--they don't need to prove that in order to sue.

    To me, the more serious issue is that Lance perjured himself and that IS a serious crime--the entire basis of the US justice system depends on credible testimony. And for that, he will need to be held accountable.

    If Floyd Landis does get millions from his suit against Lance, which would be preposterous, I would hope he'd pay back all the money he received from his book sales (Positively False) and from the "Floyd Fairness Fund".
     
  20. jasonmason

    jasonmason inebriate savant

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,362
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Geologist when I have to work, which is too often.
    Location:
    Sacramento
    If you could give some explanation, that might help.

    I fail to see how your belief in their (USPS, etc.) advertising is the same as a legally binding sponsorship contract.
     

Share This Page

Help keep STR alive, please click the donation button below