Seeking Alpha

More on Nike-Lance Armstrong: The former world-class athlete's resignation from the Lance...

More on Nike-Lance Armstrong: The former world-class athlete's resignation from the Lance Armstrong Foundation could bolster the chances that Nike (NKE +0.3%) sticks with its Livestrong brand of clothing and shoes. More than just a sideshow for Nike, the flareup over Armstrong's doping has forced the company to strongly deny an accusation it bribed an exec with a governing cycling body $500K to cover up a positive drug test.
Comments (17)
    17 Oct 2012, 11:43 AM Reply Like
  • That link is Nike's statement that it is dumping Armstrong, but maintaining its Livestrong support.
    17 Oct 2012, 11:43 AM Reply Like
  • It should DUMP Livestrong, too.


    There are 1,000 (or more) other anti-cancer groups MORE DESERVING -- and LESS TAINTED -- than something that is the progeny of the DISGRACED Lance Armstrong.
    17 Oct 2012, 12:31 PM Reply Like
  • Not sure I understand. Armstrong passed all the drug tests at the time of the races. Passed all of the drug tests since the races. Was searched at the time of the races and no drugs were found.


    Now some other cyclists come along and in return for them not having to give up their medals, all they have to do is say, "Armstrong is a doper". Then they, in almost all cases, get to move up 1 position in the final standings of races, some that are almost a decade old.


    I'm sorry, but this stinks. May he did, maybe he didn't, but the process is not worthy of this impact. If they are going to take away Armstrong's legacy, then they need to have proof, not just a bunch of innuendo by the 2nd best people who have everything to gain because they will pick up his endorsements, etc.


    There is no proof that he took anything, no proof that if he did take something that it helped, and no proof that he violated any rules. If it was so obvious then why didn't the officials handle it at the time. This appears to me to be simply a vendetta played out in public.


    And if everyone was doing it (which is what they say), then he was still the best of them and deserves the top recognition or they all should forfeit their titles.
    17 Oct 2012, 04:17 PM Reply Like
  • Oh boy...


    You are woefully misinformed. My explanations will likely not convince you. I urge you to read a little bit here:
    17 Oct 2012, 04:44 PM Reply Like
  • Well, I read some of it, but this sticks out.


    "This case was initiated by USADA based on evidence other than a positive drug test."


    "During this time frame several riders, in addition to Vaughters, saw Armstrong carrying a thermos and associated it with him using EPO."


    "In the Vuelta towards the end of a tough day of riding Armstrong asked Vaughters and Vande Velde to return to the team car and retrieve a cortisone pill for him. The teammates obliged, however, Jonny Weltz told Vaughters he did not have any cortisone in the car. Thinking quickly, Weltz came up with a placebo, whittling down an aspirin pill and wrapping it in tin foil to give to Armstrong."


    This whole story reads like a novel, not an investigation. Its all he-said, she-said and at times, its just he-though, she-thought.


    It's clear you have never been at the top of the heap, with everyone else gunning for your position or place.


    I still stand by my position, there is no evidence. It is good to read that others, who have admitted to doing it have been punished. But key people have not agreed to this story and I am still concerned by the process. It stinks. Like I said initially, who knows if he did or not, but there is no proof in this document, only well written guesses.


    And it is clear in the document that they went after him because he did not play ball, who knows what pressures the others were under to make up, agree with, or generally go along with order to minimize their own punishment.


    It really disturbs me that you see this as proof. I certainly hope that you do not get on the backside of a political attack that destroys your career based on conjecture of your rivals and subordinates.
    17 Oct 2012, 05:41 PM Reply Like
  • A few things.
    1) this is not a criminal investigation. There is no "burden of proof".
    2) LA has already made his career. His net worth is north of 100 $million.
    3) The statements the riders made were originally made under oath as part of a federal investigation. If they lied then, they are goign to jail.
    4) Every american rider who has ever raced with LA has now admitted to doping and admitted LA doped along with them, and that JB and MF helped them dope.
    5) Every rider who's stood on a TDF podium with LA is a convicted doper.
    6) Lance Armstrong was given the chance to tell his story along with everyone else. He chose not to.


    If you're waiting for a smoking gun - pictures of LA with a needle in his arm, you can keep waiting. I realize plenty of people are emotionally invested in LA and Livestrong which makes it hard to give up "hero" status he has.


    As always, this is a free country you can believe what you want. I simply urge you to put all the testimony into context. Some of it is weak, but some of it is also very strong.
    18 Oct 2012, 08:45 AM Reply Like
  • "As always, this is a free country you can believe what you want."


    I never said I did or did not believe he doped. What I said is that the process followed by the doping agency stinks. But then again, I also don't believe in letting criminals out of jail if they squeal on other criminals. There are so many problem with this line of sloppy investigation it is frightening (will at least to me).


    Look, Obama lied to everyone in America at the debate and got away with it. People lie under oath all the time. I'm not saying the others in the Armstrong docs did lie, but rather, that without proof, the USADA should not have proceeded this way.


    I mean why wait for proof next time, why improve procedures to catch these things, why not just wait and publish a bunch of innuendo every few years?
    18 Oct 2012, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • Lance Armstrong signed up to be governed by the "rules" of these non-government bodies. He has NO ONE to blame other than himself.


    And can't we save the Obama/Romney pandering for other forums?
    19 Oct 2012, 09:51 AM Reply Like
  • And can't we save the Obama/Romney pandering for other forums?


    Discussing facts about the debate is not pandering. Even CNN agreed the next day that Obama lied in the debate. They just thought it was a great tactic because he got away with it. Wake up.


    The point is exactly relevant. Today, people accept lying as part of what it takes to succeed. One only has to look at politics to see why. There is no doubt in my mind that the people in the Armstrong docs, in some cases, lied, embellished, or said whatever to lessen their punishment. After all, that was the deal. But because of the way this was handled by the USADA we'll never know that part of the story.


    Again, I am not saying Armstrong was innocent (because I have no way of knowing), just that this sets a poor precedent and should not be the way things are handled. I mean some of this stuff is 12 years old. All crimes except murder have a statue of limitations. He could have stolen the 100 million and been in a better position than he is now. That is just not right to me. There is a vendetta playing out here.
    19 Oct 2012, 11:19 AM Reply Like
  • Or justice -- versus the strawman term "vendetta" -- being served, however delayed. And it doesn't matter that it's not in a court room; this private organization has it's own rules, and Lance has been governed (and judged within) them.
    19 Oct 2012, 11:24 AM Reply Like
  • You're wasting your breath on him.
    19 Oct 2012, 11:29 AM Reply Like
  • "this private organization has it's own rules, and Lance has been governed (and judged within) them."


    Except that they could not do anything to him so they just went public.


    Armstrong never agreed to be judged by them.


    We all know there are murderers on the street that have been let go because of lack of evidence. Letting them go is not about the murderer, it's about all those that might be charged in the future. This is not about Armstrong, its about all of those that might be charged in the future.


    Some notes:
    1. The USADA was formed after some of the alleged events. Hmmm. Clearly they did not have jurisdiction before they were formed.
    2. They are a government funded agency that has assumed jurisdiction for cycling. Most of the events that are being claimed are not under their jurisdiction.


    The only sports that recognize the USADA are the Olympic, Paralympic and Pan-American movements.


    The judge that dismissed Armstrongs complaint against the USADA stated the following, "USADA's conduct raises serious questions about whether its real interest in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less noble motives."


    The Feds dropped the case against Armstrong.


    I know that today it is fashionable to hate successful people, especially ones that appear to have cheated, but bastardizing the rules and the process just because you hate is not good for America.
    19 Oct 2012, 05:22 PM Reply Like
  • Lance isn't the only person accused here, although you go out of your way to apologize for his egregious, decade(s?) long conduct.


    Lance lied to the world, his sponsors, his fans, cancer victims everywhere. His non-profit doesn't actually fund cancer RESEARCH, but pork-laden advocacy, and since it doesn't reveal its finances, there's no idea how much it paid it's (now former) "Chairman" for his involvement with it.


    The only persons here who VIOLATED rules were Lance Armstrong and his fellow dopers.


    Strike that. You VIOLATE "rules" of accountability and common sense with your arguments. Perhaps you know Lance, or you're a "true believer", but you're also AN APOLOGIST. "It's not Lance's fault ... it's a witchhunt!" That's pathetic, and you're pandering to a "famous person" who hasn't earned your pander.
    19 Oct 2012, 05:43 PM Reply Like
  • wjbrown2003030, thats what I mean, just pure hate. I have no connection with Armstrong, and no real connection to cycling, just common sense. The others that have been accused were caught, or were afraid of getting caught and confessed. They deserve what they got.


    There is no proof that Armstrong violated the rules. There is no proof of what he took when people say they saw him taking it. Read the material.


    Protection from the 'system' is so important that it is written into our (American) bill of rights. I understand you don't like Armstrong, but how would you feel if the USADA just got a bunch of comments about someone that was not famous and then threw them out of the sport with no proof.


    Your post just made my point, you hate and are willing to throw out proper procedure and protections anytime someone you hate is accused. I understand your type, "Its the seriousness of the charges that matter, not the proving of guilt."


    It is exactly at times like this that we need to stand up against the government because next time it will be harder, and the next even harder. You would have been much better suited living during the Salem Witch Trials and that is exactly why, for the protection of the innocent, that sometimes guilty people go free.
    20 Oct 2012, 09:54 AM Reply Like
  • Pure hate? How about just PURE REVULSION?


    Keep your "hate" proclamations to yourself. Why do you feel the need to excuse Lance Armstrong's behavior?


    I'm very glad that he has now been STRIPPED of his 7 Tour de France titles. But not because I hate him. BECAUSE IT WAS SIMPLY THE RIGHT OUTCOME.


    He cheated. He lied. He obscured. Even if every other rider did the same thing, it changes nothing.


    He's likely been chemical doping for so long, in fact, I'd argue that it contributed to his cancer. (There, I said it. Label it "hate", if you want. It doesn't change anything).


    I wish we could see "clawback" on Lance's endorsement income for the past 15 years, and his siphoning payment from his not-for-profit. It's ALL ILL GOTTEN GAINS. He wouldn't be "anybody" -- in the context that we know him -- if he hadn't cheated over his ENTIRE PROFESSIONAL CYCLING CAREER. But then, maybe at least he'd have his humanity ... now, he has nothing but the money. And that won't clear his name or buy him dignity.


    And THAT'S the way it should be.
    23 Oct 2012, 10:20 AM Reply Like
  • wjbrown2003030, thank you for making my point.
    23 Oct 2012, 11:04 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)