Lance Armstrong

Topics without replies are pruned every 365 days. Not moderated.

Moderator: Dux


Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19098
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Blaidd Drwg »

I didn't know you could get those assets back after setting that up. interesting problem i will never face.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

User avatar

Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21247
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Turdacious »

Blaidd Drwg wrote:I didn't know you could get those assets back after setting that up. interesting problem i will never face.
They can be set up to provide you with future income, or as a tax dodge. Someone in Lance's situation would have to do some serious lawyering up to make it work.

Depending on what the laws are in the future, you might consider setting one up in a few decades to pass on assets to your heirs. For ordinary folks, they are a way to avoid probate (which is contestable in court) and to avoid public knowledge of what you have (because it's nobody's business). A lot of people set them up when both spouses have kids from previous marriages, or poor relationships with some of their kids.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

User avatar

baffled
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 8873
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:56 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by baffled »

Turdacious wrote:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:I didn't know you could get those assets back after setting that up. interesting problem i will never face.
They can be set up to provide you with future income, or as a tax dodge. Someone in Lance's situation would have to do some serious lawyering up to make it work.

Depending on what the laws are in the future, you might consider setting one up in a few decades to pass on assets to your heirs. For ordinary folks, they are a way to avoid probate (which is contestable in court) and to avoid public knowledge of what you have (because it's nobody's business). A lot of people set them up when both spouses have kids from previous marriages, or poor relationships with some of their kids.
My parents have a trust set up. They're comfortable, but not rich. I get along with them really well, too. No half brothers or sisters that I'm aware of. Pretty much set up for the other reasons you described, I think.

Some friends of ours who actually are rich as fuck have one set up. Their home, all three of their kids' houses and a shit load of other stuff is apparently in there.

They have a very healthy family business, fwiw.
"Gentle in what you do, Firm in how you do it"
- Buck Brannaman


Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19098
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Blaidd Drwg »

Turdacious wrote:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:I didn't know you could get those assets back after setting that up. interesting problem i will never face.
They can be set up to provide you with future income, or as a tax dodge. Someone in Lance's situation would have to do some serious lawyering up to make it work.

Depending on what the laws are in the future, you might consider setting one up in a few decades to pass on assets to your heirs. For ordinary folks, they are a way to avoid probate (which is contestable in court) and to avoid public knowledge of what you have (because it's nobody's business). A lot of people set them up when both spouses have kids from previous marriages, or poor relationships with some of their kids.

Interesting. Thanks for the run down.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill


DikTracy6000
Sgt. Major
Posts: 2705
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:35 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by DikTracy6000 »

Kazuya Mishima wrote:What's the income stream for a major cyclist if you're not Lance Armstrong? Aside from Lance, I can't name a single one besides Greg LeMond, and that's from a million years ago. Do you get a million dollars for wearing 7-11 Big Slurp on your jersey, and finishing in 29th place at Le Tour? I don't even know who the fan base is for this queer sport...never walked into a sports bar and heard a bunch of guys talking about pelatons and carbon fiber cycles and how Lance crushed some frog in the trials. Is it like Crossfit...there's only 50,000 people on the planet that actually do it, but those 50,000 spend their every waking hour obsessing and throw the last dime in their pocket at it?
Dunno about money, but Eddie Merckx probably scored more French and Belgian pussy than Lance's ball could handle. without checking I believe he won it six times without ped's.


Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19098
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Blaidd Drwg »

DikTracy6000 wrote:
Kazuya Mishima wrote:What's the income stream for a major cyclist if you're not Lance Armstrong? Aside from Lance, I can't name a single one besides Greg LeMond, and that's from a million years ago. Do you get a million dollars for wearing 7-11 Big Slurp on your jersey, and finishing in 29th place at Le Tour? I don't even know who the fan base is for this queer sport...never walked into a sports bar and heard a bunch of guys talking about pelatons and carbon fiber cycles and how Lance crushed some frog in the trials. Is it like Crossfit...there's only 50,000 people on the planet that actually do it, but those 50,000 spend their every waking hour obsessing and throw the last dime in their pocket at it?
Dunno about money, but Eddie Merckx probably scored more French and Belgian pussy than Lance's ball could handle. without checking I believe he won it six times without ped's.

5 times. Correct on the Pussy. He got busted for amphetamines.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

User avatar

tough old man
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: Hell

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by tough old man »

Americans are ignorant when it comes to many interesting things, soccer, cycling and red wine included. The fan base for cycling is quite significant in europe, less so outside
True except for the red wine thing. Wine in general sucks balls except champagne.
"I am the author of my own misfortune, I don't need a ghost writer" - Ian Dury


"Legio mihi nomen est, quia multi sumus."


Thatcher II
Top
Posts: 1706
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:02 am

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Thatcher II »

Blaidd Drwg wrote:I didn't know you could get those assets back after setting that up. interesting problem i will never face.
To be clear on this, you are correct and the assets are put into the trust and gone from your control forever. However, you can set it up so that you or those close to you are the beneficiaries. So all of the INCOME from the assets (or gains if assets are traded) goes to you. By giving wide discretion to professional trustees, by sourcing the trust in a correct jurisdiction and routing money home properly you can minimise tax leakage, you can keep the benefit of the assets and you avoid a shit load of publicity, you avoid people being able to sue you and take the assets and it's generally how wealthy people look to protect inter-generational wealth. Not for the faint-hearted or light of pocket.

I would think Lance has all sorts of trust, orphan vehicles and other goodies set up and being run on his behalf and has done for some time. He's a fucking paranoid megalomaniac and from what I've read, took a particular delight in cash payments to and from himself.

And to you and EZ, I rarely, rarely troll. BD, my post is the result of a long time reading about this subject, talking to people and thinking about the whole pro-cycling world. It is a complete world apart. A sub-existence of unimaginable physical hardship, unwritten rules of conduct, unspoken realities of required doping and unthinkable double-think as to why it's all ok if you're inside the circus and rolling through the pretty towns at 50k an hour in the greatest moving show on earth. It's pretty annoying to type shit that makes perfect sense and lends something to a complex argument and have people say you're trolling. Trolling how when the thoughts are pretty well formed and make fucking sense, you pair of complete lesbians.
It's great to be first at last


Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19098
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Blaidd Drwg »

Thank you for the extension of Turd's assplaining and jesus tits don't be such a soft cunt about the trolling comment.

I agreed with the assessment, the fact it's genuine is all the better. I mean..I would never give in to hyperbole and all that.. :-" . but you have to admit the statement was a little shrill and could be misread.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill


Thatcher II
Top
Posts: 1706
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:02 am

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Thatcher II »

Blaidd Drwg wrote:Thank you for the extension of Turd's assplaining and jesus tits don't be such a soft cunt about the trolling comment.

I agreed with the assessment, the fact it's genuine is all the better. I mean..I would never give in to hyperbole and all that.. :-" . but you have to admit the statement was a little shrill and could be misread.
It wasn't in the least bit shrill. Shrill was the comment to which I was responding - "lying be lying be lying and y'all need to see that". That's shrill. Someone taking the time to explain that actually, lying isn't always lying, because there are elements of grey to the whole pro-cycling debacle....that's the opposite of shrill.

And I don't ever recall you succumbing to hyperbole. I mean, you're a bit of a hyper-bollox, but that's a different matter.
It's great to be first at last


Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19098
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Blaidd Drwg »

Gorbachev wrote:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:Thank you for the extension of Turd's assplaining and jesus tits don't be such a soft cunt about the trolling comment.

I agreed with the assessment, the fact it's genuine is all the better. I mean..I would never give in to hyperbole and all that.. :-" . but you have to admit the statement was a little shrill and could be misread.
It wasn't in the least bit shrill. Shrill was the comment to which I was responding - "lying be lying be lying and y'all need to see that". That's shrill. Someone taking the time to explain that actually, lying isn't always lying, because there are elements of grey to the whole pro-cycling debacle....that's the opposite of shrill.

And I don't ever recall you succumbing to hyperbole. I mean, you're a bit of a hyper-bollox, but that's a different matter.
I do have large swinging ones...yes.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill


Shapecharge
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 8498
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 11:59 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Shapecharge »

Just fyi but there's a private email function here where you can share your love for each other and make plans to get together for a latte and discuss where your relationship is headed. Yes, I am jealous.

User avatar

Holland Oates
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 14137
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 8:32 am
Location: GAWD'S Country
Contact:

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Holland Oates »

Gorbachev wrote:said some stuff I didn't read
I didn't say your baiting was a bad thing. Hell I enjoy it. Lighten up Francis. And why not troll BD? I do it all the time.
Southern Hospitality Is Aggressive Hospitality

User avatar

Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21247
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Turdacious »

Ed Zachary wrote:
Gorbachev wrote:said some stuff I didn't read
I didn't say your baiting was a bad thing. Hell I enjoy it. Lighten up Francis. And why not troll BD? I do it all the time.
That's not very nice.

Image
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule


Thatcher II
Top
Posts: 1706
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:02 am

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Thatcher II »

Shapecharge wrote:Just fyi but there's a private email function here where you can share your love for each other and make plans to get together for a latte and discuss where your relationship is headed. Yes, I am jealous.
PM on the way. If you are genuine and want to talk and open up and really listen and share issues for modern men that touch on feelings and emotions, then you're welcome to join our circle of truth and support us as we support you on our journey together. *VIRTUAL HUGS*!!
It's great to be first at last

User avatar

WildGorillaMan
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 9951
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:01 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by WildGorillaMan »

Blaidd Drwg wrote:
Grandpa's Spells wrote:
Shapecharge wrote:What's Lance's angle here? So the statute of limitations is over on the purjury charge from what I gather so is coming clean a way to get back into the game a la triathlon? Supposedly a public admission of guilt is necessary for the USADA to clear him for competition...again just something I read somewhere else. Does it matter if his public admission of guilt is a means to an end and perhaps disingenuous?
I'm wondering about all the people he slandered who now have a legitimate suit at a guy with very deep pockets.
them pockets be gettin shallowwww.....

get while the gettin is good. Lance will be broke as fuck unless someone ghost writes him a good book.

Here's somebody with very deep pockets who is apparently exposed to liability thanks to Lance:

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/01/14/ ... esbusiness
When Lance Armstrong’s interview with Oprah Winfrey about his suspected use of illegal performance-enhancing drugs is broadcast on Thursday, an investment banker will most likely be watching it very carefully (and nervously): Thomas Weisel.

Mr. Weisel is a legend in finance and Silicon Valley. He was the banker behind Yahoo’s public offering and some of the biggest deals during the dot-com bubble. He famously sold the firm he ran, Montgomery Securities, for $1.2 billion in 1997. And he sold his next firm, Thomas Weisel Partners, for $300 million to Stifel Financial in 2010.

But it is Mr. Weisel’s extracurricular activity that connects him to the news of the moment: he was Mr. Armstrong’s biggest financial backer and the single individual most responsible for the money machine that propelled Mr. Armstrong’s career.

Depending on what Mr. Armstrong says in the interview about his purported doping, Mr. Weisel, who was a co-owner of the United States Postal Service Pro Cycling Team through a cycling management firm that he helped found called Tailwind Sports, could be subject along with his partners to lawsuits from corporate sponsors seeking millions of dollars. Already, there is a False Claims Act case contending that Mr. Armstrong and the team defrauded the Postal Service.

Perhaps more anxiety-producing is what Mr. Weisel may have known, or should have known, about a team that for years ran “the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen,” according to the United States Anti-Doping Agency.
Image
You'll Hurt Your Back

basically I'm Raoul Duke trying to fit into a Philip K. Dick movie remake.

User avatar

Kazuya Mishima
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6394
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 10:11 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Kazuya Mishima »

I used to have one of those Livestrong bracelets...can I sue to get my money back?


Thatcher II
Top
Posts: 1706
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:02 am

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Thatcher II »

Kazuya Mishima wrote:I used to have one of those Livestrong bracelets...can I sue to get my money back?
You're confused. This:

Image

is not a Livestrong bracelet.
It's great to be first at last


Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19098
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Blaidd Drwg »

Gorbachev wrote:
Kazuya Mishima wrote:I used to have one of those Livestrong bracelets...can I sue to get my money back?
You're confused. This:

Image

is not a Livestrong bracelet.

=D>

My sartorial leanings have never been statist let alone fascistic but that's a real snappy looking belt.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

User avatar

WildGorillaMan
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 9951
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:01 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by WildGorillaMan »

Blaidd Drwg wrote:
Gorbachev wrote:
Kazuya Mishima wrote:I used to have one of those Livestrong bracelets...can I sue to get my money back?
You're confused. This:

Image

is not a Livestrong bracelet.

=D>

My sartorial leanings have never been statist let alone fascistic but that's a real snappy looking belt.
Say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, but they dressed with flair.
Image
You'll Hurt Your Back

basically I'm Raoul Duke trying to fit into a Philip K. Dick movie remake.

User avatar

Kazuya Mishima
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6394
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 10:11 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Kazuya Mishima »

Gorbachev wrote:
Kazuya Mishima wrote:I used to have one of those Livestrong bracelets...can I sue to get my money back?
You're confused. This:

Image

is not a Livestrong bracelet.
If they're talking about you, they're thinking about you.

Glad to be in your head, Gorby.


Thatcher II
Top
Posts: 1706
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:02 am

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Thatcher II »

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

=D>

My sartorial leanings have never been statist let alone fascistic but that's a real snappy looking belt.
Hugo Boss designed most of the uniforms, which remain iconic, despite the connotations. He was later condemned, but the company seems to have successfully glossed over the facts.
It's great to be first at last

User avatar

kreator
Top
Posts: 1287
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:52 am

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by kreator »

Gorbachev wrote:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:Thank you for the extension of Turd's assplaining and jesus tits don't be such a soft cunt about the trolling comment.

I agreed with the assessment, the fact it's genuine is all the better. I mean..I would never give in to hyperbole and all that.. :-" . but you have to admit the statement was a little shrill and could be misread.
It wasn't in the least bit shrill. Shrill was the comment to which I was responding - "lying be lying be lying and y'all need to see that". That's shrill. Someone taking the time to explain that actually, lying isn't always lying, because there are elements of grey to the whole pro-cycling debacle....that's the opposite of shrill.

And I don't ever recall you succumbing to hyperbole. I mean, you're a bit of a hyper-bollox, but that's a different matter.
Are you saying it's a grey area because it's institutionalized and the sport tacitly condones it and because it involves hard work? Or is there another reason why it's ambiguous?


Thatcher II
Top
Posts: 1706
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:02 am

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Thatcher II »

kreator wrote:
Gorbachev wrote:
Blaidd Drwg wrote:Thank you for the extension of Turd's assplaining and jesus tits don't be such a soft cunt about the trolling comment.

I agreed with the assessment, the fact it's genuine is all the better. I mean..I would never give in to hyperbole and all that.. :-" . but you have to admit the statement was a little shrill and could be misread.
It wasn't in the least bit shrill. Shrill was the comment to which I was responding - "lying be lying be lying and y'all need to see that". That's shrill. Someone taking the time to explain that actually, lying isn't always lying, because there are elements of grey to the whole pro-cycling debacle....that's the opposite of shrill.

And I don't ever recall you succumbing to hyperbole. I mean, you're a bit of a hyper-bollox, but that's a different matter.
Are you saying it's a grey area because it's institutionalized and the sport tacitly condones it and because it involves hard work? Or is there another reason why it's ambiguous?
That's a good part of it. The other part is this. NO ONE GETS HURT! You're not defrauding a person of their life's savings. You're not holding up a bank. You're getting on with a shitty, harder than hell job. You're doing what is expected, required and understood by those in the know. Those at the top. Comparing Armstrong to Madoff would be very wrong. So it's simple - he lied his ass off. But complex - we built him up as something superhuman while all along, the sport was rotten to its core and that was the world in which he operated.
It's great to be first at last

User avatar

Mickey O'neil
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:49 pm
Location: The Pale Blue Dot

Re: Lance Armstrong

Post by Mickey O'neil »

Gorby, can you list some of the books you've read on cycling where you got your info?

Post Reply