IGX

I didn't know you could get those assets back after setting that up. interesting problem i will never face.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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*!!

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.

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

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

You're confused. This:



is not a Livestrong bracelet.

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:



is not a Livestrong bracelet.

My sartorial leanings have never been statist let alone fascistic but that's a real snappy looking belt.

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:



is not a Livestrong bracelet.

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.

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:



is not a Livestrong bracelet.

If they're talking about you, they're thinking about you.

Glad to be in your head, Gorby.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:



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.

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?

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.

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