| However, the stuff in the middle about LANCE and
| how Trek loves LANCE better than him and it's so
| unfair is essentially irrelevant to the contract.
| That is Greg's grudge match.
Irrelevant to the contract, maybe. But *not* irrelevant to Greg's hope that
he could get Trek to capitulate early.
I think it's on page 6 of the Trek filing where it's noted that Trek was
served with the latest paperwork from Greg, but it was not filed. It appears
that Greg's intention was, at least partly, to try and include a lot of
stuff about Lance that Greg thought Trek would find embarrassing to air in
public, thus causing Trek to want to settle things quickly & quietly (and in
Greg's favor). Trek instead chose the "nuclear" option- expose EVERYTHING
quickly, including the stuff Greg thought he could have leverage with by
threatening to expose.
From the various documents Trek made public, Greg did the same thing in
2004, at which time Trek did, indeed, decide it was better to settle with
him and continue with the line, rather than have everything come out. I
think John Burke even said something to that effect in his employee
presentation, which is also on-line. But this time, it appears Trek's
attitude is "enough is enough."
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
<
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:97c57c5f-0286-4305-be4b-6c9bac31f832@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
| On Apr 8, 4:56 pm, RicodJour <
[email protected]> wrote:
| > On Apr 8, 7:41 pm, "
[email protected]" <
[email protected]>
| > wrote:
| > >
www.lemondbikes.comisstill up. Guess Burke hasn't pulled the plug
| > > on that yet. tic toc tic toc..... Or is this treks ploy to look
| > > innocent while putting up such biased statements. That and putting up
| > > the time lines and suit summarys.
| >
| > I'd rather those sort of self-serving statements than the ego-fodder
| > than Greggie's lawyers wrote up. The first items in his complaint are
| > a paean to all that is Lemond. As always, first and foremost, it's
| > all about Greg. He's like a Steve Jobs without the business acumen
| > and charisma.
|
| The "Whereas, Greg Lemond is a famous bike racer and
| champion of righteousness" stuff is basically relevant.
| Take away all the histrionics and this is a lawsuit
| about contractual obligations and the licensing of
| Lemond's name, and so it's relevant for him to
| establish that his name and bike brand have value.
|
| However, the stuff in the middle about LANCE and
| how Trek loves LANCE better than him and it's so
| unfair is essentially irrelevant to the contract.
| That is Greg's grudge match.
| Maybe Trek does love LANCE better than him, maybe
| Trek told him to shut up about doping because he
| was damaging their mutual business interests, and
| so on. In theory that provides motivation for
| Trek to fail to fulfill their contractual obligations,
| but that theory is mostly in Greg's ideas about
| who is picking on whom. For the lawsuit to succeed,
| Greg will likely have to show that Trek failed to
| fulfill, not that they might have had a nefarious
| reason for failing to fulfill. Contracts are about
| performance, not motivation. LANCE is a sideshow.
|
| Ben
|
