Return on sponsorship

[email hidden] (Russ Baxter) wrote in news:c00af3.0306260530.58708942 @posting.google.com:

Quoted message said:

From Business Week, a discussion of the value of Armstrong to the Postal Service, among
other things.

businessweek.comb3839046.htmOpen ↗

The part on Lance's advertising value was interesting.

But then he starts a paragraph saying "But Armstrong's success may be hurting the sport that made
him a global star" and goes on to imply that LA dominating 1 race a year is somehow responsible for
the Team Coast fiasco. This notion of LA being bad for the sport is a reach at best, but I think the
author just pulled this notion from his ass, considering that the LA story has been credited with
saving cycling after the doping scandals.

But still, the article makes me want to know more about advertising value
. . . I'd really like to know Pantani's advertising value, because he sure manages to get a lot of
publicity.

NS

Nev Shea said:

But then he starts a paragraph saying "But Armstrong's success may be hurting the sport that made
him a global star" and goes on to imply that LA dominating 1 race a year is somehow responsible
for the Team Coast fiasco.

I have a friend who is in the professional golf circuit. In their field, Woods has hurt the game in
the sense that for tournaments in which Woods is not playing, attendance is a lot lower than it used
to be, and interest non-existent. Maybe that's where the author got the idea from.

Didier

--
Didier A Depireux [email hidden] [email hidden] 685 W.Baltimore Str
neurobiology.umaryland.edudepireux.htmOpen ↗ Anatomy and Neurobiology Phone: 410-706-1272 (off)
University of Maryland -1273 (lab) Baltimore MD 21201 USA Fax: 1-410-706-2512

It's hilarious the bedfellows (Kurgan?) that business and sports make.

Whereas ("-as"...he said "as"...Kurgan?) with amateur sports all you need is what happens and a good
storyteller to captivate however many folks want to tune into it or check it out.

--

Jeff Potter
****
*Out Your Backdoor * outyourbackdoor.comoutyourbackdoor.comOpen ↗ for modern folkways and culture revival...
...offering "small world" views on bikes, bows, books, movies... ...new books featuring: XC ski
culture, a Gulf Coast thriller folding bicycles ... with radical novels coming up! ...original
downloadable music ... and articles galore! plus national "Off the Beaten Path" travel forums!
HOLY SMOKES!

Sportsbook.com would not have a team were it not for the added publicity generated by Lance
Armstrong and the trickle down effect that has generated additional press coverage and the existance
of races such as NYC and San Fran.

That being said, I can see the difficulty for a company such as Navigators or Prime Allience when
they have solid, big budget teams animating a race such as Philadelphia, with riders in the break,
and the coverage cuts away from the race itself to do a 5 minute piece on Lance and Hincappe,
neither of whom are in the race. And in both New York and San Francisco last year, most of the
interviews and post race attention didn't go to Saturn or 7-UP, but went to US Postal and Lance who
were also rans in those events.

When the first couple of questions fired at Charles Dionne after winning America's biggest race are,
"what did you think about how Lance rode ?" and " how does it feel to beat Lance ?", I can
understand the ideas presented in the article.

Nev Shea <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (Russ Baxter) wrote in news:c00af3.0306260530.58708942 @posting.google.com:

Quoted message said:

From Business Week, a discussion of the value of Armstrong to the Postal Service, among other
things.

businessweek.comb3839046.htmOpen ↗

The part on Lance's advertising value was interesting.

But then he starts a paragraph saying "But Armstrong's success may be hurting the sport that made
him a global star" and goes on to imply that LA dominating 1 race a year is somehow responsible
for the Team Coast fiasco. This notion of LA being bad for the sport is a reach at best, but I
think the author just pulled this notion from his ass, considering that the LA story has been
credited with saving cycling after the doping scandals.

But still, the article makes me want to know more about advertising value
. . . I'd really like to know Pantani's advertising value, because he sure manages to get a lot of
publicity.

NS

In article said:

I have a friend who is in the professional golf circuit. In their field, Woods has hurt the game
in the sense that for tournaments in which Woods is not playing, attendance is a lot lower than it
used to be, and interest non-existent. Maybe that's where the author got the idea from.

I know you weren't defending it, but that analogy strikes me as highly suspect. Lance is really good
at winning one race a year; Woods wins on a regular basis (well, he used to). Was the interest in
the Giro any less in Europe this year than it was a decade ago?

Off topic:

Have you ever asked your friend what the annual tour prize money was like pre-Tiger, versus the
prize money now? Is attendance actually lower at non-Tiger tourneys, or is it simply flat and
therefore proportionally lower since a lot of people who wouldn't normally watch golf decide to
check out Tiger on a whim?

It's tough to compare individual sports to team sports, but I don't remember hearing anyone say that
Michael Jordan was bad for basketball because the only time the Bullets/Wizards sold more than 5000
tickets was when the Bulls were in town.

ISTR reading that golf TV contracts -- which are directly related to the tournament prize money --
have exploded since Woods came onto the golf scene. I find it hard to consider that "hurting the
game". But then, I don't play.

-Joe

[email hidden] (Bill Laudien) wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Sportsbook.com would not have a team were it not for the added publicity generated by Lance
Armstrong and the trickle down effect that has generated additional press coverage and the
existance of races such as NYC and San Fran.

Bingo! And the additional coverage is exactly what makes it attractive to sponsors, therefore
contradicting the author's argument.

Quoted message said:

That being said, I can see the difficulty for a company such as Navigators or Prime Allience when
they have solid, big budget teams animating a race such as Philadelphia, with riders in the break,
and the coverage cuts away from the race itself to do a 5 minute piece on Lance and Hincappe,
neither of whom are in the race. And in both New York and San Francisco last year, most of the
interviews and post race attention didn't go to Saturn or 7-UP, but went to US Postal and Lance
who were also rans in those events.

These are good points, and support the article's measure of advertising value to Postal. I suppose
the folks at Navigators et al probably have numbers that show viewership for the events over the
past few years; if those numbers show increased interest in the sport, then they probably don't mind
OLN cutting away for 5 minutes to worship the man responsible for it if their advertising value has
gone up too.

Quoted message said:

When the first couple of questions fired at Charles Dionne after winning America's biggest race
are, "what did you think about how Lance rode ?" and " how does it feel to beat Lance ?", I can
understand the ideas presented in the article.

Really? Because I think this example contradicts it. You've already made the point that the race
probably wouldn't exist without the Lance effect and he amplifies the media attention as well.
Would Dionne prefer all that attention with questions about beating Lance, or would he rather
answer racing questions from just the local media and a stringer from rbr? Beating Lance Armstrong
makes this the biggest day in Charles Dionne's career so far, and it's something he'll tell his
grandkids about.

To me, this premise that Lance is bad for the sport is like finding $100, and then being upset
because you'll have to figure out how to spend it.

NS

It's almost comical to read this sort of stuff. Lance wins a couple of races a year and he is said
to dominate. Jalabert was winning three dozen races a year and no one knew who the hell he was.

"Nev Shea" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (Russ Baxter) wrote in

news:c00af3.0306260530.58708942

Quoted message said:

@posting.google.com:

Quoted message said:

From Business Week, a discussion of the value of Armstrong to the Postal Service, among other
things.

businessweek.comb3839046.htmOpen ↗

The part on Lance's advertising value was interesting.

But then he starts a paragraph saying "But Armstrong's success may

be

Quoted message said:

hurting the sport that made him a global star" and goes on to imply

that

Quoted message said:

LA dominating 1 race a year is somehow responsible for the Team

Coast

Quoted message said:

fiasco. This notion of LA being bad for the sport is a reach at

best, but

Quoted message said:

I think the author just pulled this notion from his ass, considering

that

Quoted message said:

the LA story has been credited with saving cycling after the doping scandals.

But still, the article makes me want to know more about advertising

value

Quoted message said:

. . . I'd really like to know Pantani's advertising value, because

he

Quoted message said:

suremanages to get a lot of publicity.

NS

I read that the entire postal team operation has a budget of 12 million.

Thats the same a single drug using baseball juice pig makes this day - and not a good one either.

"Russ Baxter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

From Business Week, a discussion of the value of Armstrong to the Postal Service, among
other things.

businessweek.comb3839046.htmOpen ↗

I agree. If Lance raises the profile of cycling enough to get props from Jim Rome than how can
this be bad?

The stupid UCI Italian and French police are the problem with cycling. When Mapei quits, you know
something stinks and it ain't the drug.

"Nev Shea" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (Russ Baxter) wrote in news:c00af3.0306260530.58708942 @posting.google.com:

Quoted message said:

From Business Week, a discussion of the value of Armstrong to the Postal Service, among other
things.

businessweek.comb3839046.htmOpen ↗

The part on Lance's advertising value was interesting.

But then he starts a paragraph saying "But Armstrong's success may be hurting the sport that made
him a global star" and goes on to imply that LA dominating 1 race a year is somehow responsible
for the Team Coast fiasco. This notion of LA being bad for the sport is a reach at best, but I
think the author just pulled this notion from his ass, considering that the LA story has been
credited with saving cycling after the doping scandals.

But still, the article makes me want to know more about advertising value
. . . I'd really like to know Pantani's advertising value, because he suremanages to get a lot of
publicity.

NS

Except us. And to JaJa, the respect of his fans, peers and countrymen was enough.

Its going to suck not having him around.

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

It's almost comical to read this sort of stuff. Lance wins a couple of races a year and he is said
to dominate. Jalabert was winning three dozen races a year and no one knew who the hell he was.

"Nev Shea" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (Russ Baxter) wrote in

news:c00af3.0306260530.58708942

Quoted message said:

@posting.google.com:

Quoted message said:

From Business Week, a discussion of the value of Armstrong to the Postal Service, among other
things.

businessweek.comb3839046.htmOpen ↗

The part on Lance's advertising value was interesting.

But then he starts a paragraph saying "But Armstrong's success may

be

Quoted message said:

hurting the sport that made him a global star" and goes on to imply

that

Quoted message said:

LA dominating 1 race a year is somehow responsible for the Team

Coast

Quoted message said:

fiasco. This notion of LA being bad for the sport is a reach at

best, but

Quoted message said:

I think the author just pulled this notion from his ass, considering

that

Quoted message said:

the LA story has been credited with saving cycling after the doping scandals.

But still, the article makes me want to know more about advertising

value

Quoted message said:

. . . I'd really like to know Pantani's advertising value, because

he

Quoted message said:

suremanages to get a lot of publicity.

NS

Lance only draws at the Tour because that is the only place where he tries to win.

If I go to Paris Roubaix I want to see Museuw. No?

I think the writer should have called up an editor at Velonews for some expert opinion.

"Didier A. Depireux" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Nev Shea said:

But then he starts a paragraph saying "But Armstrong's success may be hurting the sport that
made him a global star" and goes on to imply that LA dominating 1 race a year is somehow
responsible for the Team Coast fiasco.

I have a friend who is in the professional golf circuit. In their field, Woods has hurt the game
in the sense that for tournaments in which Woods

is

Quoted message said:

not playing, attendance is a lot lower than it used to be, and interest non-existent. Maybe that's
where the author got the idea from.

Didier

--
Didier A Depireux [email hidden] [email hidden] 685 W.Baltimore Str
neurobiology.umaryland.edudepireux.htmOpen ↗ Anatomy and Neurobiology Phone: 410-706-1272 (off)
University of Maryland -1273 (lab) Baltimore MD 21201 USA Fax: 1-410-706-2512

I like Lance a lot - but he really should take a crack at some of the 'lesser' races in the US.

"Bill Laudien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Sportsbook.com would not have a team were it not for the added publicity generated by Lance
Armstrong and the trickle down effect that has generated additional press coverage and the
existance of races such as NYC and San Fran.

That being said, I can see the difficulty for a company such as Navigators or Prime Allience when
they have solid, big budget teams animating a race such as Philadelphia, with riders in the break,
and the coverage cuts away from the race itself to do a 5 minute piece on Lance and Hincappe,
neither of whom are in the race. And in both New York and San Francisco last year, most of the
interviews and post race attention didn't go to Saturn or 7-UP, but went to US Postal and Lance
who were also rans in those events.

When the first couple of questions fired at Charles Dionne after winning America's biggest race
are, "what did you think about how Lance rode ?" and " how does it feel to beat Lance ?", I can
understand the ideas presented in the article.

Nev Shea <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (Russ Baxter) wrote in news:c00af3.0306260530.58708942 @posting.google.com:

Quoted message said:

From Business Week, a discussion of the value of Armstrong to the Postal Service, among other
things.

businessweek.comb3839046.htmOpen ↗

The part on Lance's advertising value was interesting.

But then he starts a paragraph saying "But Armstrong's success may be hurting the sport that
made him a global star" and goes on to imply that LA dominating 1 race a year is somehow
responsible for the Team Coast fiasco. This notion of LA being bad for the sport is a reach
at best,

but

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I think the author just pulled this notion from his ass, considering

that

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the LA story has been credited with saving cycling after the doping scandals.

But still, the article makes me want to know more about advertising

value

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

. . . I'd really like to know Pantani's advertising value, because he sure manages to get a lot
of publicity.

NS

Lewdvig said:

I like Lance a lot - but he really should take a crack at some of the 'lesser' races in the US.

'Lance a lot'

heh heh