Wednesday, April 9, 2008

BKW Featured on Slowtwitch!


Following our post on Pacific Cycle's purchase of Cannondale, Slowtwitch Publisher Dan Empfield got in touch with us and expressed some interest in working together.

Trek announced it was dumping LeMond yesterday which was just the occasion Empfield was looking for to get back in touch. You can read our analysis here.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Trek went to bed with a dog and is complaining that LeMond gave them fleas.

I have no doubt that the relationship with Armstrong sells more bikes that LeMond. But, Trek is indirectly perpetuating omerta in the pro peloton by uncritically supporting Armstrong.

Frenchy aka Bike Boy said...

Thank you for another great post.

I agree with the post above: "Trek is indirectly perpetuating omerta in the pro peloton by uncritically supporting Armstrong."

Having worked at a large Trek dealer for many years I had drank the Kool-Aid and has always been a fan of the house of Burke. But Treks support of Lance was/is gross when there was so much circumstantial evidence for one not to be concerned about the allegations. Trek is like any other large company whose self interest lies only in their bottom line. They screwed Lemond because he would not cow tow to their BS request of keeping quiet. Armstrong was/is a bully and Greg stood up to him was given his warning. He obviously did not listen and thusly he got canned.

When Greg comes back I will be there to buy one of his bikes (as long as it is not a piece of junk). He was a champ when he raced and he was a champ for comming forward about doping even though it meant risking his relationship with his Trek Master.

Anonymous said...

"A quick scan of the cycling forums shows that a significant population sees LeMond as a “whiner” and doing more to hurt his own legacy than righting a wrong."

Not sure if we are reading the same forums, most of what I see has support for Lemond and condemnation for the Trek/Lance doping apologists.

But it appears you did not set out to present a balanced looked and instead just gave Trek position, point by point.

Love your site, but you are way off base. Go back an actually read what Lemond has said an you will see that little of it is any different that what the average procycling fan says. Most of us shared Lemonds disappointment when we found out Lance was working with Ferrari.....you will also find that Lance had said worse about Lemond, but it appears Trek did not mind if that part of their brand was damaged.

Anonymous said...

http://www.cyclingforums.com/t458319.html

I don't see anyone calling Greg a whiner in this forum

Padraig said...

Anon 1:09: My analysis was never meant to address the substance of LeMond's criticism of Armstrong. My personal opinion of LeMond's position and Armstrong's actions is utterly irrelevant.

Given both Armstrong and LeMond's litigious natures, as a writer I have a duty to stick to what is known.

It's an ugly situation and one I do personally wish had played out differently. I respect that some readers may see pockets of support for LeMond, but I've seen an incredible backlash against him for what he has said about Armstrong; again, what I'm reporting isn't my opinion but rather an observation of what's out there.

Similarly, to report on Armstrong as if his rumored doping was fact and to write an analysis that takes such an idea into account would be utterly irresponsible journalism.

As to what Trek minds or doesn't mind, they are allowed to choose when to speak up. It's a private company and this is America, allegedly the land of the free.

If BKW readers object to LeMond's treatment at the hands of Trek, that's fine; just don't think for a second that we have taken a side.

bikesgonewild said...

...padraig...i thought it was a very fair review of what is going on...

...two one-time amazing bicycle racers, now both litigious enraptured "bike personalities"...

...armstrong's got his foundation which is a righteous endeavor but he's got a questionable cycling history...

...lemond's outside efforts are righteously directed towards a dope free sport of cycling but he regularly casts aspersions w/ no substantiated evidence...

...the bottom line: this is a business venture, plain & simple...i won't repeat facts w/ which i felt you did a great job, but once the paperwork is settled, greg will be free to pursue both new business partners & his concerns regarding cycling's future...trek can proceed in their business w/ out a disruptive internal dialogue...

...i can't even see this as being a big court battle...nobody's happy, so dissolve the relationship...
...what's the fuss ???...

velomonkey said...

This article seemed a but rushed and didn't have nearly the impact of the C'Dale sale.

I want you to consider something: of the bike fans you know, the ones who know of the feats of both LeMond and Armstrong, how many prefer Armstrong over LeMond? I see some, but it's not many. Conversely, how many prefer LeMond over Armstrong? As far as I can tell substantially more. Are these scientific facts? No. But they have as much support as your statement of bulletin boards and the felling on LeMond. Most people are new to cycling and Lance is the guy who brought them into the sport. With that viewpoint of course LeMond appears like a brat.

Still, if you know the career of both, then it seems like Trek is just rallying around the more recent winner of the tour who also happens to have more wins (i.e., Armstrong). Simple business decision, but not necessarily supporting the sport of cycling, but it sure does make financial sense.

Lastly, LeMond buying 2.5m in retail value bikes and parts over the years is a red herring. You saying it buttresses Trek's claim shows a level of naivety. When people have access to such a financial vehicle (purchase parts at wholesale) they use it to their monetary gain, especially when you're loaded like Greg, it's simple accounting. The guy probably donated the parts to charity or whatever and then took the tax right-off for the retail price or any other myriad of financial accounting trickery. I highly doubt he opened a Ebay account and pocketed the profit.

Net, Net - Trek made a business decision and in the end it was probably the right one. As far as I am concerned, it is more proof that Trek might as well be selling TVs or Refrigerators as they hardly support the sport. I don't buy their stuff and I certainly will go out of my way to tell people how poor of a company they are.

Anonymous said...

I think that while you may not have meant for your report to be bias the stance on the cycling forums was completely off. All of the 4 or 5 forums I looked at were strongly pro Lemond