Should the public boycott banned athlete Lance Armstrong's sponsors?

[GLuvsMtb]

 

 

I am undecided if woolies did anything wrong. So for now, based on that question, no.

 

But the questions I asked still remain. Would you boycott a brand if you dont believe in their business model. And, do you even believe in boycotting a company to stand up for your principles (the two are essentially the same question).

If all other things are ceteris paribus, yes.

ie. If both brands are similarly priced, similarly convenient for me to shop at and similarly specced I would buy from the company that has the better policy in place.

Eg. If the free range eggs cost the same as the battery chicken eggs and are of similar quality and are right next to each other I would buy free range.

Proximity to other desired products also play a role. I don't go buy just eggs, so out of my whole basket it has to be the best priced, most convenient, best quality and best availability of everything I need.

Often these criteria are mutually exclusive, so we start weighing them, ie, I need milk, bread and a few cleaning detergents for the maid and checkers is 1km from my home where woollies is 4km and parking is always a challenge, I go to checkers.

or

I am on my way home and will be driving past both stores and would like something nice to braai tonight as well, I go to Woollies.

[Tubehunter]

C'mon Bob and LL, how can you guys want to doubt what Lance has done for cancer?? You guys are looking at this purely from a balance sheet perspective. You chaps haven't lived a cancer experience with someone close to you yet, have you? Maybe take a trip to an oncology ward somewhere and see if the advanced stage sufferers there don't know who Lance Armstrong is and think of his achievements to put in a solid fight back to recovery and more for their lives! Now imagine that this is happening in almost every oncology ward around the planet!!!! Then come back and tell us how you doubt what he has done for cancer....

[Tubehunter]

Your idea of a boycott would carry a lot more weight if the sport of cycling was clean and LA was the only person who doped. The reality is that the rest of the peloton were all on the something during those racing years and able to avoid detection. The doping agencies need to up their game somehow and make sure they are able to punish the offenders in far more consequential ways during the actual events, rather than turn sport into a farce with them trying to retroactively test athletes more than a decade after the event happened. USADA and WADA should focus on a proper strategy to tackle professional sport in this manner. Instead they're entirely reactive in their way of dealing with the testing philosophy. I would be happy to see lifetime bans for proper hard conclusive tests whilst the event is still on. There are still far too many incentives to attempt riding their prescribed limits or go beyond and mask their protocol. It's practically impossible to conclusively say who is completely clean or simply on a cocktail to stay within their limits.

[eddy]

C'mon Bob and LL, how can you guys want to doubt what Lance has done for cancer?? You guys are looking at this purely from a balance sheet perspective. You chaps haven't lived a cancer experience with someone close to you yet, have you? Maybe take a trip to an oncology ward somewhere and see if the advanced stage sufferers there don't know who Lance Armstrong is and think of his achievements to put in a solid fight back to recovery and more for their lives! Now imagine that this is happening in almost every oncology ward around the planet!!!! Then come back and tell us how you doubt what he has done for cancer....

 

Tubehunter, i'll take the bait.

 

Can you give me the 30 second version of "what Lance has done for cancer" ?

 

Oh, and in case you doubt my credentials, both my mother and mother in law died of cancer, my brother is in remission and my father is currently undergoing treatment.

[Slowbee]

If all other things are ceteris paribus, yes.

ie. If both brands are similarly priced, similarly convenient for me to shop at and similarly specced I would buy from the company that has the better policy in place.

Eg. If the free range eggs cost the same as the battery chicken eggs and are of similar quality and are right next to each other I would buy free range.

Proximity to other desired products also play a role. I don't go buy just eggs, so out of my whole basket it has to be the best priced, most convenient, best quality and best availability of everything I need.

Often these criteria are mutually exclusive, so we start weighing them, ie, I need milk, bread and a few cleaning detergents for the maid and checkers is 1km from my home where woollies is 4km and parking is always a challenge, I go to checkers.

or

I am on my way home and will be driving past both stores and would like something nice to braai tonight as well, I go to Woollies.

 

and thats the problem, all things are not always equal and marketing folk for sure make you aware of that.

[Guest Omega Man]

I looked at all my riding stuff last night and it's only my shifters and deralieurs that are SRAM on both bikes. I've also got AVID brakes on the one bike. So this is what I'm gonna do.

 

In protest I'll change gears as little as possible.

 

I'll also use my brakes as little as possible on the bike that has AVID brakes until I can afford to buy hopes. In protest of course.

 

Is that enough of a protest?

Edited September 11, 2012 by Omega Man

[Tumbleweed]

Oh, and in case you doubt my credentials, both my mother and mother in law died of cancer, my brother is in remission and my father is currently undergoing treatment.

 

That's hectic.

 

Here's sending good wishes to your brother and dad.

[Guest Omega Man]

 

Oh, and in case you doubt my credentials, both my mother and mother in law died of cancer, my brother is in remission and my father is currently undergoing treatment.

I'm not religious but my thoughts are with you and your family.

[Dirtbreath]

C'mon Bob and LL, how can you guys want to doubt what Lance has done for cancer?? You guys are looking at this purely from a balance sheet perspective. You chaps haven't lived a cancer experience with someone close to you yet, have you? Maybe take a trip to an oncology ward somewhere and see if the advanced stage sufferers there don't know who Lance Armstrong is and think of his achievements to put in a solid fight back to recovery and more for their lives! Now imagine that this is happening in almost every oncology ward around the planet!!!! Then come back and tell us how you doubt what he has done for cancer....

Livestrong is a very American thing. My clinic is totally void of any reference to LA as are the other clinics I have visited for opinions. Not saying that people wouldn't know who he is but he's not as big a deal as it might be made out to be. His story is inspirational, but not exceptional.

[eddy]

Livestrong is a very American thing. My clinic is totally void of any reference to LA as are the other clinics I have visited for opinions. Not saying that people wouldn't know who he is but he's not as big a deal as it might be made out to be. His story is inspirational, but not exceptional.

 

 

Agreed.

 

There is a dishonesty in founding a “cancer research“ charity which morphs into a “cancer advocacy” foundation and yet carries on without making the difference clear.

 

Research benefits all of mankind. This kind of focussed advocacy benefits the celebrities around it and, to be fair, I suppose helps some people in the USA who don’t have friends and family to give them support.

 

Here is the thing; most people with cancer know it is a potentially deadly disease, that the treatment is unpleasant but surprisingly effective and that if you are one of the ones who will die of it, it is a particularly gruesome way to go.

 

They don’t need Lance Armstrong to tell them that.

 

They also don’t need Lance Armstrong to tell them that if they are like him, they can “kick its Arse”. The implication is clear..... however, sometimes, no matter how hard you fight, you die.

 

If you want to make a financial contribution to South African cancer sufferers, give to Hospice. The last time I checked they had not used my donation to acquire a $11m business jet to fly their celebrity spokesman to his image polishing speaking engagements, so you may not have heard of them.

 

When you need them, you will be glad they are around.

[Lucky Luke.]

His story is inspirational, but not exceptional true.

[Lucky Luke.]

Agreed.

 

There is a dishonesty in founding a “cancer research“ charity which morphs into a “cancer advocacy” foundation and yet carries on without making the difference clear.

 

Research benefits all of mankind. This kind of focussed advocacy benefits the celebrities around it and, to be fair, I suppose helps some people in the USA who don’t have friends and family to give them support.

 

Here is the thing; most people with cancer know it is a potentially deadly disease, that the treatment is unpleasant but surprisingly effective and that if you are one of the ones who will die of it, it is a particularly gruesome way to go.

 

They don’t need Lance Armstrong to tell them that.

 

They also don’t need Lance Armstrong to tell them that if they are like him, they can “kick its Arse”. The implication is clear..... however, sometimes, no matter how hard you fight, you die.

 

If you want to make a financial contribution to South African cancer sufferers, give to Hospice. The last time I checked they had not used my donation to acquire a $11m business jet to fly their celebrity spokesman to his image polishing speaking engagements, so you may not have heard of them.

 

When you need them, you will be glad they are around.

 

St Luke's is great and they always have late Argus entries if you're stuck, or would just like to help them out by joining their sponsored bunch of riders.

 

Edit: here's the link http://www.stlukes.co.za/newsitem.asp?p=440

Edited September 11, 2012 by Lucky Luke.

[scotty]

With all this talk of boycotting, wonder how Mellow Johnny's holding up

[Tubehunter]

Tubehunter, i'll take the bait.

 

Can you give me the 30 second version of "what Lance has done for cancer" ?

 

Oh, and in case you doubt my credentials, both my mother and mother in law died of cancer, my brother is in remission and my father is currently undergoing treatment.

 

Eddy,condolences on the moms and best wishes to your brother and father!

 

(One of my closest mate's father succumbed to this too. He was like my own father as mine was absent. Have lost 2 good mates to this too. Watched them disappear in front of my eyes in the space of 4 weeks as it was that advanced.)

 

What bait is there to take? LA is certainly not the be all and end of cancer. He did however take a gruesome disease that few people wanted to discuss or know about until they were affected and make it mainstream media for a considerable time. Yes he would be far more relevant in the US and St Luke's does a phenomenal job locally and is deserving of our support here. The only point I was attempting to make was for Bob and LL to consider that even though LA doesn't rank highly as a respect worthy human being on their scale (or mine for that matter) you can't dis how he has opened the eyes of the world to how and what cancer does, or what can be achieved (albeit with dope) after it for those that use him as their inspiration to keep fighting in their darkest hours.

 

Hope the rest of the treatments go well.

Edited September 11, 2012 by Tubehunter

[dracs]

Tubehunter, i'll take the bait.

 

Can you give me the 30 second version of "what Lance has done for cancer" ?

 

Oh, and in case you doubt my credentials, both my mother and mother in law died of cancer, my brother is in remission and my father is currently undergoing treatment.

Agreed.

 

There is a dishonesty in founding a “cancer research“ charity which morphs into a “cancer advocacy” foundation and yet carries on without making the difference clear.

 

Research benefits all of mankind. This kind of focussed advocacy benefits the celebrities around it and, to be fair, I suppose helps some people in the USA who don’t have friends and family to give them support.

 

Here is the thing; most people with cancer know it is a potentially deadly disease, that the treatment is unpleasant but surprisingly effective and that if you are one of the ones who will die of it, it is a particularly gruesome way to go.

 

They don’t need Lance Armstrong to tell them that.

 

They also don’t need Lance Armstrong to tell them that if they are like him, they can “kick its Arse”. The implication is clear..... however, sometimes, no matter how hard you fight, you die.

 

If you want to make a financial contribution to South African cancer sufferers, give to Hospice. The last time I checked they had not used my donation to acquire a $11m business jet to fly their celebrity spokesman to his image polishing speaking engagements, so you may not have heard of them.

 

When you need them, you will be glad they are around.

Eddy that is rough and I am sorry to hear about your family. Your experience is however different to mine. In my case LA's approach to fighting the disease has had a very direct impact on 2 people close to me. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the man - that is a fact that no one on this forum can argue with. I will add with certainty that i am not alone.

 

For another (US centric) example have a look at this link which I posted on the other LA thread. its simply wrong to say that Livestrong does no good and is purely for LA's personal gain. http://howsbrian.com/2012/08/how-lance-and-livestrong-totally-screwed-me/

[TNT1]

 

 

Oh, and in case you doubt my credentials, both my mother and mother in law died of cancer, my brother is in remission and my father is currently undergoing treatment.

 

Sorry for your loss, but what does that have to do with what Lance has done for cancer patients? Did he or Livestrong do anything for you and yours?