Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Not familiar with the specifics of that situation, but any company that loses a lot of its major customers in a short space of time would struggle to stay running.

 

I stand by my point - if one week of less customers put you out of business then you weren't doing it right to begin with.

 

And there never was a proper boikot to begin with, only a few calls for it from twitter extremists and like savage mentioned, social media has zero attention span. Who of us can even name the business without googling it first?

  • Replies 2.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

I stand by my point - if one week of less customers put you out of business then you weren't doing it right to begin with.

 

And there never was a proper boikot to begin with, only a few calls for it from twitter extremists and like savage mentioned, social media has zero attention span. Who of us can even name the business without googling it first

 

My penny sparrow quip was not serious by the way.

 

I think it 'could' be possible, but I don't think probable.

 

If they were a company that supplied something to 2 major clients who shut their doors to them after the scandal then it could happen.

 

OR they were government suppliers.... Greek? Did they own a greasy food shop on a university campus or next to the high court?

 

Trump is still president, most people still eat meat and we all use plastic despite the gigatons of social media 'thoughts and prayers' on the subjects.

 

I agree with you. I can't see a well run company closing down in a week because the son was a boob

Edited by Jewbacca
Posted

My penny sparrow quip was not serious by the way.

 

I think it 'could' be possible, but I don't think probable.

 

If they were a company that supplied something to 2 major clients who shut their doors to them after the scandal then it could happen.

 

OR they were government suppliers.... Greek? Did they own a greasy food shop on a university campus or next to the high court?

 

Trump is still president, most people still eat meat and we all use plastic despite the gigatons of social media 'thoughts and prayers' on the subjects.

 

I agree with you. I can't see a well run company closing down in a week because the son was a boob

 

It was a restaurant, it was wrong from social media & the EFF to involve the restaurant in the outrage but I also don't think that was the main reason the restaurant closed.

Posted

Off topic here but I call bull^& on that story. Family business went bust literally a week or 2 after that story. I cannot believe that a successfully run business will go bust in that short space of time simply because of  a half-hearted social media campaign. I think that business was already in deep trouble  and the whole story just gave them a convenient excuse.

 

I think we often over-estimate the power of social media.

But the overestimation may be a good thing. It may prevent people from doing or saying stupid poop.

It may not be that effective against dopers yet, but it seems more effective against racial ranters and rapists at least.

Posted

But the overestimation may be a good thing. It may prevent people from doing or saying stupid poop.

It may not be that effective against dopers yet, but it seems more effective against racial ranters and rapists at least.

Newspeak + Doublethink = Orwellian dystopia

Posted

Just a little bit back on topic but that story of the guy that slapped the woman in the cradle...social media outrage played a part in getting him sorted out.

 

The point is that the larger the social outcry, the harsher the penalty/consequences.

Google KE. One of the first articles that pop up is him talking about his addiction. Not much about doping. Brandon Stewart, he has a lot more hits on his doping scandal than KE.

I don’t think local society really cares all that much about doping in cycling. It just doesn’t gather the same hitrate...

Posted

Just a little bit back on topic but that story of the guy that slapped the woman in the cradle...social media outrage played a part in getting him sorted out.

 

The point is that the larger the social outcry, the harsher the penalty/consequences.

Google KE. One of the first articles that pop up is him talking about his addiction. Not much about doping. Brandon Stewart, he has a lot more hits on his doping scandal than KE.

I don’t think local society really cares all that much about doping in cycling. It just doesn’t gather the same hitrate...

Agree but sadly because the general public think it's the norm in cycling

Posted

Off topic here but I call bull^& on that story. Family business went bust literally a week or 2 after that story. I cannot believe that a successfully run business will go bust in that short space of time simply because of  a half-hearted social media campaign. I think that business was already in deep trouble  and the whole story just gave them a convenient excuse.

 

I think we often over-estimate the power of social media.

Well I do know that the EFF basically played a massive part in the shutting down of their business. They threatened the black staff and basically every other patron who dared enter the restaurant. Yes, we can say "why didn't they(patrons) lay criminal charges" etc etc(in theory life is very simple, but we do not live in a theoretical world), but we all know our police force and that nothing would have come of these charges, and also that the EFF frankly don't give 2 hoots about the law and would have continued intimidating prospective patrons because in their minds they are the law.

 

I think they, as a family and management possibly knew that staying open was not going to be financially viable in the long run and that turn over/profits would never be the same again. So whether they felt customers would not support their business due to the video or due to the fear of being intimidated in store by EFF members, the best option for all involved, staff included, would be to cut their losses and close their business doors.

 

Again, these are my thoughts on the matter, I don't know the exact reason.(Only the 1st paragraph is pretty much fact)

Posted

Agree but sadly because the general public think it's the norm in cycling

To be honest, I don’t care much about it either. Well at least not in the same way I care about say animal abuse or child abuse.

If I was a pro cyclist, maybe then I would care. But I’m not.

If I had kids, I would teach them to stick to the rules, and don’t be bothered about the other guy.

Posted

Well this didnt age well:

 

Commenting on the sentence George received, Galant says: “George claims his EPO doping was isolated to himself and he could not provide us with information in terms of an infrastructure of doping. Hence he received the standard two-year ban, as there were no grounds for a reduction in this sanction.”

 

https://www.bikehub.co.za/features/_/news/industry-news/absa-cape-epic-comments-on-david-georges-positive-test-r347

 

 

https://community.bikehub.co.za/topic/124318-david-george-gets-2-years/page-1

Posted

Out of curiosity: can someone explain the technicalities between the difference between DG and KE's sentence lengths? I would have thought that EPO positive would've been the same as a biological passport irregularity.

Posted (edited)

Well done Floyd! Still one of my favourite bike riders.

 

 

 

Landis knows there will be blowback. “They can put me in the same bracket as everyone else they want to go away, but at the end of the day, rather than yelling and screaming on the internet about how I should go away, they could go out and find some other sponsors to help them promote the sport,” he said.
Edited by Velouria
Posted

Out of curiosity: can someone explain the technicalities between the difference between DG and KE's sentence lengths? I would have thought that EPO positive would've been the same as a biological passport irregularity.

At the time of DG's incident, the minimum mandatory sentence was 2 years, unless there were mitigating circumstances or you provided info that could assist the anti-doping efforts. This was later changed to 4 years. So hence KE getting 4 years. And because he did not contest it or try give mitigating circumstances he got the standard.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout