Skip to main content

Lance vs. U.S. Postal: Show them the money

Photo courtesy AP via
It's going to court, after all. The $100 million lawsuit against Lance Armstrong will proceed to trial. U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled in favor of the federal government, which is suing on behalf of the U.S. Postal Service. U.S. Postal sponsored Lance from 2000 to 2004 and it is reported that $32.3 million was invested. The case states U.S. Postal would not have funded the Tour de France team, had it known there was a violation of the sponsorship contract based on performance enhancing drug use and blood transfusions. The federal government is attempting to have the damages related to sponsorship fees tripled, based on the False Claims Act. Armstrong could be held accountable for the entire amount.

Much of this case will focus on 1) terms of contract and purported breach and 2) sponsorship value to the United States Postal Service. Did the sponsor achieve a proportionate return on investment?

I won't be able to write on the terms of contract. I am not privy to the language. However, much of my academic research has been invested in sport and sponsorship. If I were called as an expert witness, I'd most likely refer to the value of sponsorship and related brand value. 

First, it will be important to determine what constitutes ROI. In the early years of sponsorship, it was appropriate to base value on exposure. For example, if Lance was featured for eight minutes during a tour telecast and the postal logo ID was in clear focus, that would constitute eight minutes of advertising media value. It would be assessed at the selling price for 30-second commercials in that time block, for that show and that channel. Or, if Lance was featured in a 4-page magazine spread, the value was noted at the cost of full page ad rates x 4 for that publication.

Over time, that model has been discounted. From commercial spot cost to something well less, sometimes 10% of spot buy. It might be possible the federal government will revisit the exposure model as part of its due diligence, with a new proposed exposure value.

The next major hurdle in the case might be the timeline of events. Determining value for sponsorship during the contract years is one dimension; exploring brand perception and related value well beyond the contract will be for the courts to decide. When engaging research related to brand value, there is a foundational study that frames the construct of "brand transgression."

Aaker, J., Fournier, S., & Brasel, S. A. (2004). When good brands do bad. Journal of Consumer research, 31(1), 1-16.

This article has been cited over 1300 times and relates to consumer perception, and related purchasing decisions, prior to, then after, a transgression occurrence. This is where much of the Lance/U.S. Postal court case could go. It's not only about what value was transacted for the $32M in spending, it's also related to the U.S. Postal association with Lance and how customers reacted. For a government entity this is a bit complex, in that stock value won't be part of the equation. It will be necessary to isolate the "Lance transgression" and then prove what brand effect, if any, was incurred. Legal researchers might look for business to business, and business to consumer, examples of how doping revelations caused buyers to respond - well after the sponsorship has concluded.

Lance vs. the feds and its outcome may set precedent on sponsorship evaluation and assessment for many buyers and sellers in the years to come.


Popular posts from this blog

Scott Jurek ate vegan, won ultras...then got divorced

(Disclaimer:  I am a Brooks-supported athlete; as part of that relationship, I was provided a complimentary copy of "Eat & Run")

I was recently on a few flights making my way home to Wisconsin and en route was able to plow through Scott Jurek's new book "Eat & Run: My Unlikely Journey to Ultramarathon Greatness."

It's a fast, enjoyable read. I've been around the ultra scene for a long time and have known some of the greats, i.e. ultra champ Eric Clifton. So it's always interesting to see how the world looks from another icon's point of view.

My thoughts in no particular order:

1) I've been vegetarian/borderline vegan for 12 years and have always been concerned with protein intake.  Jurek advocates for the protein he naturally induces through his plant-based diet.  Maybe that is enough. Maybe it's not necessary to bang down 100+ grams of protein supplement every day. Good info and good advice.

2) I'm buying on big time to Scot…

Now this is better...

Hey, I don't want to dole out too many epic photos in one day...but after that fatty shot from the New York City Marathon, I had to dig a bit deeper, and found this:

Check out that attractive specimen (second from right) circa 1986...only a year earlier and Tommy Terrific was looking pretty ripped.

I'll tell you this triathlon training camp was one of the high points of my master competitor career. On the left is Mark Hinson, the best triathlete in the southeast in the mid 19890's...and far right is Frank Kohlenstein, a soccer coach from South Carolina and the dude who got me into ultrarunning...that's tanned and toned Tommy next to David Bailey, one of the greatest men who ever threw a leg over two wheels with an engine.

So, right around the time of this camp, I crewed for Frank at the Western States 100 mile endurance run in California. Hinson ran with Frank through a very tough 20 mile desert section and when he made it to the next check, he pulled me aside and told…

Build your low cost gravel and commuter bike

It's the saga of Craigslist. You have a great perfect condition road bicycle to market. You ask a fair price. A few calls come in, most often the caller throws out a low ball offer, maybe 50% of asking price.

You don't need to give the bike away. You may not need the cash.

Consider re-purposing. You already own an excellent commuter and gravel bike. Think your bike is too low end, not good for the purpose?

Wrong. In most cases less expensive bikes are build with heavier parts, which means they are stronger. Heavier wheels = better ability to absorb commuter bumps and gravel roads.

A few simple modifications and you'll be rolling for transportation or logging road expeditions.

Here's my 2011 model Specialized Roubaix. I rode it for several seasons as a serious piece of road equipment. A few buyers offered up a few hundred dollars, so I went in another direction.

1) Added 700 x 28 Continental Gatorskin tires. Gatorskin tires wear like iron and you can trust them in off …