ESPN Uncovers Details of USPS Sponsorship
by Jen See on Jan 14, 2011 3:37 PM EST
in News
Email
PrintOver the past few weeks, rumors have swirled about the imminence of a big Sports Illustrated exposé on the Armstrong case. That story has not yet dropped, but today, ESPN published a report detailing the money paid by the United States Postal Service for its sponsorship of Lance Armstrong's team in the years of his Tour de France victories. The information comes as a consequence of a Freedom of Information Act request. According to ESPN, "The U.S Postal Service spent $31.9 million to underwrite Lance Armstrong's pro cycling team during its glory years of 2001 to 2004, approximately 60 to 65 percent of the team's total budget." The ESPN story also details information about bonuses paid out to riders and anti-doping clauses inserted into the contract between the Postal Service and the team's owners Tailwind Sports.
76 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Mail delivery by bike?
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on Jan 14, 2011 3:55 PM EST up reply actions
a charismatic lobbyist?
"Next year we will build a strong team around Tom. We don't need pseudo-stage racers any more in this team." -Patrick Lefevre, 2005
by Chris Fontecchio on Jan 14, 2011 4:06 PM EST up reply actions
yeah
I never did either. And I actually, I always assumed that their sponsorship was actually a fairly token amount, that gave them some publicity, and allowed the team to wrap itself in the flag. Ie, it suited the marketing of the team’s image more than the actually sponsor. Meanwhile, the team budget actually came from investors like Weisel. Or something. I don’t really know now why I thought that – ie, was there PR at the time that suggested that? Or was it just a case of Gav making shit up? Gav, the brain, you gotta shut that thing off now! Shut it off!!!
I do. Back then, their delivery times were improving vastly,
but a fair chunk of the conventional wisdom was that they were slow, careless, made up of dysfunctional people going postal mixed with near-catatonic overweight women with 2 inch long nails and a decided lack of hustle. I’m not saying such people didn’t exist then, or don’t exist now, but…the post office is a lot more efficient, speedy, and cost-effective than that caricature.
Snark aside, a cycling team is the epitome of teamwork, selflessness, attention and speed. And I do think it worked. It gave them a viable new image that they could sell to their own people, as well as the public. It focused attention back on “teamwork” and paradoxically also on the one guy who goes it alone to get mail to your box, come rain, snow, sleet or hail. It may have gotten them a higher caliber of applicant, even. Who knows?
"dumped for Greipel?!"
That makes sense.
I’d forgotten about the whole “incompetence” meme that went around for a while. I guess it’s also worth considering the influence of team-work marketing on internal morale too. Perhaps the cycling was an effort to change the image of the postal system to customers and employees both.
Here's an example of international service.
Postal qualified wholesale program A company in Europe could arrange through a wholesaler to ship or mail to the US using the USPS.
I don’t need to know how to send letters from the US via the Royal Mail but I’m sure you can figure out how to. :-)
Postal Service officials continued to be tight-lipped about their sponsorship, responding "to a Freedom of Information Act request by The File with heavily redacted documents."
what does this mean?
the heavy use of black felt tip pen
"What happened in British Cycling, a lot of people doubted me. I've come back, got this victory, and done it my way." - Adam Blythe after his first pro win at Circuit Franco Belge
Normally in a (British) FOI document it's to conceal personal information
e.g. names, phone numbers etc. But if you can’t see it…
"What happened in British Cycling, a lot of people doubted me. I've come back, got this victory, and done it my way." - Adam Blythe after his first pro win at Circuit Franco Belge
For instance, if you were releasing a document and it had someone's home address on it
you would usually “redact” the the address.
"What happened in British Cycling, a lot of people doubted me. I've come back, got this victory, and done it my way." - Adam Blythe after his first pro win at Circuit Franco Belge
see Gav below ;-)
"What happened in British Cycling, a lot of people doubted me. I've come back, got this victory, and done it my way." - Adam Blythe after his first pro win at Circuit Franco Belge
that kinda redaction is fairly obvious from context
this sounds more heavy handed. either only certain pages released or large amounts crossed out. imagine they could pull commercially sensitive concerns quite easily though
by thebongolian on Jan 14, 2011 5:09 PM EST up reply actions
assuming it is meaning that the information was adjusted or censured
by JustJoshinYa on Jan 14, 2011 4:23 PM EST up reply actions
"Ants don’t worry, they operate like a fantastic team, they accept obstacles and deal with them in a positive manner, they don’t complain and remain positive. An ant doesn’t work on emotion, is proactive and always chooses the ant role."
FOIA
Freedom of Info Act here in the U.S. allows anyone to request information from a government agency. The agency sometimes releases the information, but not always. Often, it comes back redacted, meaning that chunks of information are blacked out. It can be minor stuff, like people’s names, or it can be whole pages. I knew someone who did a FOIA at the FBI, and received a stack of paper back that was almost entirely blacked out. Like 40 pages, only like three words were visible. Bah redacting!
FOIA exemptions
here we go:
- classified material
- internal personnel stuff
- things exempted by other statutes
- trade secrets or financial data
- privileged information (predecisional, attorney-client, attorney work product…)
- I can’t believe we’re having this discussion
- law enforcement files
- matters of privacy
"Next year we will build a strong team around Tom. We don't need pseudo-stage racers any more in this team." -Patrick Lefevre, 2005
by Chris Fontecchio on Jan 14, 2011 7:44 PM EST up reply actions
what he said.
Although, sometimes FOIA leads to declassification. Ie, a FOIA may force a reconsideration of the classification level and the opening of the documents.
Yep
and since FOIA is written by and for lawyers, the full set of information is in a three-inch bound book these days, and that’s not including judicial opinions.
"Next year we will build a strong team around Tom. We don't need pseudo-stage racers any more in this team." -Patrick Lefevre, 2005
by Chris Fontecchio on Jan 14, 2011 8:25 PM EST up reply actions
Is this substantially more than we expected it to be or something?
I feel like I’m missing the significance of this.
on face value, nothing (that i can tell at least)
I guess it’s just one more piece of the puzzle, which I still haven’t decided if it is close to completion or still just a jumbled mess of pieces. The only thing i do know for certain is that the SI piece will drop next week during the Tour Down Under, and instead of talking about racing, we’ll be talking about Lance.
"Thanks again, Floyd Landis, Yellow Jersey Wearer: Nuisance Category"
it seemed to me it was just saying, it was a lot of money (which we kinda knew)...
and Lance got big bonuses (which we also knew). Not sure it’s all that relevant to see that his bonus versus Hamilton’s was so different. Lance was the leader and Tyler was the helper, right? Anyway, are there any new kits to boo at?
by JustJoshinYa on Jan 14, 2011 4:35 PM EST up reply actions
No, the significance is missing.
But consider yourself on alert for further news to come?
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
Yes, I think I'd have to be blind, deaf, and dumb not to know about the 'further news'...
…at this point.
I remain prepared to be substantially underwhelmed, and besides that we shall see.
It depends on what you expected.
I think what’ sinteresting is that it was so closely held. And, I didn’t really realize it was that much money. LIke I said above, I thought it was some kind of token sponsorship.
I do wonder – that reference at the bottom to another shoe – does that have to do with how the sponsorship came about? Cuz like, really, how did the Postal Service decide to drop this kind of cash on a cycling team?
The clauses on bonuses and doping are new info – ie, we didn’t know that before.
This isn’t revolutionary, but it is new info.
the stuff about bonuses & doping
sounds like it could potentially be quite important
"What happened in British Cycling, a lot of people doubted me. I've come back, got this victory, and done it my way." - Adam Blythe after his first pro win at Circuit Franco Belge
I think so.
But at the moment, this is sort of a blind men with the elephant problem. Here’s a piece, do we know what it’s attached to? Not really.
"how did the Postal Service decide to drop this kind of cash on a cycling team"
The same way anyone does something stupidly. One day (or year) at time.
They started small. But then, what’s one more million $ to be part of another record setting TdF performance from one of the most famous US athletes?
There’s all kinds of biases that cause people to make decisions like this. For example, say you signed off on the $4 million one year. Are you going to be one saying how wasteful and unnecessary the next year’s $4.5 million contract is?
Probably not. Rinse and repeat and you’ve wasted a huge amount of money.
(I’m not even arguing US Postal wasted money. I am just talking in a general sense about how they went from $1 million to many millions. That amount of cash does sound high though.)
"Oh man, it’s going to take days to kill all these people!"
I will say
as sponsors go, giant government institutions who let out some cash through an obscure marketing program somewhere down on the fourth floor of the Postal Service HQs is unusually poorly equipped to track subtle but important developments in the sport of cycling. Rabobank on the other hand seems to have bank people watching carefully, or they do now at least, but Gov agencies are usually forced to do programs like this on the cheap.
"Next year we will build a strong team around Tom. We don't need pseudo-stage racers any more in this team." -Patrick Lefevre, 2005
by Chris Fontecchio on Jan 14, 2011 7:49 PM EST up reply actions
U.S. Postal is independent of the U.S. government.
Tommeke!, Tommeke!, Tommeke!, Tommeke!
by Vlaanderen90 on Jan 14, 2011 7:59 PM EST up reply actions
not exactly
it’s an independent agency created by the executive branch governed by a board that’s appointed by the president and subject to senate confirmation, as is the postmaster general. Not sure about whether its budget comes from Congress or not. So it’s more like a quasi-government entity. It’s definitely not independent, though it’s not simply an agency, as I kind of implied.
"Next year we will build a strong team around Tom. We don't need pseudo-stage racers any more in this team." -Patrick Lefevre, 2005
by Chris Fontecchio on Jan 14, 2011 8:29 PM EST up reply actions
USPS is off-budget
and its big battles come with the Postal Rate Commission. Doesn’t really figure into Congressional things (tho’ that could change, if someone wanted to make an issue of it).
I know this why? The worst summer clerk job anyone ever had.
You interned
with a letter carrier?
"Next year we will build a strong team around Tom. We don't need pseudo-stage racers any more in this team." -Patrick Lefevre, 2005
by Chris Fontecchio on Jan 14, 2011 9:44 PM EST up reply actions
Post Office used to be a Cabinet level position until they made the change.
The change allowed them to avoid having to deal with Congress for budgets and other assorted politically motivated abuses.
shoulda thought of this before
but if you’re forced to answer a FOIA, it means you’re a government agency on some level.
"Next year we will build a strong team around Tom. We don't need pseudo-stage racers any more in this team." -Patrick Lefevre, 2005
by Chris Fontecchio on Jan 14, 2011 11:03 PM EST up reply actions
in fairness
the postal service has a marketing budget. So does the US Army. USPS spent less on the team than DoD did on a handful of lame ads during the last Super Bowl or whenever. It’s a little weird, but not every agency is the DMV or EPA with very refined purposes which they’d never in a million years need to market. IIRC USPS was trying to market its express mail to compete with FedEx and the other global shippers.
"Next year we will build a strong team around Tom. We don't need pseudo-stage racers any more in this team." -Patrick Lefevre, 2005
by Chris Fontecchio on Jan 14, 2011 7:46 PM EST up reply actions
Right
But I’ve still always thought it was a weird marketing decision. And I mean that in a generally non-sinister way.
yeah
so they wanted Europeans to use Express Mail? But can you do that from Europe? I dunno…
"Next year we will build a strong team around Tom. We don't need pseudo-stage racers any more in this team." -Patrick Lefevre, 2005
by Chris Fontecchio on Jan 14, 2011 8:30 PM EST up reply actions
No, you can't.
The US Army has an actual interested in so many wrong things convincing kids to sign up. Marketing makes (some kind of) sense. USPS? What, they’re going to convince us to use them to send mail? So pointless. And at the time, there was really not express service argument for them.
I think the US Army would make a lot sense as a sponsor of a Tailwind-like team.
As long as captain had a big profile in the US, I think it would be effective. Especially compared to lame cable commercials that they run with now.
I
"Oh man, it’s going to take days to kill all these people!"
PDC Powers that be - you are all far off mark here
1) There was and is a value to marketing the USPS brand in Europe or anywhere – they are competing in parcel delivery, with tiered speeds of services.
USA is a very valuable market for sending stuff in the mail, and coming or going the service matters on both side of the transaction.
2) The bike racing team was always advertising – so obvious, but needs to be stated and USPS always advertises and spend $ to do so.
3) The freedom of information act discussion: Why would anyone still around from these decisions reason that providing easy info to the wind about the bike team would be helpful to their careers? No upside for a postal bureaucrat, that’s for sure.
4) If Tiger Woods’ troubles had shown 2 months earlier, Lance Armstrong would have been the ‘Athlete of the Decade.’
by rubesANdbabes on Jan 14, 2011 9:36 PM EST up reply actions
3)
if they don’t because of their career interests, they can’t expect much help from the Justice Department (who maintains the FOIA guidance we use) in defending them in the ensuing lawsuit. Long story short — they have no say in withholding stuff unless it fits an exemption.
"Next year we will build a strong team around Tom. We don't need pseudo-stage racers any more in this team." -Patrick Lefevre, 2005
by Chris Fontecchio on Jan 14, 2011 9:47 PM EST up reply actions
Exactly what I was thinking
The only shocking part is that they shelled out a great deal of money in sponsorship, which might get the case going further, considering the only hubbub that can really be made about USPS doping practices is that it was kind of being funded through taxpayer money (in a roundabout way). This is just a teaser…
DISCLAIMER: Anything I say is ultimately blinded by my ridiculously unnecessary love for all things Cancellara, or Schleck related....
There, you have been warned.
Hmmm, seems more than obvious to me
You have an institution that spends and earns billions of dollars and is in competition with FedEx and UPS, so they make an 8 Million dollar a year advertising investment in a new American star.
From 2006 US Federal Budget historical tables in millions. Postal Numbers.
1999 ($1050)
2000 ($2129)
2001 ($207)
2002 5,169
2003 4,070
2004 442
2005 (2174)
So we all know LA did not (!) cause these multi-billion dollars swings in the Postal income but if you were a Texan and you remember that his notoriety really hit the mass in the early 2000s, given the scale of the income, you could make a case that the 32 million was a pretty reasonable investment … maybe even … successful.
The Tour de France, So Crashy ! - gav
Yes - That is peanuts to USPS ad budget
Once you start dealing with 9 digits in dollars things look different. I would guess they actually got decent value for Parcel Post out of their sponsorship – and that is where they needed it. Fedex was eating their lunch in the mid 90’s – taking all their lucrative business away. It probably helped but of course costs have increased even more and I’d guess email and such has really put the clamps on regular mail delivery. USPS makes money on package and special deliveries. It makes money on junk mail, or at least it used to, here is where Web is killing it. It loses its shirt doing the mandated first class delivery 6 days a week.
I would guess they very well might do it again if they had a do over. Even going to 4 day week delivery which they will soon in my opinion.
Yep and successful advertising doesn't really work as you might expect.
People don’t normally jump in the car because Michael Jackson or LA were in a comercial. There is a much more subliminal component to advertising. One of the central requirements is not whether the message is taken positively or negatively. The desired affect is that it is remembered.
Even an annoying catchy jingle can make millions …. free credit report. com, tell your dad, tell your mom. You may want to shoot yourself when you hear it but if you need that service, its the one you are likely to remember.
The Tour de France, So Crashy ! - gav
it is usually the more annoying the ad, the more you remember it
"Wizard's first rule. People are stupid. They will believe anything they want to be true or fear to be true." -- Terry Goodkind
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Podium Cafe
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Celebrate the Giro d'Italia at Podium Cafe!
Check our Giro Section for race updates, on-the-scene reports, and other hijinx.
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
