Nike cuts ties with Armstrong as he steps down from Livestrong
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Lance Armstrong stepped down as chairman of his Livestrong cancer-fighting charity and Nike severed ties with him as fallout from the doping scandal swirling around the famed cyclist escalated Wednesday.
Armstrong announced his move at the charity in an early-morning statement. Within minutes, Nike said that it would end its relationship with him "due to the seemingly insurmountable evidence that Lance Armstrong participated in doping and misled Nike for more than a decade."
Nike said it will continue to support Livestrong.
The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency released a massive report last week detailing allegations of widespread doping by Armstrong and his teams when he won the Tour de France seven consecutive times from 1999 to 2005.
The document's purpose was to show why USADA has banned him from cycling for life and ordered 14 years of his career results erased — including those Tour titles. It contains sworn statements from 26 witnesses, including 11 former teammates.
Armstrong, who was not paid a salary as chairman of the Lance Armstrong Foundation, will remain on its 15-member board. His duties leading the board will be turned over to vice chairman Jeff Garvey, who was founding chairman in 1997.
"This organization, its mission and its supporters are incredibly dear to my heart," Armstrong said in a statement. "Today therefore, to spare the foundation any negative effects as a result of controversy surrounding my cycling career, I will conclude my chairmanship."
Foundation spokeswoman Katherine McLane said the decision turns over the foundation's big-picture strategic planning to Garvey. He will also assume some of the public appearances and meetings that Armstrong used to handle.
Armstrong strongly denies doping, but did not fight USADA accusations through arbitration, saying he thinks the process is unfair. Once Armstrong gave up the fight in August and the report came out, crisis management experts predicted the future of the foundation, known mainly by its Livestrong brand name, would be threatened. They said Armstrong should consider stepping down to keep the charity from getting dragged into a debate over doping.
Armstrong's inspiring story of not only recovering from testicular cancer that had spread to his lungs and brain but then winning the world's best-known bike race helped his foundation grow from a small operation in Texas into one of the most popular charities in the country.
Armstrong drew legions of fans — and donations — and insisted he was drug free at a time when doping was rampant in professional cycling. In 2004, the foundation introduced the yellow "Livestrong" bracelets, selling more than 80 million and creating a global symbol for cancer awareness and survivorship.
"As my cancer treatment was drawing to an end, I created a foundation to serve people affected by cancer. It has been a great privilege to help grow it from a dream into an organization that today has served 2.5 million people and helped spur a cultural shift in how the world views cancer survivors," Armstrong said.
As chairman, Armstrong did not run the foundation's day-to-day operations, which are handled by Livestrong president and chief executive Doug Ulman.
Ulman had said last week that Armstrong's leadership role would not change. Armstrong's statement said he will remain a visible advocate for cancer issues, and he is expected to speak at Friday night's 15th anniversary gala for Livestrong in Austin.
"My family and I have devoted our lives to the work of the foundation and that will not change. We plan to continue our service to the foundation and the cancer community. We will remain active advocates for cancer survivors and engaged supporters of the fight against cancer," Armstrong said.
CharityWatch, which analyzes the work of approximately 600 charities, lists the foundation among its top-rated organizations. That status normally goes to groups which "generally spend 75 percent or more of their budgets on programs, spend $25 or less to raise $100 in public support, do not hold excessive assets in reserve" and disclose of basic financial information and documents.
Livestrong says it had functional expenses totaling nearly $35.8 million last year and 82 percent of every dollar raised went directly to programs, a total of more than $29.3 million.
The foundation reported a spike in contributions in late August in the days immediately after Armstrong announced he would no longer fight doping charges and officials moved to erase his Tour victories.
Daniel Borochoff, founder and president of Chicago-based CharityWatch, said last week it may take some time for donors to digest the allegations against Armstrong.
"Individuals that admire and support an individual who is later found out to be severely tarnished, don't want to admit it, don't want to admit that they've been duped," Borochoff said. "People, though, do need to trust a charity.
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.
So when are they going to cut ties with a certain golfer who cheated on his wife or a certain NFL Quarterback who likes dog fighting? Oh wait, those actions are OK but ALLEGEDLY cheating via doping isn't OK.Â
Â
Back to Reeboks for me.
 @Peregrine Yeah really. Even without this Lance ordeal Nike's shoes (most of 'em) suck and disintegrate in a short period of time.
Go to hell, Nike. There is no evidence against Lance except the paid testimony of people who had a vendetta against him.
 @badcat You mean you don't believe Floyd? I mean heck... he's soooo trustworthy and all... Just because he got busted for doping and threw Lance under the bus and all...
Â
Seriously you have to wonder about it... Here they had a supposed perfect doping system and all those years of practice yet when Lance retired, all the sudden Floyd got busted for doping because thier perfect system stopped? I don't think so, and I think in the end it will prove nothing more than the USADA are a bunch of bast*s who just want to tarnish someone they got a rumour about and are hell bent on proving him guilty like the SS and other organizations who have no oversight.
Armstrong should have had children take steroids for him and then sucked their blood. Then Nike wouldn't have had any problems with him.
Livestrong has been a great organization to raise money to fight cancer. My guess is it will wither and die without Armstrong. All for a witch hunt.
 @blotto Lots of money is search for cure to cancer, not much in the cure to cancer. I wouldn't give organizations like these a dime. It's all just profit for them.
 @Jamie  @blotto No, Jaime.  It isn't all profit.  Using your standard, there would never be a cure for anything.  As things stand, more people survive cancer and treatment is improved.  There may never be a "cure" for cancer, but if we improve recovery and survival rates, that has to count for something.
 @blotto It is true that he raised a lot of money to fight cancer and he is a survivor of cancer.  That doesn't make what he did wrong, right.Â
@blotto....a very successful witch hunt I might add.
OH NO HE DI'INT!!!!
Reminiscent of "Say it ain't so, Joe" and the Chicago White/Black Sox.
What a slap in the face Nike. Why give into the witch hunt? Here is my view. If he wasnt doping, he beat everyone who was doping, hes the best. If he WAS doping, he still beat the rest of them who were doping. Either way, he still won, hes still better than the rest. Leave him the F alone.
@snuggles The evidence is overwhelming and conclusive. Only the blind cannot see that fact. But what you really don't understand snuggles is that a cheater can never be a winner and a true winner would never cheat. Your ethics and rationale both rate a failing grade.
 @I812 How in the world do you know what Snuggles does or doesn't understand? The poster made a cogent point, while you spoke in banal little platitudes. Armstrong did in fact win those races irrespective of what to you seems "overwhelming and conclusive."
@gofigure Here's a hint for you: If you cheat to get to the finish line first, you did not win. There are plenty of people in this world that lack ethics, the spirit of fair and equal athletic competition, and honesty and integrity. Apparently you support them. I do not.
@I812 you mean all the evidence of hearsay from his competitors that all lost to him that claim he was doping even though he never failed a single test? All that evidence?
@Ramsesthegreat I am talking about 11 teammates' testimony in sworn affidavits, plus numerous other competitors who have confessed their own transgressions in an era of blood doping. There is really only one reason anybody would confess their own cheating and destroy their own career. That is to set the record straight.
Â
While you are obviously not too bright, there is the potential to get a conviction in a court of law based on circumstantial evidence. In Armstrong's case he apparently felt it better to walk away and pretend he was innocent than appeal the USADA findings in a court of law and risk conviction.Â
Â
And just because they didn't test for what he was doing doesn't mean he didn't participate in chemical enhancements to improve performance; a violation of the rules and sports ethics generally. You keep drinking the Kool-Aid Ramsesthenotsogreat but those who have the capacity to rationally evaluate and analyze the available information cannot help but walk away with the same conclusion that the USADA found.
 @Ramsesthegreat  @I812 That's an incorrect statement. The test his blood was given was never tested for the drug he took.
Looks like I'll be switching to Adidas now.
Kudos to Nike for doing the right thing. So much for the Tour-de-Lance. Anyone with any remaining doubts about Armstrong's duplicity should check out the NYTimes article detailing what happened to anyone in cycling who refused to support the "lie-for-Lance" effort.
Probably not...but I can't help but wonder if there were a whole bunch of people who would do ANYTHING to get Lance's records thrown out, letting them take over the wins. If he truly had been doping, why not admit it now...he has nothing to lose by admitting it...and if he did, it might help clean up the mess that still exists from it...
@flyingtime He may never admit it. He may be incapable of telling the truth.
It's about time. Wonder what tipped the scale?
Â
I wonder if the doping had anything to do with the cancer he had?
Â
 @BillyPete If the dope killed the cancer, sports would never be the same. Ever.
So Nike decides to drop Armstrong, but, of course they will hang on to the cancer charity part of the deal. Way too much money to be made there by good will alone. When it comes to huge corporations raking in the cash by way of friendliness to cancer charities, Nike leads the way. Nike divorces Armstrong, but she will keep the 'big mansion, the Rolls Royce and the oh so popular charity organisation', cause it's good for business. If you don't like Armstrong, then be the first to give back everything you gained by his success. Everything. Including the millions from product sales.
Good to hear.
Wow and yesterday there was a protest at Nike and they stated that they will stand by his side and continue to support him! Â Good decision by both parties...