Putting aside the schizophrenic use of font, type size and coloring that make the post look unprofessional and nearly unreadable . . .

Binny first makes a claim that any criticism is inappropriate. And he couches that with the passive aggressive "with all due respect." Rather than go on the attack, a seasoned PR approach would have been to start with a statement of understanding for the concerns raised.

The statement that they are "absolutely confident" that he is racing clean is not credible on its face. And it's made worse by the follow up justification for his ban, which smacks as a defense that he was wrongfully convicted. It seems to undermine the claim made in the previous paragraph that the "support . . decisions of relevant anti-doping agencies."

He then makes a claim that it's inappropraite to criticize or questioned wghen the sponsor an athlete who has served his time. That they shouldn't be required to enforce harsher penalties. That's just ridiculous, and especially so in a case where the athlete in question has been at best unapologetic about his doping.

Finally, he goes on to lecture us about the responsibilities we have when posting, expressly warning against abuses that misinform, mislead, supress, and destroy. Really?

This just after you call me a liar on Twitter for saying Falco is sponsoring Michi Weiss!:

@EdwardOMalley we have not announced anything. Why are you making stuff up? We only make bikes.

The fact is the sport's participants have an obligation and a right to voice their opinions of the doping transgressions of athletes and the companies that support them. We have NO obligation to drop the issue just because WADA has.

You have only sponsored Michi because you made the calculation that people will see an athlete they respect and want to emulate on your bike and boost your sales. It was not some kind of altruistic gesture or compulsory action. You are finding that you at least in part mis-judged the triathlon community's view of Michi. This is your fault, not ours. And to say major bike manufacturers have gotten away with sponsoring dopers, well the triathlon community is less accepting of doping than cycling is. Go sponsor a pro tour rider if you do not want people to call you out on supporting dopers so much.

As an entrepreneur you need to understand your customer and act in a way that respects them. You will not succeed if you berate your customers and demand that they respect you.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Let's be very clear (not directed at you Dan, but to all): we aren't OWED anything.

There is nothing within the boundaries of a doping sanction which states that if the athlete chooses to return to sport, he/she is required to address their past ever again. In fact, I'd rather anyone with a doping conviction serve their time and, if they chose to continue participation in any event, show up, do the event, and just go home. A company can choose to sponsor whomever they wish -- it is their prerogative

Or maybe they just want a clean sport and are hesitant to welcome someone back who is completely unapologetic about past offenses. I think something is seriously wrong if you put the label you did on people for standing up against doping rather than criticize the people who actually dope. No wonder sport is so f*cked up these days.

---

---

BA coaching http://www.bjornandersson.se

No, we are not owed anything. But, at the same time, we don't have give him our respect and support either. And companies that choose to sponsor him and his like are not beyond criticism for those decisions.

Of course, if he wants that kind of respect and support, he has to earn it, and for many, that means coming clean. He's certainly free to ignore those that would like him to come clean, but he should understand that many of those will still criticize. And sponsors are free to sponsor him, but they should understand that there will be drawbacks to doing so.

"Finally, he goes on to lecture us about the responsibilities we have when posting, expressly warning against abuses that misinform, mislead, supress, and destroy. Really?"

when i read his post it seemed to me that he was quiet / stayed quiet until he was accused of being in league with the dopers because of his decision to sponsor michi. i think that was over the top, he reacted to it, that was his specific problem, and he was correct and justified in doing so. especially because of all the bike companies with product underneath dopers who seem to get a pass because there's a team in between the company and the athlete.

again, my problem is not with the question of whether this was an appropriate business choice. nor is my interest in muzzling you or anyone. rather, i'm ALWAYS going to take the default position that those who provide goods or services to us deserve some degree of respect rather than sneering, dismissive comments. and i'm always going to take the side of civility. speak your piece, give your opinion, but always inside a boundary of civility.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Agree 100%.

---

______________________________________________

I *heart* weak, dumb ass people...

In principle, I agree with your diagnosis of the company's response - he waited until a few comments went "too far". Nevertheless, the response was by no means measured nor professional. As I said previously, Falco can sponsor whomever they wish. However, in the end, sponsorship is above all about public exposure and advertising. If you choose an athlete with a known problematic background as the public face for your product / service, then one should not be surprised if some are critical of that choice.

I have nothing against Weiß nor Falco, but you said it yourself that Weiß's lack of straightforwardness regarding his past bothers you. Of course, we aren't owed the transparency we would like to have. However, having Weiß make statements about the weakness of the evidence and Falco coming on the forum (to justifiable express its position), and proceed to strongly imply that Weiß was falsely convicted, simply looks bad. If they continue to infer or imply something along the lines of "Weiß didn't do it, and the conviction was unfounded", yet not state that directly, then this kind of talk will persist (which I feel is a shame).

Ciao

I thought Canadians were just Americans without guns.

The rhetoric is nice, but unfortunately your brand image is determined by the court of mass opinion, not what is right, wrong, or deserved according to doping governing agencies. Many companies choose athletes to sponsor because along with their race credentials, they have a certain reputation that creates a halo effect on their products. Weiss' sponsorship does that, but sort of in the opposite way as long as he's viewed as a doper in the eyes of the public.

Side note - you know who I don't see in your list of sponsored athletes? A woman. Not one. Seriously, there aren't any women you'd extend a sponsorship opportunity to before a convicted doper?

I'm an entrepreneur too, I really want to root for you guys, but your choices are making it hard for me......

---

http://trainingwheelsrequired.wordpress.com
@KellyNCollier

"There is nothing within the boundaries of a doping sanction which states that if the athlete chooses to return to sport, he/she is required to address their past ever again."

you are right. a doper can race once his suspension is over. without constraint. but trust is earned, not just by time served during a suspension. if a football player, or cyclist, just wants the right to return, to sign with a team, to compete, no explanation necessary. but in triathlon especially i think THIS cohort requires more than that to be reintegrated into the community. to have an easier chance to get sponsors. to be liked, respected, and cheered for.

i can only speak for myself, and for what i think i see around me, and i am proud that triathlon seems to me to be a community that is eager to forgive, but requires disclosure before trust is granted. i don't think that's onerous. if you want to work in, say, finance, and you were caught embezzling, yes you might legally be allowed to work in finance after your term is served. but if you want to get a job, and reenter the community, trust must be reestablished and that requires more than just serving your sentence. likewise in sport, where we invest trust in everyone who competes and when that trust is broken it can't be automatically restored just through serving a ban.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I think that AlanShearer has been exceptionally civil thus far.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

"you know who I don't see in your list of sponsored athletes? A woman. Not one"

i would like to associate myself with your sentiment. first, like you, i want to thank binny for taking an exceptional risk to bring a compelling product to market in a category with very little proven sales value, but with a history of proven technical value. it's a risk nobody who isn't in the business of triathlon has taken, at least in this sport, and for that binny and everyone who takes a leap of financial faith is due our thanks.

second i, like you, understand that women make up 1/3 of the ironman market in only 3 countries in the world, and in every other country women have percentages of ironman participation in the 20s, teens or single digits. i acknowledge, as you do, that it is not the responsibility of a new risky venture to hoist the women up in its back and be an advocacy group. but i also, like you, think it would be a good idea to look at female sponsor opportunities, since ironman and life time in particular are embarking on a specific effort to increase the numbers of women in triathlon.

i hope to see at least one woman riding a falco. then falco would be tied with dimond, the other compelling beam bike, whose sponsored athlete roster is made up of 19 men and 1 woman.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

i think the dimond website isn't up to date in term of sponsorship. there is a few more womens on the team.

and of course the recent annoncement of Team Smash Dimond 14 womens

https://www.facebook.com/.../?type=1&theater

---

Jonathan Caron / Professional Coach / ironman champions / age group world champions
Jonnyo Coaching
Instargram

"if michi has declared his innocence i haven't seen it and i would like to see it. "

Dan,

He may not have given you a claim of innocence in private, but Michi has publicly maintained his innocence since day one, and continues to maintain that position on his website.

Zev

---

"No matter how hard you train, Somebody will train harder. No matter how hard you run, Somebody will run harder. No matter how hard you want it, Somebody will want it more, I am Somebody"~ST Post

"there is a few more womens on the team."

by god i hope so. i'm a big advocate for the womens.

my point, in case it's lost, is that sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. what we know, based on the website, is that dimond is sitting at 19 and 1. what we know, i guess, by the website, is that falco is sitting at - what? - number of featured women on its bike? i can't find that list, but i do note on its blog a win by lynne clark aboard a falco, so as far as i know dimond and falco are in a dead heat as regards sponsorship of the womens.

but don't let me get in the way of a good mob pile-on.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

"He may not have given you a claim of innocence in private, but Michi has publicly maintained his innocence since day one."

pardon, i just don't know what that means. i don't know if innocent means i didn't do what kohl, or whomever, specifically says i did, or if it means i didn't dope. what i want to know of any athlete in this situation is the answer to this question: did you dope? did you dope during your pro career in cycling or triathlon? i just don't remember getting that answer. i would still like to hear that, or to be reminded that i did hear it and my memory fails me.

further, i'm prepared to accept that. i'm prepared to hear that he didn't dope and to give him the benefit of the doubt, because the evidence was pretty flimsy and because i saw what happened to spencer smith back in 1999, when he had to go through 3 hearings, getting cleared every time. at a certain point you have to say there's a systemic problem, and i hope we're at that point, where you can just appeal directly to CAS or in some way bypass your own NF hearing knowing that you're just going to have to prove it over and over again.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Again Dan thats absolutely fine, considering on your relationship with Michi and your position on ST you can ask for that.

I interpret the statements of "I maintain my innocence" as a claim that he was innocent of what he was accused of: Doping during his cycling career.

His triathlon career isn't even up for debate as he has been in the highest pool of testing continuously.

---

"No matter how hard you train, Somebody will train harder. No matter how hard you run, Somebody will run harder. No matter how hard you want it, Somebody will want it more, I am Somebody"~ST Post

see my edit to the post above. i have sympathy for michi on a number of levels. and as i stated i think he's clean as a triathlete and i can't say that about everybody racing at that level today. if i were a bike sponsor i'd take a hard look at sponsoring michi. just, i wouldn't call his statements transparent - that's not the word i'd use. i would call them opaque. he's an eloquent guy, and i think he could be more expansive. i have never heard more than a sentence here, a sentence there. i'm willing, eager, hoping to hear enough to give him a full, clean bill of health. i just wish i could get more than a sentence or two. do you think i'm being harsh on this?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Not harsh, but I think you want it both ways frankly. You want controversial content for this forum and your front page. You want readership that translates in to advertising dollars, and this topic is always top on the buzz. I want to believe though that you are sincere about how you view Weiss, the person. You've known him, by the accounts you've made here, and it appears you like him. Even so,"you" (generic) believe Weiss STILL owes you "something"..... anything less and he hasn't met some imposition of righteous equity that someone "else" has established. Why is that? I'd submit that the overwhelming majority of the "community" couldn't care less that Weiss hasn't met your "something", he served the consequence of NADA's decision and he's resumed his career. If he doped, justice was meted out and served. If he didn't, he got screwed.

But to the extent of your quote that is highlighted Dan, I have never seen you refute the oft opined notion that is typified by the zealots on YOUR forum with regard to Weiss, that "once a doper, always a doper".
Where have you been up until now anyway? No, not harsh....perhaps insincere. I hope not.

I think that's fair.

And while I stand by my criticisms, I also understand his response.

I get that they're a company that is trying to make it and may not have the resources at this stage of their development for a well-drafted PR response, so what we get instead is an overly defensive response that is more personal and unpolished than it is professional. At the same time, they're at the level where they're sponsoring athletes, most likely by providing product, so they are voluntarily entering into a PR effort, and they should have at least some understanding about the costs and benefits of that approach.

Maybe they'll take my reaction and response, as well as the responses of others, as something constructive. When responding to criticisms like this, whether legitimate or fair or not, a good rule of thumb is to not act rashly. Perhaps sit on the written response for a while. Often, a few hours or even a day or so later, you realize that the initial response may not be the best.