Why do my hard earned tax dollars support a bike team? - Page 5

Mike Kruger wrote:

> "Benjamin Weiner" <bjw@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote in message
> news:40eded8b$1@darkstar...
>
>>>On Wisconsin say i.
>>
>>If they weren't such a bunch of cheese eating surrenderers
>>they never would have had to hand over the UP to Michigan
>>after the Great Michigan-Wisconsin War of 1928.
>>
>>Hmm, on second thought, maybe the Wisconsinners knew what
>>they were up to.
>
>
> Wrong war. Michigan was given the UP after the Toledo War
> with Ohio in 1835. Yep. That's right. Michigan and Ohio
> fought a war and Wisconsin lost.
>
> http://wiwi.essortment.com/toledowar_rzxq.htm
>
>

Interesting bit of Michigan history I never knew. Quite a
significant win for Michigan as the iron ore and copper from
the UP were a considerable asset.

My god - what rock have you been hiding under for the last 7 years? The
USPS has an advertising budget and with that it can pick and choose how and
where it will be spent. It chose to sponsor a cycling team to get some
global recognition. IT turned out to be the biggest and best return on
investment the USPS ever made. Who'd ever thought Lance would win 1,3 5 or
even 6 tours. If memory serves me correctly he wasn't even on the
'original' USPS team. Now if the USPS takes it's $25 million dollar ad
budget and spends it on TV commercials, it gets a few ads produced and some
air time, then its run its course. With the same amount of money spent,
it's logo is on every sports magazine cover prior to the tour, on the news
everyday in July and endless photos throughout the year. In doing so, the
USPS can and has kept stamp prices reasonably low and also has been able to
compete head-to-head with UPS (even having cheaper prices on many of its
parcel services)! In December, the USPS will end its sponsorship term with
the procycling team. Personally, I think it has done great job and while
it hasn't used your tax dollars, it appreciates you buying stamps and using
its services daily.
"Churchill" <yes@yes.com> wrote in message
news:VucHc.45732$JG5.989020@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
> "Marty Wallace" <mart@geo.net.au> wrote in message news:4-
> 0ed3cff$0$27218$61ce578d@news.syd.swiftdsl.com.au...
> >
> > "Sam" <marathonman@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> > news:iPaHc.9293$oD3.7611@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink-
> > .net...
> > >
> > > "Alex Rodriguez" <adr5@columbia.edu> wrote in message
> > > news:cchmff$o7$2@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu...
> > > > In article
> > > > <152f6cbe.0407070758.11ce6549@posting.google.com>,
> > > > rondechamp@aol.com says...
> > > > >Hey, Why does the US federal Government support a
> > > > >bike team in France?
I
> > > > >work hard for my money, and think the taxes I pay
> > > > >could be better used. What a Boondoggle!
> > > >
> > > > Like any other company, you have to advertise to get
> > > > more business.
> > USPS
> > > > wanted to get more customers in Europe to use their
> > > > service, so they
> > > sponser
> > > > a bicycle racing team. For the money they spend,
> > > > they get an
> excellent
> > > > return on investment. So they continued to do so
> > > > until ignorant
folks
> > > > started to complain.
> > > > -------------
> > > > Alex
> > > >
> > >
> > > I would like to see some proof that they are getting
> > > bang for their
buck
> > in
> > > terms of promotion and advertising. I doubt they are.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > My God you're an idiot. The fastest rider and the
> > fastest team in the biggest race in the world! And you
> > want proof? If you don't think thats good promotion and
> > advertising then you tell us what is.
> >
> > Marty
>
> Speaking as a non-American I would never have heard of the
> "USPS" if it wasn't for the Tour, so their marketing
> worked in my case
>
> USPS is smart to do this, they are getting all of Europe
> focused on their name, cycling 'I sense' is much more
> popular in Europe than North America

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 03:00:51 GMT, "Stefan Pavlik" <spavlik1@wi.rr.com>
wrote:

> It chose to sponsor a cycling team to get some global
> recognition. IT turned out to be the biggest and best
> return on investment the USPS ever made.

I've read that the sponsorship was NOT aimed at the US,
but Europe.

The USPS was trying to increase it's share of the lucrative
and profitable global express market, also served by UPS,
FedEx, DHL, etc... In other words, they are trying to
convince Euros to use the USPS to ship stuff to and from the
USA. Here in the US, the USPS is losing package business to
the same companies. Going after their profitable global
business, attempting to expand the business into new
markets, can be seen as a smart move.

If this is true, and it actually makes sense, sponsoring the
bike team would be no different from FedEx and UPS
sponsorship of auto racing here in the USA. Think about it,
the target of the advertising is Europe, pro cycling is as
big there as NASCAR is in the USA.

I'll bet the bike team is cheaper than sponsoring a
decent F1 team.
<G>

Barry

Bonehenge <Keep_it_in_the_newsgroup_please@aol.com> writes:

> The USPS was trying to increase it's share of the
> lucrative and profitable global express market, also
> served by UPS, FedEx, DHL, etc... In other words, they are
> trying to convince Euros to use the USPS to ship stuff to
> and from the USA.

But can you use USPS from europe? I can't, As far as I know, here in
Italy. And believe me, any alternative to the Italian postal
system is welcome... What's the point of advertising USPS
when half the shipping depends on the local postal system? I
don't really follow that logic.

--
David N. Welton Personal: http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Free Software: http://www.dedasys.com/freesoftware/ Apache
Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/ Photos:
http://www.dedasys.com/photos/

"Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote in message
news:m2u0wfxxna.fsf@Stella-Blue.local...
> ken@kenpapai.com (K. J. Papai) writes:
>
> Makes sense, doesn't it? There are few riders with the
> combination of skills to win the Tour de France:
> Armstrong, Ullrich, maybe Hamilton. Mayo doesn't yet but
> he is not yet mature. Julich did have the talent but
> didn't have the head for it. Pantani's victory was a one-
> off. The genetic sweepstakes are pretty selective for Tour
> winners. There are many more riders with the abilities to
> win the Classics and the smaller stage races. Luck is a
> greater factor in one-day races, too.

I think that it is only fair to include Beloki into the list
of potential candidates to win the Tour de France. In 4 participations
he has been 2nd once, 3rd twice and one did not finish. Only
Lance and Jan have superior record and all others including
Tyler are well, well behind.

"Bonehenge" <Keep_it_in_the_newsgroup_please@aol.com> wrote in message
news:hf92f0lot9thu1pnub2o68mk22uqeh1vll@4ax.com

[...]

> I'll bet the bike team is cheaper than sponsoring a decent
> F1 team.

Heh. The top F1 teams spend around US$300 million per
season. Their tyre budget alone would probably pay for most
bike teams.

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 11:47:37 GMT, Bonehenge
<Keep_it_in_the_newsgroup_please@aol.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 03:00:51 GMT, "Stefan Pavlik"
><spavlik1@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> It chose to sponsor a cycling team to get some global
>> recognition. IT turned out to be the biggest and best
>> return on investment the USPS ever made.
>
>I've read that the sponsorship was NOT aimed at the US,
>but Europe.
>
>The USPS was trying to increase it's share of the lucrative
>and profitable global express market, also served by UPS,
>FedEx, DHL, etc... In other words, they are trying to
>convince Euros to use the USPS to ship stuff to and from
>the USA. Here in the US, the USPS is losing package
>business to the same companies. Going after their
>profitable global business, attempting to expand the
>business into new markets, can be seen as a smart move.
>
>If this is true, and it actually makes sense, sponsoring
>the bike team would be no different from FedEx and UPS
>sponsorship of auto racing here in the USA. Think about it,
>the target of the advertising is Europe, pro cycling is as
>big there as NASCAR is in the USA.
>
>I'll bet the bike team is cheaper than sponsoring a
>decent F1 team.
><G>
>
>Barry

I order frequently from the US and dread the final bill from
the courier companies. All the 'brokerage fees', paperwork
fees, customs declaration charges, etc, etc, can sometimes
vastly exceed the value of the goods. It's sickening. Plus,
their 2-day, 3-day or whatever service is for major urban
areas only. Add another couple of days for anywhere else. I
beg any companies to use USPS. It's far cheaper, far faster
and ties in to my country's postal service, so I don't come
home to a note on my door, then have to take a day off work
to wait for a parcel. I hope the USPS slays some of those
couriers due to the increased visibility overseas thanks to
Lance et al.

"H. Morgan" <ship@piratecove.com> wrote in message
news:h3n2f0hsjelo7rmsqmuiv0om3jdq19f7n7@4ax.com

[...]

> I order frequently from the US and dread the final bill
> from the courier companies. All the 'brokerage fees',
> paperwork fees, customs declaration charges, etc, etc, can
> sometimes vastly exceed the value of the goods. It's
> sickening.

Absolutely right. Courier costs are deal killers when
ordering from the US.

[...]

> I beg any companies to use USPS.

The smart ones do. I don't understand why those that refuse
to use USPS even bother with international sales.

> It's far cheaper, far faster and ties in to my country's
> postal service, so I don't come home to a note on my door,
> then have to take a day off work to wait for a parcel. I
> hope the USPS slays some of those couriers due to the
> increased visibility overseas thanks to Lance et al.

It would be nice.

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

"alex" <alex.beascoechea@arcor.de> writes:

> "Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote in message news:m2u0wfxxna.fsf@Stella-
> Blue.local...
>> ken@kenpapai.com (K. J. Papai) writes:
>>
>> Makes sense, doesn't it? There are few riders with the
>> combination of skills to win the Tour de France:
>> Armstrong, Ullrich, maybe Hamilton. Mayo doesn't yet but
>> he is not yet mature. Julich did have the talent but
>> didn't have the head for it. Pantani's victory was a one-
>> off. The genetic sweepstakes are pretty selective for
>> Tour winners. There are many more riders with the
>> abilities to win the Classics and the smaller stage
>> races. Luck is a greater factor in one-day races, too.
>
> I think that it is only fair to include Beloki into the
> list of potential candidates to win the Tour de France. In 4
> participations he has been 2nd once, 3rd twice and one did
> not finish. Only Lance and Jan have superior record and
> all others including Tyler are well, well behind.

Whether you win a race depends not only on your abilities
but on those of the competition, so with that caveat there
are a number of potential winners. I didn't include Beloki
because I wasn't trying to create an exhaustive list and was
only thinking about the current Tour. If you were to look
across the entire peloton and not just the current Tour,
you'd come up with a list of riders that's a bit larger than
the three I named.

I was specifically thinking about Simoni- who's got the
abilities to win the Giro but not the Tour, and Heras who
has the abilities to win the Vuelta but not the Tour (I
think Heras is a better candidate for the Tour than Simoni,
in part because the latter beats himself up too much in the
Giro). Both the Vuelta and the Giro tend to favor climbers
over rouleurs in recent years, partly in an attempt to
create a greater spectacle than the Tour (TIOOYK) de France;
as a result some climbers come to the Tour with pretensions
to win that are just not realistic.

"Stefan Pavlik" <spavlik1@wi.rr.com> writes:

> In doing so, the USPS can and has kept stamp prices
> reasonably low

I'm always amazed to send letters to Europeans for under $1
and get replies which may cost several times as much to send
from Europe to the US. I sent a letter to Ireland a few
years ago, cost me US$.40 and the return from Ireland cost
nearly US$5.00! Sending that letter to Ireland now would
cost more, but still probably a fraction of what it would
cost someone in Europe to send one to me.

Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:

>"Stefan Pavlik" <spavlik1@wi.rr.com> writes:
>
>> In doing so, the USPS can and has kept stamp prices
>> reasonably low
>
>I'm always amazed to send letters to Europeans for under $1
>and get replies which may cost several times as much to
>send from Europe to the US. I sent a letter to Ireland a
>few years ago, cost me US$.40 and the return from Ireland
>cost nearly US$5.00! Sending that letter to Ireland now
>would cost more, but still probably a fraction of what it
>would cost someone in Europe to send one to me.

Then again, when I lived in China it cost LESS to send a
letter from Beijing to the US than from the US to the US
(around 20 cents vx. 33 cents IIRC). I never figured that
one out. I suppose to the US postal system the mail coming
in from China looked like the pre-sorted kind of "cut-rate
commercial" junk mail that costs little to send, too (only
on a much larger scale).

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of
the $695 ti frame

Mark Hickey <mark@habcycles.com> writes:

> Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
>>"Stefan Pavlik" <spavlik1@wi.rr.com> writes:
>>
>>> In doing so, the USPS can and has kept stamp prices
>>> reasonably low
>>
>>I'm always amazed to send letters to Europeans for under
>>$1 and get replies which may cost several times as much to
>>send from Europe to the US. I sent a letter to Ireland a
>>few years ago, cost me US$.40 and the return from Ireland
>>cost nearly US$5.00! Sending that letter to Ireland now
>>would cost more, but still probably a fraction of what it
>>would cost someone in Europe to send one to me.
>
> Then again, when I lived in China it cost LESS to send a
> letter from Beijing to the US than from the US to the US
> (around 20 cents vx. 33 cents IIRC). I never figured that
> one out. I suppose to the US postal system the mail coming
> in from China looked like the pre-sorted kind of "cut-rate
> commercial" junk mail that costs little to send, too (only
> on a much larger scale).

That brings up a question I have never thought of.
Presumably, I pay USPS for the stamp and then once it gets
to Ireland or France or Italy or wherever, USPS is paying
that country's postal service to actually deliver the
letter. How does that work? And how does it work in reverse?
I'm assuming that Mr. Armstrong and Co. are not out dropping
off letters and parcels on their training rides (contrary to
the ads on TV today).

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 22:49:18 -0500, Tim McNamara
<timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:

>That brings up a question I have never thought of.
>Presumably, I pay USPS for the stamp and then once it gets
>to Ireland or France or Italy or wherever, USPS is paying
>that country's postal service to actually deliver the
>letter. How does that work? And how does it work in
>reverse? I'm assuming that Mr. Armstrong and Co. are not
>out dropping off letters and parcels on their training
>rides (contrary to the ads on TV today).

as I recall, those rates and protocols are negotiated
bilaterally between national postal services directly and
multilaterally through the Universal Postal Union.

-Luigi

> > There are more Classics Specialists than there are Tour
> > Specialists these days.
>
> Makes sense, doesn't it? There are few riders with the
> combination of skills to win the Tour de France:
> Armstrong, Ullrich, maybe Hamilton. Mayo doesn't yet but
> he is not yet mature. Julich did have the talent but
> didn't have the head for it. Pantani's victory was a one-
> off. The genetic sweepstakes are pretty selective for Tour
> winners. There are many more riders with the abilities to
> win the Classics and the smaller stage races. Luck is a
> greater factor in one-day races, too.

This is a wrong comparison. There are 10 WC ("classics")
races and only 1 tour each year. If you want to make such a
comparison, compare the two major disciplines in cycling: WC
races and Grand Tours. I think if you try to name the main
contenders for those two types of racing, you won't find
more names for classics as for GT's. I agree if there is a
suprising winner it is mostly in classics. But if you name
top favourites, you'll have the same number of riders for
each "discipline". Prove me wrong but to me there aren't
more riders with the ability to win classics than riders
with the ability to win a GT.

On 12 Jul 2004 05:43:44 -0700, gelei2001@hotmail.com (Kenny) wrote:

>There are 10 WC ("classics") races and only 1 tour each
>year. If you want to make such a comparison, compare the
>two major disciplines in cycling: WC races and Grand Tours.
>I think if you try to name the main contenders for those
>two types of racing, you won't find more names for classics
>as for GT's.

Depends on what you mean by contenders for racing. If you
mean who can win a stage on a given day on one of the three
Tours, as well as winning overall G.C., yes. If you are
including anyone that has a role in the Tour, then also yes,
but that has little to do with the thread to date.

If you mean that there are as many legitimate contenders for
winning the G.C. of a Tour as there are winning any one of
the classics i a given year, that simply doesn't make sense.

Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on
two wheels...