BTM_Pix

In fairness to Jim Jannard he had longstanding personal and business relationships with both Armstrong and Greg LeMond. It always difficult to get caught in the middle of mutual friends that have fallen out and are in conflict with each other and even worse when you are forced to make a choice between them. Do you choose the three time clean TdF winner who's life is being ruined or the seven time dirty TdF winner who is trying to ruin it (and the lives of several more people) to save his own skin? I doubt we need to a poll to find out what most of us would do.

Looks like it'll cost a few squid.

I'll sort it out over the weekend once I've calibrated my unicorn to vibe ratio measurement kit.

Her name is Stephanie Mcilvain and both she and her husband Patrick worked for Oakley at the time, she as a client liaison to Armstrong and he as VP of global sports marketing.

Its featured in Sunday Times journalist David Walsh's book "From Lance To Landis" amongst his other works. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zJ9IOdnm5mQC&pg=PA267&lpg=PA267&dq="david+walsh"+"jim+jannard"&source=bl&ots=qPQCUFfqGo&sig=ACfU3U2qn6lur2Z6PSXzqbQ6Zs6gzrDBZw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjJrrn3yYfkAhXE0qQKHXx6Bg0Q6AEwDnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q="david walsh" "jim jannard"&f=false Walsh ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Walsh_(journalist)) and his ex-professional cyclist colleague Paul Kimmage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Kimmage) pursued Armstrong and were pilloried and ostracised for it. Armstrong successfully sued The Sunday Times for libel in connection with the pieces to expose him at the time, something which they then attempted to recoup those losses on when he eventually admitted to doping almost a decade later. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/jan/22/uk-libel-laws-sunday-times-lance-armstrong To date, I'm not aware of any action brought against Walsh or his publishers by Oakley or Jim Jannard for the allegations made about them in any of his publications. Maybe they meant to sue the EO SHED company instead for making this red shed.

Tell him you are suing RED for stealing the rights to your name by simply removing the 'i' from it and the subsequent distress this has caused you being associated with them.

He doesn't like BM. Or Andrew. http://www.reduser.net/forum/search.php?searchid=32277376

Do you have a cape for this alter ego ?

My view of it is that its basically only a fucking camera and why would anyone want to go to the mattresses over it? As for the sycophancy of that reverential capitalisation stuff well...my response to reading that was literally "Christ on a bike". Which is quite apt considering the Lance Armstrong associations. I think we should all be mindful of how our loved ones would react if they saw some of the battles we fight over pretty silly stuff. As this video illustrates quite well

Oh absolutely in no way, shape or form is it a cult. It is merely a collection of people with a shared interest in a particular brand of camera. And pseudo-military four wheel drive vehicles. http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?65569-Jannard Take your pick really of absolutely not cult like posts in that thread but I think you'd go a long way to beat this one using the reverential capitalisation of 'He' usually reserved for a deity or divine being.

Hey, I can do you an A/B with an EPIC and a Pocket4K if you like and we can have a massive row about silkyshuddercodeshuttermojo ?

Hey @Andrew Reid I'm not sure you and I can still be friends if you are going round the internet bullying *checks notes* a camera company owned by a billionaire who took legal action to shut you up that they knew you couldn't possibly afford to have defended. Clearly, as Peter says, the internet bullying must be stopped. Peter's solution to your spiteful bullying is to *checks notes* go on the internet and demand a camera company owned by a billionaire shuts you down by taking legal action they know you couldn't possibly afford to defend. Anyway, I'm off to 3D print a new irony meter as my current one has just exploded.

And the rest! Armstrong was ultimately brought down by financial and government interest cases in his own country though to be fair. SCA sports promotions not wanting to pay him huge bonuses for winning the TdF and the Justice Department for defrauding the federal government because of the USPS sponsorship of the team while he was cheating. Absolutely no doubt he wasn't alone in cheating either before, during and after his career (particularly in terms of some suspcious results gained by a certain team in the past 7 years) but the difference with Armstrong is the lengths he went to in order to contain it. It was shitbaggery on an industrial mechanised scale

Quite spooky how apt the title of the next video in my YouTube window was when that finished!

LeMond claimed the threats ran the whole way from his business to his life. https://www.iol.co.za/capeargus/sport/armstrong-threatened-my-life-claims-lemond-559230 https://www.twincities.com/2015/06/17/cycling-legend-greg-lemond-on-lance-armstrong-future-of-the-sport/ One of the nastiet aspects of it (though it led to a positive with LeMond becoming involved in a very good cause) was a threat intended to stop him testifying against Floyd Landis after Landis was stripped of the 2006 Tour de France for doping. Landis was part of the USPS team with Armstrong and would eventually blow the whistle on him after the usual strongarm tactics attempt to make him keep the bigger secret of Armstrong's cheating. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2009-aug-18-sp-crowe18-story.html

When the RED EPIC was released and being touted as a combined cinema and stills camera, I took it to shoot alongside my regular stills gear to shoot the Tour De France to see if it was viable for stills extraction for live editorial use. On BMCUser, someone else was also planning to shoot the Tour de France that year but ourtesy of two EPICs apparently loaned via RED through the well known Minnesota based pro cyclist who was going to expose the evidence of doping by Armstrong and who's friend was the CEO.... According to this post, it fell through in unusual and quite disturbing circumstances. If you watched the clip of Stephanie Mcilvain in that video, the person who did the recording of the phone call with her was three times (legitimate) Tour de France winner Greg LeMond who lost his business and endured 12 years of hell after questioning Armstrong's legitimacy. Imagine being a friend of Greg LeMond,who was losing everything he had legitimately won purely because he was exposing the cheating of another man that you yourself knew was cheating and just letting that happen? With a friend like that, Greg LeMond of Minnesota wouldn't need enemies.

Its certainly got the makings of a great investigative documentary. I like a great investigative documentary. Like this one called "Stop At Nothing" about the con trick that Lance Armstrong pulled on the whole world and which he sustained by the bullying tactic of suing everyone that he knew was too weak financially to stand up to him with what they knew. They were all written off and derided publicly by Armstrong and his acolytes as jealous or bitter or conspiracy theorists or even all three. The biggest scorn was reserved for those who had been privy to the biggest secret which was when he admitted to his doctor just after brain surgery in 1996 that he had taken performance enhancing drugs. People like Stephanie Mcilvain. I've cued it up to the part where the allegations are discussed about the pressure she came under from both Armstrong himself but also her employer at the time. And in particular, her ultimate boss at that employer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpb-VBNoEC0&t=3958

The rebuttal to the legitimacy of RED's patents from Apple's imaging scientist might as well have said "In summary...This is like Vanilla Ice claiming he owns the rights to Under Pressure"

Ignore the date of December on the video, as this was shot at NAB 2006, and purports to be the earliest video of a public interview with RED about the camera. Fast forward to IBC in September 2006 and I've found this video of the Q&A with the, erm, "Leader Of The Rebellion" and I've cued this up right when someone asks the question about the compression.... Prior to this section, where REDCODE definitely is described, he was actually inviting people to get in line the next day at their booth to pre-order the camera and saying how they had to that point had 400+ orders for it already. I placed my order based on the NAB reveal where the info was slightly more nebulous but RED always used the caveat that everything was subject to change which undoubtedly covers them in terms of what we ordered but less so I would believe in terms of the patent aspect?

If the price is under $5K if you own a Hydrogen (i.e. you need a Hydrogen to make the whole package under $5K) then that implies the camera is $5K minus the price of the Hydrogen ($1295) hence it will be $3700 ? However it may well be a special deal for Hydrogen owners to compensate them for being early adopters and that only they can buy it for $5K, in which case it could easily be $8-9K as a fresh purchase. They have done this in the past obviously with things like EPIC X only being available at a certain price to RED ONE owners etc.

On the media and monitors, certainly

The sunglasses that Lance used to wear you mean? https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-02/sponsor-turned-blind-eye-to-lance-armstrongs-doping/5564074

I think the appearance of the Pocket 6K has probably forced their hand to get images out of it being used for shooting a bit quicker than they wanted (the pic is from Steven Soderbergh) hence them having to use the Atomos. The kudos of getting Soderbergh to tweet it was slightly undermined by him getting the name wrong and calling it the Kimono. Could be worse, he could have called it the Komode. The last thing they need at the moment is the connotation of it being something they've been sat on for ages that turns out to have a load of shit inside.

Can't see a Hydrogen (maybe the shot was taken on it) as I thought that was going to be how they did the UI?