[troutman]

Originally Posted by East Coast Flame

You have no idea what you're talking about. The Lance Armstrong Foundation is a 4 star rated charity on charity navigator. One of the highest rated charities in the United States.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/inde...ary&orgid=6570

You are both talking about different things. Livestrong rates high for not wasting donations on administration. Livestrong spends an enormous amount on branding.

Check the Outside article:

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor....html?page=all

LIVESTRONG PRIDES ITSELF on the fact that—on paper, anyway—it spends 81 percent of every dollar on programs. This is a big improvement over 2005, when the American Institute of Philanthropy took Livestrong to task for spending 45 cents of every dollar on fundraising. Now AIP gives Livestrong an A-minus, while Charity Navigator rates it three stars out of four.

But the foundation’s financial reports from 2009 and 2010 show that Livestrong’s resources pay for a very large amount of marketing and PR. During those years, the foundation raised $84 million and spent just over $60 million. (The rest went into a reserve of cash and assets that now tops $100 million.)