Not sure I'm following why it would be thrown on the scrap heap, though?
Well, in my local JJB sports there are a few rails of Live Stronger merchandise... can see that in the bargain bucket if this goes much further... Live stronger is a bad slogan for a drugs assisted athlete!
Well maybe the merchandise may be devalued and reputation may suffer if Armstrong is continually pilloried - but all the same, it's a charity foundation, isn't it? As long as they have some means of gathering revenue, they should still be able to do good work.
Also if Schumacher was the fastest car/driver package in 94, why did they feel the need to cheat?
I reckon most of the teams would do up to and a bit beyond as one of their main modus operandi, as and when they can.
All I'm saying is that none of the factors we know to be, well, dubious about the Benetton car in 94, look to have granted sufficient advantage for him to dominate in the way he did.
At least the fuel rig thing, I seem to recall there's some mitigation in there being some discussion with the FIA / Charlie, before the FIAsco (see what I did there?). Verstappen (it was Verstappen, wasn't it?) just getting a bit toasty, is, well, just a bit inconvenient...
Launch control, if it was used, would explain good starts... hmm... but not Schumacher completely out-driving Hill all year (except, curiously, when it really mattered, in the Adelaide race), such that even after being banned for 3 races, Schumacher was still ahead on points.