News On F1 Forums - Talk Formula 1

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 10:45 am**

Kapel wrote: Hello JayVee,not having a good day today?

Huh! I am having a great day. Just that this

is a bit noisy!

Stop it!

I think Hondas are not only more affordable but also more reliable than Ferraris

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 10:55 am**

JayVee wrote:
Julian Mayo wrote: Merely stating what is in that respectable and august publication, "the Melbourne Age",
Which now becomes merely unrespecatable

It, and the Hume hway WERE the only good things coming out of Melbourne

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 10:57 am**

JayVee wrote:
Julian Mayo wrote:I am a great fan of Renault as I have said repeatedly for years. I do pass on things I have read. That is all.
This means you are a great great fan of Williams but I don't see you passing on anything negative you read about them or their dreaded gearbox ..... That's all

Sigh, if you read some of my posts you will disagree with your post, and that is not all

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 10:59 am**

JayVee wrote:
Kapel wrote: Hello JayVee,not having a good day today?

Huh! I am having a great day. Just that this is a bit noisy!

Stop it!

I think Hondas are not only more affordable but also more reliable than Ferraris

And geminis

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:54 pm**

JayVee wrote:
rah wrote: Ahhh, so your argument is entirely made up of speculation. That explains it.
Ah but you can't answer why Michael never had a strong driver alongside him at Ferrari

rah wrote:And Indy was not Ferrari's fault. We do not need to rehash that old argument.
Not Indy 2005

No I can't, I had no idea I was supoosed to. We DO know of the contracts the other drivers had, but we do NOT know why they never picked another top line driver. Maybe they approched them, but the drivers were turned off due to the contract. I have no idea. What I do know is that I have never seen it stated in anything I have read (other than your posts) that MS has a veto over any other drivers. IMO the contract would have driven other drivers away, not MS.

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:11 pm**

Julian Mayo wrote:
JayVee wrote:
Julian Mayo wrote:I am a great fan of Renault as I have said repeatedly for years. I do pass on things I have read. That is all.
This means you are a great great fan of Williams but I don't see you passing on anything negative you read about them or their dreaded gearbox ..... That's all
Sigh, if you read some of my posts you will disagree with your post, and that is not all

huh ?

Show me one of those posts. You said it before, if there is anything bad on Williams (or Webber for that matter) you stay quiet.

So don't report bad news on Renault then say you are a great fan of them

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:12 pm**

Julian Mayo wrote: And geminis

More reliable yes but more affordable

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:14 pm**

JayVee wrote:
Julian Mayo wrote: And geminis
More reliable yes but more affordable

Over the long run, probably.

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:16 pm**

rah wrote:
JayVee wrote:
rah wrote: Ahhh, so your argument is entirely made up of speculation. That explains it.
Ah but you can't answer why Michael never had a strong driver alongside him at Ferrari

rah wrote:And Indy was not Ferrari's fault. We do not need to rehash that old argument.
Not Indy 2005
No I can't, I had no idea I was supoosed to. We DO know of the contracts the other drivers had, but we do NOT know why they never picked another top line driver. Maybe they approched them, but the drivers were turned off due to the contract. I have no idea. What I do know is that I have never seen it stated in anything I have read (other than your posts) that MS has a veto over any other drivers. IMO the contract would have driven other drivers away, not MS.

Ah I see, so it is only semantics. There is a condition in the other driver's contract to play second fiddle to Michael (i.e. helper in my book). Hence any driver that could be a threat gets turned away.

No that's not a veto by Michael
Perhaps in todays world we can call it a preemptive veto by Michael

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:17 pm**

rah wrote:
JayVee wrote:
Julian Mayo wrote: And geminis
More reliable yes but more affordable
Over the long run, probably.

Not when it is parked for ever

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:21 pm**

Julian Mayo wrote: And geminis

And its a Camira not a Gemini

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:24 pm**

JayVee wrote:
Ah I see, so it is only semantics. There is a condition in the other driver's contract to play second fiddle to Michael (i.e. helper in my book). Hence any driver that could be a threat gets turned away.

No that's not a veto by Michael
Perhaps in todays world we can call it a preemptive veto by Michael

Not semantics, a totally different thing. One is an action by Ferrari. One as you are suggesting is an action by MS. Two different actions by two different parties.

No that's not a veto by Michael

Absolutely correct. Glad you get it now.

As a clarification you say

Hence any driver that could be a threat gets turned away.

But any good driver who wants the WDC would not want to drive for Ferrari under those contract conditions. They would get turned off joining Ferrari. They would not get turned away by Ferrari.

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:26 pm**

JayVee wrote:
Not when it is parked for ever

Ah I had no idea you were using it as a feature in your lanscaping.

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:28 pm**

JayVee wrote: I think Hondas are not only more affordable but also more reliable than Ferraris

I still wouldnt mind the Ferrari in my garage if someone can pay for its maintenance

On Honda-yes they r affordable with occasional BBQ

Posted: **Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:33 pm**

Kapel wrote:
JayVee wrote: I think Hondas are not only more affordable but also more reliable than Ferraris
I still wouldnt mind the Ferrari in my garage if someone can pay for its maintenance

On Honda-yes they r affordable with occasional BBQ

Ferrari's these days are pretty reliable too. The servicing though would be a little bit more costly than the ute.

News On F1 Forums - Talk Formula 1

Michael Schumacher hints at retirement