Huh! I am having a great day. Just that thisKapel wrote: Hello JayVee,not having a good day today?![]()
![]()


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


Moderators: cmlean, Ed, The Qualiflyer, The Heretic
Sigh, if you read some of my posts you will disagree with your post, and that is not allJayVee wrote: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 allJulian 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.
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.JayVee wrote:Ah but you can't answer why Michael never had a strong driver alongside him at Ferrarirah wrote: Ahhh, so your argument is entirely made up of speculation. That explains it.
Not Indy 2005rah wrote:And Indy was not Ferrari's fault. We do not need to rehash that old argument.![]()
huh ?Julian Mayo wrote:Sigh, if you read some of my posts you will disagree with your post, and that is not allJayVee wrote: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 allJulian 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.![]()
![]()
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.rah wrote: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.JayVee wrote:Ah but you can't answer why Michael never had a strong driver alongside him at Ferrarirah wrote: Ahhh, so your argument is entirely made up of speculation. That explains it.
Not Indy 2005rah wrote:And Indy was not Ferrari's fault. We do not need to rehash that old argument.![]()
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.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
Absolutely correct. Glad you get it now.No that's not a veto by Michael
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.Hence any driver that could be a threat gets turned away.
Ferrari's these days are pretty reliable too. The servicing though would be a little bit more costly than the ute.Kapel wrote:I still wouldnt mind the Ferrari in my garage if someone can pay for its maintenanceJayVee wrote: I think Hondas are not only more affordable but also more reliable than Ferraris![]()
![]()
On Honda-yes they r affordable with occasional BBQ![]()