While we're still under a caution, i want you to go out an hit the pace car...I'm fed up to my back teeth of the poisonous dwarf to be honest, the way he's milking the show really gets up my nose to be honest. I hope Marussia really, really dick him to be frank. I'd also love BE to call their bluff and then see the cameras screw up.
Marussia to be absent from Australian broadcasts?
#51
Posted 09 March 2013 - 18:38
Advertisement
#52
Posted 09 March 2013 - 18:51
Any odds on marussia not making the 107% Qual cut off, and NOT being granted an exemption as is normally the case? Either that or both cars fail scrutineering
I actually think this is a very large possibility
While we're still under a caution, i want you to go out an hit the pace car...
Wouldn't that be great!
#53
Posted 09 March 2013 - 18:57
I think this shows that, actually, they are in a very good position to be asking for something - that's exactly what they are doing.Because Marussia really is in no position to be asking anything? The value they bring to Bernie is close to zero.
#54
Posted 09 March 2013 - 19:45
#56
Posted 09 March 2013 - 20:49
#57
Posted 09 March 2013 - 20:53
They fight for P1 but jsut before that they need to overtake Marussia. What would happen? Commentatory:
A: OMG OMG THEY ARE FIGHTING FOR P1 BUT SOME UNKNOWN CAR IS RUNNING AHEAD OF THEM?
or
safery car cuz of Marussia
A: Someone had a collision but we have no idea who, cause all 20 cars are running.
Edited by Shiroo, 09 March 2013 - 20:53.
#58
Posted 09 March 2013 - 21:01
#59
Posted 09 March 2013 - 21:25
The only aspect of the race coverage to be damaged by a blackout on Marussia's image is that shot from the back of the grid with the green flag being waved when all cars are in place for the start. Like this.
What about when Vettel and Hamilton are dicing for the lead and they come across a gaggle of backmarkers, Caterhams, Marussia's, toro rossos. What do they do, cut to the midfield? I can only see that pssing a lot of people of, let alone the promoters...
Advertisement
#60
Posted 09 March 2013 - 21:42
Seriously, they'll just show the car and leave it to Marussia to sue for the image rights. Then they'll be in really deep trouble closing a deal with the dwarf.
#61
Posted 09 March 2013 - 21:44
Hamilton will be nowhere near the lead next weekend, no problem ;)
Seriously, they'll just show the car and leave it to Marussia to sue for the image rights. Then they'll be in really deep trouble closing a deal with the dwarf.
Well, they wont, as they are permitted to race this year. BE is going to be in deep enough doo doo when the tax men get hold of him, let alone fighting court cases he can't win.
As for Hamilton: maybe, maybe not. Looking forward to it either way ;)
#62
Posted 09 March 2013 - 21:49
Edited by saudoso, 09 March 2013 - 21:49.
#63
Posted 09 March 2013 - 21:50
It's Bernie circus. The FIA says how long the clown's shoes can be and if the lions are in good health, but Bernie is the ring master.
But marussia have paid their dues to the FIA to race, so Bernie isn't in control here, marussia are. This is the bit in the whole story you miss.
#64
Posted 09 March 2013 - 21:53
EDIT:Because it is too naive to think they will race and there will be no broadcast. Indy fiasco style. Marussia wouldn't survive the fallout of that.
Edited by saudoso, 09 March 2013 - 21:57.
#65
Posted 09 March 2013 - 22:11
They will race. How and when they'll get paid that is the issue here.
EDIT:Because it is too naive to think they will race and there will be no broadcast. Indy fiasco style. Marussia wouldn't survive the fallout of that.
Eh?
They will race, and if their image appears, they have a genuine case, which is irrefutable.
There will be a broadcast, and they will survive; remember a couple of things here: who are we talking about? Who will the press be talking about come race day? What will be discussed post race? They'll be getting, arguably, more coverage without signing a deal, than with it.
Seriously, for a moment, think about it.
#66
Posted 09 March 2013 - 22:36
Last midget to cross horns with Bernie was Stoddard while heading Minardi and that didn't end well for him.
Edited by saudoso, 09 March 2013 - 22:36.
#67
Posted 10 March 2013 - 00:36
They might get paid. But it is comercial suicide, getting sponsors for a third class team is hard enough, but for a third class team being avoided by the cameras must be really, really hard. Unless Chilton's dad has the money to keep it going forever, which I doubt. Because if the kid is any good he will switch teams. If he is not daddy will eventually pull the plug.
Last midget to cross horns with Bernie was Stoddard while heading Minardi and that didn't end well for him.
Laughing at last midget to cross BE....
Means nothing. Marussian have a budget of £40m. They have got massive coverage out of this, we're still talking about it (as it F1 world) and I think we all now, BE has picked an argument too far with the German prosecutors, and he didnt need another he cant win
#68
Posted 10 March 2013 - 01:51
#69
Posted 10 March 2013 - 02:16
Somewhat being hyped here this 'story'
As was the Force India thing.
#70
Posted 10 March 2013 - 02:39
#71
Posted 10 March 2013 - 04:00
#72
Posted 10 March 2013 - 10:16
Yeah probably, but Bernie will get what he wants: a bad deal for Marussia, worse than before they started veiled legal threats via the media.
I disagree completely.
#73
Posted 10 March 2013 - 12:23
Yeah, but considering FOM would not be able to show ANY picture of them, that would mean F1 would be bust sooner. Imagine not being able to broadcast the start, or any scene with a marussia car or team member in it. It would be more awkward for FOM than for Marussia.Im sure the sponsors would love them to be invisible!. F1 can go a whole year without showing Marussia and while ridiculous there wouldn't be harm really. Marussia on the other hand would go broke within 2/3 races. So even saying it in jest is pretty out of this world let alone calling it "vital" for Bernie and using it to get a better deal.
That too, but Virgin? Pirelli and Cosworth count as sponsors too, right? And CNET or something, or is that Lotus? EDIT: Caterham, I mean.Name one Marussia sponsor without looking them up.
Edited by Morbus, 10 March 2013 - 12:25.
#74
Posted 10 March 2013 - 12:33
yep, but taking into consideration that Marussia's behaving that way would also hurt the interests of the other team's sponsors, we could suddenly see, for example, the top teams using the softer tyre and running on fumes already in Q1 to try to have Marussia out of the 107%. It's a dangerous game, and not just because of Bernie.Yeah, but considering FOM would not be able to show ANY picture of them, that would mean F1 would be bust sooner. Imagine not being able to broadcast the start, or any scene with a marussia car or team member in it. It would be more awkward for FOM than for Marussia.
...
#75
Posted 10 March 2013 - 12:41
They might get paid. But it is comercial suicide, getting sponsors for a third class team is hard enough, but for a third class team being avoided by the cameras must be really, really hard. Unless Chilton's dad has the money to keep it going forever, which I doubt. Because if the kid is any good he will switch teams. If he is not daddy will eventually pull the plug.
Well by that theory he would've pulled the plug years ago then.
#76
Posted 10 March 2013 - 12:55
And Caterham, who were generally slower than Marussia in testing now the latter has KERS...
Edited by Felix, 10 March 2013 - 12:56.
#77
Posted 10 March 2013 - 13:01
FOM can go dodging Marussia as long as they want. If they happen to show their car the team could be able to take it to a judge and ask for compensation, but I guess the team would be belly up before they see any money from that.Yeah, but considering FOM would not be able to show ANY picture of them, that would mean F1 would be bust sooner. Imagine not being able to broadcast the start, or any scene with a marussia car or team member in it. It would be more awkward for FOM than for Marussia.
And before someone suggests, pursuing an injunction to have the show stopped would be their last act as a Formula 1 team.
#78
Posted 10 March 2013 - 13:02
Well by that theory he would've pulled the plug years ago then.
Can't really tell...
#79
Posted 10 March 2013 - 13:14
I don't know who's going to be faster, Catherham or Marussia. We'll see once the season starts. What I was trying to point out is that, if that's really how Marussia is behaving, it's not just Bernie who they would be annoying (to use a soft word) but also all the other teams. Playing around with TV would make all the other teams very angry. And teams, specially the big ones, have their resources to get rid of Marussia in case they need it: certain teams do have influence in the FIA, Marussia is getting certain technology from other teams, there is margin to play around in the 107% rule... It's a dangerous game, which could gain them many powerful enemies, and I would play that game very carefully, that's all I'm sayingAnd Caterham, who were generally slower than Marussia in testing now the latter has KERS...
Edited by artista, 10 March 2013 - 13:15.
Advertisement
#80
Posted 10 March 2013 - 22:01
No cars on track except Di Resta, who was on a flyer, and FOM were filming the desert and panning distant shots of the circuit while he was circulating until another car came out on track hahaYeah, FI were basically invisible all across qualifying.
#81
Posted 10 March 2013 - 22:21
#82
Posted 10 March 2013 - 23:46
#83
Posted 11 March 2013 - 15:15
#84
Posted 11 March 2013 - 15:58
#85
Posted 11 March 2013 - 18:31
I don't know who's going to be faster, Catherham or Marussia. We'll see once the season starts.
We will find out, but we may very well not see, unless Bernie comes to an agreement..
#86
Posted 11 March 2013 - 23:17
As for all the secret dealing, Bernies record with race venues and promoters, yet alone the teams is really very suspect. How does the Sports governing body take all of this? Very quickly there could be no show, and Bernies German problems may well make him an unfit person to do anything to do with the sport.
#87
Posted 12 March 2013 - 00:01
Bernie just hasnt offered them a concorde agreement yet. I have no idea where this "marussia are blackmailing bernie" story comes from.
Neither have I. It's all based upon one sentence from one mediocre website and suddenly Marussia have managed what countless bigger and better players have failed to achieve in beating Bernie Ecclestone. You'd think that if not signing the Concorde Agreement meant that FOM legally couldn't film the teams, they wouldn't bend over so quickly like they normally do.
I would imagine the act of signing up for the Championship would transfer over all image rights. Bernie isn't going to be stupid and leave himself wide open.
Edited by Fastcake, 12 March 2013 - 00:06.
#88
Posted 12 March 2013 - 09:56
I doubt it does mean that. I suspect that Marussia are reading too much into clauses in Concorde that set out what the teams are paid for, and extrapolating that into what FOM are allowed to do.You'd think that if not signing the Concorde Agreement meant that FOM legally couldn't film the teams, they wouldn't bend over so quickly like they normally do.
If anything, I would have thought the boot would be on FOM's foot over this: sign or get very little exposure for your sponsors.
#89
Posted 12 March 2013 - 23:36
#90
Posted 12 March 2013 - 23:39
#91
Posted 13 March 2013 - 07:33
If I was a sponsor of Maurussia, I would be mighty pissed off.
It's will be sorted out by the time the race weekend start. Bernie has pointed a gun to people's head before and then they have kissed and hug in the nick of time.
#92
Posted 15 March 2013 - 17:47
Now this appears to mean not a sanction on Marussia as has been thought possible here, but there actually being no concorde agreement as the season gets underway.
That is, no agreement with any of the teams. There's either an all in agreement or no agreement. The latter being in effect at the moment as far as I understand it.
So what does this mean? Is this agreement for the future or meant to be covering now?
edit: or have I picked up on something completely different here?
Edited by BullHead, 15 March 2013 - 18:00.
#93
Posted 15 March 2013 - 19:00
#94
Posted 15 March 2013 - 19:20
#95
Posted 15 March 2013 - 19:41
#96
Posted 15 March 2013 - 19:47
#97
Posted 15 March 2013 - 19:51
I suppose Bernie was right when he said that the agreement isnt necessary.
We don't know that do we? Anyway it's after their cars are broadcast that the liability comes into play.
#98
Posted 15 March 2013 - 20:13
I saw nothing of them in the part of FP2 I caught earlier.
I watched FP1 and Marussia vs Toro Rosso vs Caterham was shown very well in the first half when they were the only cars on the track!
So no problem to show Marussia on the broadcasts!
#99
Posted 15 March 2013 - 20:49
Edited by Tufty, 15 March 2013 - 20:50.
Advertisement
#100
Posted 16 March 2013 - 06:17