Jump to content


Photo

Red Bull Racing - team, politics and a soft drink


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#1 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 29 June 2012 - 10:46

I opened this thread to cut the clutter out of the technical thread about the RB8.

Red Bull is the midst of a lot of controversies right now after having dominated the sport in the last two years with occasional snipes by competitors concerning the legality of the car aka height-control or flexy wings. Despite having to revise the car after the Monaco GP 2012 so far none of the rumours and allegations has been proven or even officially disputed.

After having given the impression to think that the SC had possibly been deployed for show effects, Marko has recently commented on the political situation in F1 from RBR point of view:

"When you think about the course of a race weekend, it all sounds so nice and so simple, but it's very different in reality," said the Austrian.

"There is so much politics involved," Marko told motorline.cc. "If Martin Whitmarsh wishes me a pleasant day, I get really nervous and wonder what is up."

He insisted that Red Bull's place in the F1 paddock is a difficult one.

"The first reason is that we are not a car maker or a traditional racing car constructor. What hurts even more is that along with Ferrari we have reached a super deal with Bernie Ecclestone, and not just in the budget but also in the prestige.

"That's why our life is really difficult at the moment," said Marko.


Hamilton was quoted "It's just a drink company" and Marko seems to think their success seems to be very hard to swallow for more famous competitors ( and many fans :cat: ), resulting in a lot of political pressure against RBR.

With so many conflict zones I wonder who things go on in the next couple of years...

Edited by H2H, 29 June 2012 - 10:55.


Advertisement

#2 krapmeister

krapmeister
  • Member

  • 5,570 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 29 June 2012 - 11:14

Marko complaining about politics? Oh the irony... :lol:



#3 ayali

ayali
  • Member

  • 729 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 29 June 2012 - 12:32

Hmm bit of a cr@ppy translation and summery by GMM of what was quite an interesting interview with Dr Marko

http://www.motorline.../article=170640

:cool:

#4 TheWilliamzer

TheWilliamzer
  • Member

  • 689 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 29 June 2012 - 12:39

Marco is just sounding... err... paranoid? :p

I think RBR need to focus on their team and just ignore the talking... Words doesn't affect lap times or tire wear.

#5 LuckyStrike1

LuckyStrike1
  • Member

  • 5,573 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 29 June 2012 - 12:45

Marko complaining about politics? Oh the irony... :lol:



Someone involved in F1 complaining about politics? Oh the irony ..... :lol:

#6 Cavani

Cavani
  • Member

  • 905 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 29 June 2012 - 12:47

speaking of myself, i really find RBR and vettel success hard to swallow, if it were an established racing team even if it did came from another racing series , it would be ok . but you sure as hell should give them credit but with a fake smile

Edited by Cavani, 29 June 2012 - 12:47.


#7 GotYoubyTheBalls

GotYoubyTheBalls
  • Member

  • 301 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 29 June 2012 - 13:01

speaking of myself, i really find RBR and vettel success hard to swallow, if it were an established racing team even if it did came from another racing series , it would be ok . but you sure as hell should give them credit but with a fake smile


Turn it up.

#8 One

One
  • Member

  • 6,527 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 29 June 2012 - 13:11

Kind a part of the game, but depends whole a lot on one's perspective isn't it?
Marco is paranoid to begin with, so he sees that anything that fall on the ground is the reason he will be blamed.
Rightly so, he dirtily manipulated out comes of racing between his drivers.




#9 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 29 June 2012 - 13:15

Marko complaining about politics? Oh the irony... :lol:


It is always a question of power, isn't it? F1 has always been about that and politics.

Anyway some posts show why he feels that there is alot of envy....

At least envy is something you have to earn.

Edited by H2H, 29 June 2012 - 13:16.


#10 goingthedistance

goingthedistance
  • Member

  • 2,266 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 29 June 2012 - 13:50

Hmm bit of a cr@ppy translation and summery by GMM of what was quite an interesting interview with Dr Marko

http://www.motorline.../article=170640

:cool:


If my translation is correct then he says they kept telling Seb to go slower so as not to pull too much of a gap at Valencia, because they feared looking too good and attracting the attention of the FIA who might try and bring them back into the field.

I think Marko is a paranoid nut, and a blight on the sport. Jumping to the conclusion that Vettel's retirement was caused by the safety car phase, for example. Renault have said the alternator failure was not due to the safety car period, that Vettel's was overheating prior to that and it just delayed the eventual failure.

Edited by goingthedistance, 29 June 2012 - 13:51.


#11 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • In the running for best OP of 2014

  • 3,366 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 29 June 2012 - 14:49

If Martin Whitmarsh wishes me a pleasant day, I get really nervous and wonder what is up.

:rotfl:

#12 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 29 June 2012 - 15:50


That is actually a great link, Marko back in Austria speaking clearly his mind which is always informative for good and bad...

And that line about Martin made me laugh, somehow I had to think about Lewis and his fans :rotfl:

#13 ayali

ayali
  • Member

  • 729 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 29 June 2012 - 16:07

That is actually a great link, Marko back in Austria speaking clearly his mind which is always informative for good and bad...

And that line about Martin made me laugh, somehow I had to think about Lewis and his fans :rotfl:

I thought so too
he spoke freely on tyres, the Valencia weekend and F1 politics
Seems he answered questions from the public afterwards. Will try and post a link to those too

:cool:


#14 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 2,023 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 30 June 2012 - 06:06

i'm not a fan of his at all, but i don't see anything wrong with what he's said here.

and if they really have reached an agreement with bernie, where they are on equal pegging with ferrari now, id probably be a little peeved if i were mclaren aswell.



#15 Aieljose

Aieljose
  • Member

  • 676 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 30 June 2012 - 06:56

:lol: Yeah having seemingly unlimited spending money and the best designer/ driver combo on the grid must be really tough :rolleyes:
"Red bull are just a drinks company" No truer words have ever been said.

#16 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,442 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 07:10

"Red bull are just a drinks company" No truer words have ever been said.


Although, interestingly, Hamilton never said that.

'Red Bull are just a drinks company,' says revved-up Lewis Hamilton

is the headline, but

Lewis Hamilton has dismissed last year's double world championship winning Red Bull team as just a "drinks company"
...
"Red Bull are not a manufacturer, they are a drinks company"

is the article text. The headline quote is not a quote at all, but journalistic licence.

English is a powerful language, and the inclusion of "just" changes the tone of the quote substantially from something quite sensible to something quite dismissive. Of course it is all rather futile, "just a drinks company" has gone down in folklore as the quote...

Edited by smitten, 30 June 2012 - 07:11.


#17 Aieljose

Aieljose
  • Member

  • 676 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 30 June 2012 - 07:33

Although, interestingly, Hamilton never said that.

is the headline, but is the article text. The headline quote is not a quote at all, but journalistic licence.

English is a powerful language, and the inclusion of "just" changes the tone of the quote substantially from something quite sensible to something quite dismissive. Of course it is all rather futile, "just a drinks company" has gone down in folklore as the quote...

*sigh* I really don't care to debate this. Although you are correct, i think we all know what Hamilton was trying to imply about Red Bull.

#18 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,820 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 07:46

Hmm bit of a cr@ppy translation and summery by GMM of what was quite an interesting interview with Dr Marko

http://www.motorline.../article=170640

:cool:


Thanks for the link. Having read the interview in German I am now even more pissed off at Marko. It's full of paranoia and even outright lies.

#19 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 30 June 2012 - 08:11

*sigh* I really don't care to debate this. Although you are correct, i think we all know what Hamilton was trying to imply about Red Bull.

You don't want to debate it, you just want to comment :drunk: .

'JUST a drinks company' would be disparaging.

'Not a manufacturer they are a drinks company' simply means they are not primarily a racing organisation.

They are an an advertising vehicle, dependent on funding from one one guy; and a guy who doesn't actually attend many races. They may eventually become a racing organisation like Williams or McLaren, or they may not.

But it seems clear Bernie and the FIA want to encourage them into the fold. The new deal probably guarantees they can find a buyer of some kind after Dietrich, while Newey and Charlie obviously have their own deal going.

Advertisement

#20 BullHead

BullHead
  • Member

  • 6,719 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 30 June 2012 - 12:00

I wonder. When Bennetton were dominating, did they get referred to as just a clothing company?

#21 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,442 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 12:01

I wonder. When Bennetton were dominating, did they get referred to as just a clothing company?


And would it have been apt, given their current F1 form?;)

Edited by smitten, 30 June 2012 - 12:02.


#22 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 30 June 2012 - 12:57

This whole thing is hilarious. As if making cars is somehow more noble than making energy drinks. They are making stuff to sell.

And RedBull has probably done more for sports than McLaren ever will.

#23 gm914

gm914
  • Member

  • 6,046 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 30 June 2012 - 13:12

I wonder. When Bennetton were dominating, did they get referred to as just a clothing company?

No. Because Flavio would've put a bomb under your car.
Oh wait he did.

#24 krapmeister

krapmeister
  • Member

  • 5,570 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 30 June 2012 - 13:12

This whole thing is hilarious. As if making cars is somehow more noble than making energy drinks. They are making stuff to sell.

And RedBull has probably done more for sports than McLaren ever will.


Well tbf, it's probably a slightly more complex and involved process to design and build a car than buy the rights to a drink and market it.

But i agree that Red Bull has done a lot for sports through it's marketing philosophy...

#25 ayali

ayali
  • Member

  • 729 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 30 June 2012 - 13:30

I wonder. When Bennetton were dominating, did they get referred to as just a clothing company?

Yep and Flavio was even dismissed as that T-shirt salesman back then

This whole thing is hilarious. As if making cars is somehow more noble than making energy drinks. They are making stuff to sell.

It's not but it grates some to no end that an energy drinks company is beating car-makers in F1.
Thankfully FOM has realized the value of Red Bull and have rewarded them with a similar good deal as Ferrari has

And RedBull has probably done more for sports than McLaren ever will.

Don't underestimate Macca they were so nice to donate $60 million to the FIA foundation in 2008 to further safety in the sport  ;)

:cool:

#26 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 30 June 2012 - 13:34

Oh, and if you are McLaren or Ferrari it SHOULD grate you that an upstart is kicking your ass.

What is ridiculous is when it comes from some fans that it is somehow generally "bad" ir bad for the sport that RBR is beating the old teams.

#27 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,474 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 30 June 2012 - 13:47

I'm happy to have Red Bull.

If they are 'just a drink maker', then what does that say about Mclaren and Ferrari and everyone else who is having trouble beating them? People who feel that way need to realize that they are a proper F1 race team now. Yes, they were bought by Red Bull, but they did their homework, got the most talented personel they could find and put together a hell of a team. People will say it was just them throwing money at the sport, but I dont remember Toyota, BMW or Honda ever dominating like this.

As a Ferrari fan, it does not grate on me that an 'upstart' is beating my team, nor do I think the sport is better when its just Mclaren vs Ferrari. The more competition at the top, the better, in my opinion. We've got 3 fantastic drivers all in 3 different, but also fantastic teams, which is great for the sport and for me as a spectator. I think people who get upset over Red Bull coming in and doing so well are just being sore losers.

I also appreciate what Red Bull does for sports in general. Yes, they tend to throw their money around in all sorts of different series/events/sports/whatever, but a lot of that money is also going to helping young competitors get a leg up in whatever sport they've been training in, which is a fantastic thing.

#28 ayali

ayali
  • Member

  • 729 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 30 June 2012 - 13:50

Oh, and if you are McLaren or Ferrari it SHOULD grate you that an upstart is kicking your ass.

What is ridiculous is when it comes from some fans that it is somehow generally "bad" ir bad for the sport that RBR is beating the old teams.

Hmm maybe not so much Ferrari or McLaren but more so their fans

The people in Woking and Maranello would've known that if you buy a mid-grid team invest several $100 million and employ the right people you've a good chance to come to the front.

But you're right dismissing Red Bull as just a drinks company and bad for the sport is ridiculous, they've done a lot for the sport and deserve respect from teams and fans alike.

#29 iotar

iotar
  • Member

  • 2,153 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 30 June 2012 - 15:16

Since when team's threads are purely "technical" threads? It's not F1technical with conundrums like :
Is this car longer? No it's just a different camera angle.
Is this a winglet/hole? No it's just a shadow. It's always a shadow.
Is this fan hiding something? No it's just a fan, for cooling.

What about pitstops, strategy, driver's performance relative to strategy? How team performs at different tracks, I mean the car can be the same. It's not like cars are remote controlled. What about penalties?

You start a thread with not a single point or thought, just by throwing two unrelated quotes. Hamilton's from last season (does it even belong here? Isn't it about 2012?) and Marko's random rambling. What exactly is YOUR point on whatever the subject is?

#30 Aieljose

Aieljose
  • Member

  • 676 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 30 June 2012 - 15:35

You don't want to debate it, you just want to comment :drunk: .

'JUST a drinks company' would be disparaging.

'Not a manufacturer they are a drinks company' simply means they are not primarily a racing organisation.

They are an an advertising vehicle, dependent on funding from one one guy; and a guy who doesn't actually attend many races. They may eventually become a racing organisation like Williams or McLaren, or they may not.

But it seems clear Bernie and the FIA want to encourage them into the fold. The new deal probably guarantees they can find a buyer of some kind after Dietrich, while Newey and Charlie obviously have their own deal going.

Undersquare to the rescue! Im not sure what part of " i don't care to debate this" you don't understand but i'll say it again. I don't care to debate this. If you want to believe he was just pointing out they are not manufactures then so be it. I think it's obvious a little more is implied.

#31 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 30 June 2012 - 16:00

Undersquare to the rescue! Im not sure what part of " i don't care to debate this" you don't understand but i'll say it again. I don't care to debate this. If you want to believe he was just pointing out they are not manufactures then so be it. I think it's obvious a little more is implied.

Now cmon, that IS debating :D

It wasn't so much I 'don't understand' as 'don't believe for a second'...

#32 BullHead

BullHead
  • Member

  • 6,719 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 30 June 2012 - 16:07

At the end of the day Red Bull Racing are a team who have built and run a successful formula one car. Exactly what sort of corporate money is behind it doesn't really matter. This is the team that Jackie Stewart started.

#33 F1ultimate

F1ultimate
  • Member

  • 2,861 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 16:41

Energy drinks, petrol or tobacco sponsorship don't taint teams achievements. Hell Mclaren are sponsored by Lucazode now.

#34 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 30 June 2012 - 16:49

Energy drinks, petrol or tobacco sponsorship don't taint teams achievements. Hell Mclaren are sponsored by Lucazode now.

For me tobacco sponsorship, when all but one team are denied it, certainly does taint a team's achievements. It's an unfair advantage and a bad thing to be promoting.

Red Bull are fine, afaic, in terms of their funding. I do downgrade their achievement a little because some of their performance does constantly seem to stem from running outside the rules for some races, then notching it back but keeping the points. But that's more the FIA to blame than Red Bull.

#35 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 6,626 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 16:53

You don't want to debate it, you just want to comment :drunk: .

'JUST a drinks company' would be disparaging.

'Not a manufacturer they are a drinks company' simply means they are not primarily a racing organisation.


Red Bull Racing is primarily a racing organization. They do not make drinks. Their only business is racing.

This is similar to McLaren's part ownership by the middle eastern entity that is not in the car manufacturing business.

They are an an advertising vehicle,


RBR is a money making concern. They earned the most purse money in F1 the last two seasons. Advertising vehicles are cost or extremely low income items, not money making cash cows.

dependent on funding from one one guy; and a guy who doesn't actually attend many races.


Do you have evidence for that statement? As a matter of fact, we do know that sponsors contribute to RBR. Infiniti (the car manufacturer) does not get to plaster their insignia on the back of the RBR car for free.

They may eventually become a racing organisation like Williams or McLaren, or they may not.


They may remain in F1 or not; is that what you mean? Because RBR is only a racing organization. In addition, Red Bull KTM is only a racing organization - which is distinct from Red Bull sponsorship of drivers like Raikkonen or riders like Pedrosa or Stewart.

Or perhaps you are talking about the parent company? That one day they will not sell drinks but instead manufactur cars full time? Why would they do that? General motors did not stop selling cars to go into the kitchen electronics or telephone business (among others) - you just start a new subsidiary or division or other entity type under the company umbrella. That is what Red Bull has done with RBR. Which is separate from Red Bull Satallite or Severus TV. All under the umbrella of RB, but quite distinct lines of business.

It would sound quite silly to say "Severus TV is a drinks company" the same goes for Red Bull Racing.

But it seems clear Bernie and the FIA want to encourage them into the fold. The new deal probably guarantees they can find a buyer of some kind after Dietrich, while Newey and Charlie obviously have their own deal going.


Why would Bernie and the FIA discourage constructor teams that make it in F1? They are not an upstart or start up company as some have tried to say. They took over established teams and crew, factories and equipment. They built on a F1 foundation. Should they be disdained or should we be gratified that companies are still willing to invest so much money into the sport we love and keep it viable? Virgin was airline, telephony, space travel, etc., not primarily a car manufacturer, but Virgin Racing was a 100% dedicated racing organization.

I do downgrade their achievement a little because some of their performance does constantly seem to stem from running outside the rules for some races, then notching it back but keeping the points. But that's more the FIA to blame than Red Bull.


It is FIA to blame and you downgrade RBR anyway? How is that fair? Perhaps I am reading too much into your statement, but it appears as if you are trying to intimate that RBR are the only innovative team that has ever had its innovations disapproved after approval. That is simply not true.

Edited by bourbon, 30 June 2012 - 17:04.


#36 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 30 June 2012 - 18:20

Red Bull Racing is primarily a racing organization. They do not make drinks. Their only business is racing.

This is similar to McLaren's part ownership by the middle eastern entity that is not in the car manufacturing business.

RBR is a money making concern. They earned the most purse money in F1 the last two seasons. Advertising vehicles are cost or extremely low income items, not money making cash cows.

Do you have evidence for that statement? As a matter of fact, we do know that sponsors contribute to RBR. Infiniti (the car manufacturer) does not get to plaster their insignia on the back of the RBR car for free.

They may remain in F1 or not; is that what you mean? Because RBR is only a racing organization. In addition, Red Bull KTM is only a racing organization - which is distinct from Red Bull sponsorship of drivers like Raikkonen or riders like Pedrosa or Stewart.

Or perhaps you are talking about the parent company? That one day they will not sell drinks but instead manufactur cars full time? Why would they do that? General motors did not stop selling cars to go into the kitchen electronics or telephone business (among others) - you just start a new subsidiary or division or other entity type under the company umbrella. That is what Red Bull has done with RBR. Which is separate from Red Bull Satallite or Severus TV. All under the umbrella of RB, but quite distinct lines of business.

It would sound quite silly to say "Severus TV is a drinks company" the same goes for Red Bull Racing.

Why would Bernie and the FIA discourage constructor teams that make it in F1? They are not an upstart or start up company as some have tried to say. They took over established teams and crew, factories and equipment. They built on a F1 foundation. Should they be disdained or should we be gratified that companies are still willing to invest so much money into the sport we love and keep it viable? Virgin was airline, telephony, space travel, etc., not primarily a car manufacturer, but Virgin Racing was a 100% dedicated racing organization.

It is FIA to blame and you downgrade RBR anyway? How is that fair? Perhaps I am reading too much into your statement, but it appears as if you are trying to intimate that RBR are the only innovative team that has ever had its innovations disapproved after approval. That is simply not true.

Red Bull Racing is owned by Dietrich and is there to advertise his drinks. That is different from an organisation that exists to race and goes out looking for sponsorship so they can pursue their expensive passion. DM pumps a LOT of money in. It's money he makes with an unhealthy expensive drink that he copied lock stock and logo from someone else, then has promoted brilliantly.

I downgrade their achievements al little because some of it is achieved with excellence and some with bending the rules, which the FIA allows them to do. So to the extent that they have been allowed to win points with moving aero parts, hinged floors, aero suspension and all the rest of it it does make it a bit less impressive.

Though I do admire the team and Newey and the way they go about it. I hope Lewis goes there and works with Newey, after you and Sebi have moved on to Ferrari :D .

#37 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 6,626 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 18:36

Red Bull Racing is owned by Dietrich and is there to advertise his drinks. That is different from an organisation that exists to race and goes out looking for sponsorship so they can pursue their expensive passion. DM pumps a LOT of money in. It's money he makes with an unhealthy expensive drink that he copied lock stock and logo from someone else, then has promoted brilliantly.

I downgrade their achievements al little because some of it is achieved with excellence and some with bending the rules, which the FIA allows them to do. So to the extent that they have been allowed to win points with moving aero parts, hinged floors, aero suspension and all the rest of it it does make it a bit less impressive.

Though I do admire the team and Newey and the way they go about it. I hope Lewis goes there and works with Newey, after you and Sebi have moved on to Ferrari :D .


Well your statements appear contradictory, so I would need further explanation to understand how you conclude that you admire a team you spend two paragraphs degrading.

Since you didn't address the points I raised regarding RBR (as opposed to RB), I don't really have a further response. I guess we just agree to disagree.

Edited by bourbon, 30 June 2012 - 18:45.


#38 fed up

fed up
  • Member

  • 1,957 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 30 June 2012 - 18:56

I downgrade their achievements al little because some of it is achieved with excellence and some with bending the rules, which the FIA allows them to do. So to the extent that they have been allowed to win points with moving aero parts, hinged floors, aero suspension and all the rest of it it does make it a bit less impressive.

Though I do admire the team and Newey and the way they go about it. I hope Lewis goes there and works with Newey, after you and Sebi have moved on to Ferrari :D .


This. Verbatim :up:

Brawn, the illustrious Brawn, got away with one novel invention in recent times and secured a WCC/WDC.

The amount of novel inventions the RBR has had since 2009 is just mind boggling. For Marko to admit that they told Vettel to slow down is just plain unbelievable - where are they getting this pace from? the cars are so tightly bunched so my guess is they're cheating.

Vettel can win 8 wdc's in the RBR and he won't be rated - if he went to Ferrari and won 1 maybe 2 that would convince me.


#39 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 30 June 2012 - 20:01

Well your statements appear contradictory, so I would need further explanation to understand how you conclude that you admire a team you spend two paragraphs degrading.

Since you didn't address the points I raised regarding RBR (as opposed to RB), I don't really have a further response. I guess we just agree to disagree.

Yeah OK, my view of them IS a bit contradictory. I admire them in some ways and not in others. I wish the FIA were stricter with them. I'll probably admire them more and more the longer they stay in the sport.

Advertisement

#40 ayali

ayali
  • Member

  • 729 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 30 June 2012 - 20:03

I downgrade their achievements al little because some of it is achieved with excellence and some with bending the rules, which the FIA allows them to do.


Vettel can win 8 wdc's in the RBR and he won't be rated - if he went to Ferrari and won 1 maybe 2 that would convince me.

lol fantastic but I doubt Red Bull or Sebastian will lose any sleep about a couple of biased fans on a bb who don't rate their achievements.

Wins are in the books, records are in the books and the money is in the bank that's all that matters

:cool:

#41 olliek88

olliek88
  • Member

  • 4,048 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 20:21

The sun is hot, the sky is blue & Helmut has a controversial opinion. Whats new?

#42 ayali

ayali
  • Member

  • 729 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 30 June 2012 - 20:34

The sun is hot, the sky is blue & Helmut has a controversial opinion. Whats new?

Can't see what is so controversial about Marko's opinions in that article

:cool:

#43 puxanando

puxanando
  • Member

  • 3,538 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 20:34

The sun is hot, the sky is blue & Helmut has a controversial opinion. Whats new?


NOTHING! Only that RBR is losing credit and fans all over the WEB....... :smoking:


#44 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 03 July 2012 - 08:09

NOTHING! Only that RBR is losing credit and fans all over the WEB....... :smoking:


:rotfl: