30 replies to this topic

[Bouleman]

Like?
Dislike?
Don't care?...

Why?

My opinion: Don't like.
Why: He talks too much.

How about you?

[Gary Grant]

I've mentioned my reasons for disliking Lauda many times before so I'll just cut and paste:-

Roger Williamson burned to death in the 1973 Dutch GP. After the race, Niki was asked why he didn't stop to try to help Williamson his reply was 'I am paid to race. Not to stop'. Tactful, eh? The excuse that he did not think anyone was in the car is also incorrect - Niki knew full well what was going on.

Niki never thanked the drivers who stopped and saved him from being roasted alive at the 'Ring.

When Gunnar Nilsson was dying of cancer Niki agreed to turn up at a fundraiser for his charity then, without warning - and despite being the 'star attraction' - didn't show. Reason: couldn't be bothered.

I don't dispute his bravery after 1976 and I don't mind one or two outspoken comments to liven up F1 but I don't think any of the above is forgivable, really.

[Dan_G]

I cant stand the guy. He needs to spend less time getting his name in the papers and more time helping Rahal run an F1 team. Although in all honesty, my first choice would be for Ford to send him packing. Especially after this last incident with Burti. If their original intent was to keep Burti all year, then Lauda should not have said in the press that Burti would be replaced by Pedro for 2002. He should also not have said just days later that he expected Burti to finish the season with Jag, and he wouldnt be replaced. Now the latest info seems to indicate that much of the decision to move to Prost was Burti's, and I say good for him!! if I were Burti I would have made every effort to get the hell out of the way of Lauda, too.

[Rainbowtrout]

If someone put him at Jaguar they must of received good feedback about him.

[Gemini]

I was intending to vote: "don't care" but Gary's post made me change my mind to "dislike".

I recently saw Williamson's crash on video. This was really disturbing experience. Maybe that's why I can't ignore Lauda's quote on that one.

[Holy Driver]

Roger Williamson burned to death in the 1973 Dutch GP. After the race, Niki was asked why he didn't stop to try to help Williamson his reply was 'I am paid to race. Not to stop'. Tactful, eh? The excuse that he did not think anyone was in the car is also incorrect - Niki knew full well what was going on.

Due to an interview with Lauda I heard, this was by far not his immediate answer. He did not realise what was going on. Just when the interviewer keeped asking the same question again and again and again, he finally kind of lost his nerve and made this statement. Misquoted or not, he regards this as a bad mistake.

Niki never thanked the drivers who stopped and saved him from being roasted alive at the 'Ring.

"never" is not true at all, "too late" is, nevertheless, correct: Due to an interview with Arturo Merzario I heard, Lauda tried to thank him a few months later, including a watch as present, gaining rather harsh (and IMO justified) criticism by Merzario for not showing up at an appropiate time. Years later, when they incidentally met, Lauda spontaneously introduced Merzario to everyone as the saver of his life, and Merzario gained the impression that Lauda had changed a lot over the years.

Surely, he´s not as holy as the St. Nikolaus (i.e. Santa Claus, by the way ...) he´s named after, but I don´t think he´s THAT bad.

[Runner]

Originally posted by Rainbowtrout
If someone put him at Jaguar they must of received good feedback about him.

Reitzle hired him for the following reasons:

1. A well known name which Reitzle feels is attractive to the German speaking market where he is trying to sell cars.

2. Lauda needed a job and a substantial income badly after his little airline went bankrupt and Lauda lost, for all intents and purposes, all his money. Contrary to popular reports he did not sell Lauda Air - it was taken over by the majority stockholder (Austrian Air) because he couldn't run it. Austrian Airlines then bought out (on their terms) the minority shares that he still owned. In the airline business, Lauda was regarded as a stupid cowboy.

3. In corporate Ford, Lauda is Reitzle's man and Reitzle wants to make sure that the F1 operation (including Cosworth and Pi) stays under his control. He's after Jac's job. Nasser's record with F1 (hiring Irvine, the PR disaster last year - which was the brainstorm of Jonathan Browning - one of Nasser's "brand image managers") has been a a disaster and Reitzle wants to show that he can do a better job than Jac.

4. There is no evidence to suggest that Lauda knows how to run an F1 team. On the other hand, there is a great deal of evidence, based on his "consultant" job at Ferrari to suggest that he doesn't know how to run an F1 team.

[Williams]

Anyone interested in more Lauda-bashing can find it all in the Lauda should ban himself thread.;)

[Runner]

Originally posted by Williams
Anyone interested in more Lauda-bashing can find it all in theLauda should ban himself thread.

We're not bashing, we're telling it like it is. Sort of like taking a picture of a very ugly person - you can't blame the camera.

[Williams]

Hey, have fun !

[AT-LAW]

Niki Lauda was the first driver I ever supported. I was nine years old when he suffered the accident and lost the WDC for just one point, and I felt very angry with James Hunt.
My opinnion about the driver has biased completely my perception of the manager -I still like him.

[Runner]

Originally posted by AT-LAW
Niki Lauda was the first driver I ever supported. I was nine years old when he suffered the accident and lost the WDC for just one point, and I felt very angry with James Hunt.
My opinnion about the driver has biased completely my perception of the manager -I still like him.

No one has questioned his ability as a driver. I saw him with raw and bleeding skin at the Glen after the accident in "76. No one questions that. But that doesn't change the fact that he is a totally distasteful individual. A nasty man who makes a great deal of noise with very little to show for it off the track. You have to learn to separate the two.

Maybe what you should be saying is that "My opinion about the driver has completely blinded me to his abilities as a manager."?

;)

[AT-LAW]

Sorry, I thought it was quite clear: I loved the driver, and still like the manager, but I admit that I can´t be objective with the guy. My fault, that´s all.
BTW, shouldn´t he get some credit for the way he has handled the Burti-PDLR affaire? Pretty good, IMO.

[Zawed]

Don't like him as a person, though I do admire him for what he achieved as a driver. Seems lack a few people skills, and I doubt his "consultancy" role at Ferrari contributed much to their success. It seems to me that Ford took him on at Jaguar more for his face/profile than anything else.

[Indian Chief]

Originally posted by Gary Grant
Roger Williamson burned to death in the 1973 Dutch GP. After the race, Niki was asked why he didn't stop to try to helpWilliamson his reply was 'I am paid to race. Not to stop' Tactful, eh? The excuse that he did not think anyone was in the car is also incorrect - Niki knew full well what was going on.

How do you know that Lauda knew that Williamson was in the car??? NO OTHER DRIVER stopped at the scene because nobody except David Purley saw it happen. This was before the radio became common in F1. All the drivers assumed that it was Purley who was trying to push his own car right-side up!

Originally Posted by Runner
In the airline business, Lauda was regarded as a stupid cowboy.

Right. A stupid cowboy who setup Austria's second largest Airline company. I wish I could be a "stupid cowboy" millionaire too.

The Lauda bashing on this BB is ridiculous. It isn't like he organises a press conference after evry race and gives his views on everything. He is a very famous F1 personality and reporters often ask him about his views on matters in F1. WHat do you think he should do in that situation?

[Runner]

Originally posted by Indian Chief


Right. A stupid cowboy who setup Austria's second largest Airline company. I wish I could be a "stupid cowboy" millionaire too.

The "stupid cowboy" quote came from an upper management type with a major aircraft firm who dealt with Lauda for several years. Frankly, I think he is, in all probability, in a better position to evaluate Lauda's position within the air transportion industry than you are.

With apologies to any Austrian posters, I don't think that "Austria's second largest Airline company" is anything to write home about.

Last year an auditors report estimated an operating loss of $67 million for Lauda Air. This was followed by a second auditor's report critical of Lauda Air's management and charges of financial irregularities by Austrian Airlines, Lauda Airs largest stock holder. Exit Lauda.

The airline business is tough and lots of people don't survive. But there does seem to be a good deal of evidence that Lauda's "acirimonious and bitterly personalized" relationship with Austrian Airlines executives certainly hastened the end of Lauda Air.

[Bex37]

In his current position, he is just trying to "play the media" like the big boys. Problem is, he is extremely poor at it. Further, there is not much point when you have little chance of even gaining points.

I voted, "dont care". He can keep making misguided statements as long as he wants; it only makes him look stupid. This is an interesting part of F1 for mine. There is no way that I would take most of his comments seriously, though.

[Gary Grant]

How do you know that Lauda knew that Williamson was in the car??? NO OTHER DRIVER stopped at the scene because nobody except David Purley saw it happen. This was before the radio became common in F1. All the drivers assumed that it was Purley who was trying to push his own car right-side up!

This is a commonly-believed myth. Think about it - who on earth would try to push their own blazing car the right way up, especially in the days when fires could really catch hold? (as this one sadly did). Jackie Stewart knew it was not Purley's car - his thoughts were that the people in charge of the race would know best how to handle the situation. These sentiments were echoed by many of the drivers who drove past the scene. Lauda has never claimed that he thought it was Purley's car - in fact, his reply gives entirely the opposite impression.

Also, the other two points I made remain valid. Harald ertl went to his grave without a word of thanks from 'The Rat'. The man cares only for himself.

[Lamont]

I've got a lot of respect for his driving abilities, I just don't care for a lot of the stuff he spouts off these days.

[Melbourne Park]

To criticise Lauda for his airline skills and is ignorant of what's happening in the airline industry. To criticise him for how he got on with the airline partners is so shallow as to be meaningless. One could just as easily praise him for that behaviour, if you knew the circumstances.

Everybody should leave the airline issues alone, and just concentrate on his F1 related deeds. For those who get their jollies out of character assasination, they'd be best to go to a psychiatrist.

There are several people on this site who criticise other drivers, as being hopeless, stupid, **** for brains etc etc. Most of those are really quite funny as being so inflammatory that they cannot be taken seriously. So they are OK, its all part of the fun.

But to attack people about their after F1 life is outrageous I think. As to Lauda's air businesses, I find some comments to be ignorant about business. Because this is real stuff, it then gets irritating and then the site and we all get hurt.

I'd bet that with the failure of Ford to perform, should they do well two years down the track, there'll be a body of people who will say Lauda shouldn't get any praise. That's fine, it would be part of our fun.

But please could we leave the other stuff alone?

[JPMCrew]

I never liked Lauda for the exact same reasons that Gary Grant posted.

Somebody did quote in another thread a paragraph from Lauda's autobiography where he thanked the people who saved his life.

[Runner]

Originally posted by Melbourne Park
To criticize Lauda for his airline skills and is ignorant of what's happening in the airline industry. To criticize him for how he got on with the airline partners is so shallow as to be meaningless. One could just as easily praise him for that behavior, if you knew the circumstances.

Since Lauda's abilities to run a business (his airline) are used to justify his employment with Ford/Jaguar, how successfully he ran that business is extremely pertinent to the discussion. The fact that he was unable to interface with the largest stockholder of his business in a mature and constructive manner (which might have saved his airline) does not bode well for the future.

Since he has been hired as a manager, not as a driver, his management skills (and that includes the ability to interface with other people and the ability to budget money) are very much open for debate in this forum.

[Melbourne Park]

Runner, you clearly know little about business. But Ford do. I'll leave it with them.

[Runner]

Originally posted by Melbourne Park
Runner, you clearly know little about business. But Ford do. I'll leave it with them.

Is that the best you can come up with?

[GerhardP]

As I am German I see Lauda talking in Austrian and German TV very often and just think that he has a very good understanding of F1 and is very realistic and rational about it, but that he's a crampy and arrogant old... in a personal point of view.

[GerhardP]

Originally posted by Gary Grant
I've mentioned my reasons for disliking Lauda many times before so I'll just cut and paste:-
...he never thanked the drivers who saved his life...

I don't dispute his bravery after 1976 and I don't mind one or two outspoken comments to liven up F1 but I don't think any of the above is forgivable, really.

Gary, although I think he never really gave them the respect they deserved for having risked their own lives to help him out of his burning Ferrari, I remember that he met Arturo Merzario the following year at Monte Carlo and gave him his Pole Position gold watch and thanked him for having saved his life...

[Melbourne Park]

Originally posted by Runner
Is that the best you can come up with?

Runner, we see to have crossed a little as I just answered your issues about Ford CEO Nasser. Now I’ve read this site and you’ve said that “is that all you can come up with”, I will come up with something, because I am getting annoyed . Please forgive any poor grammar issues that may arise but I’ll get it done right now.

Concerning the airline, Lauda was always crazy to take on the big boys in that cut throat and cyclical business. Many times he was told to be crazy to try to fight the big boys. The reason he came back to Grand Prix racing to drive and win for McLaren was because Ron Dennis offered him a heap of money to come back, and Lauda needed it for his drastically under funded - if likely to be broke - airline. One can criticise his business acumen for venturing into that business, but to survive in it for 15 odd years was an incredible achievement. Runner on the business side of things give me your GMAT and I can address at that level.

About the criticisms of Lauda for his lack of apologies to those who assisted him in his severe crash at the Nürburgring in Germany in the late 1970’s. What does one expect when one saves a life? To be taken to your house for the weekend? A thank you card? 10% of your life’s income? A beer in your favourite pub? Being taken to the Super Bowl? Life long friendship? Adoration and gratification in front of the world media? A gold watch?

Granted Lauda did say thank you. There is another side to this however. Its relevent to recall that the Ring was a uniquely and notoriously dangerous track. It took I think over 7 minutes to drive in an F1 car around it. Modern road sports cars I don’t think can break 8 minutes on today’s track. An ambulance could take 20 minutes back then to get to a car. The track’s length made it impossible to get rescue equipment to accidents promptly. The drivers knew this. At other tracks, there were skilled rescue teams who could get to an accident quickly. But not at the Ring. Drivers were expected to help each other there. It was mandatory. It was expected at the Ring.

Earlier in the 70’s the race switched for a year I guess to Hockenheim as they worked on safety fences etc. on the northern section because the F1 drivers refused to race there. A few years after the work was done the bikers boycotted the same northern section and the F1 guys again a few years after the safety efforts on the northern section complained about it again.

When Lauda crashed in the northern section, he suddenly speared off the track, similarly to the way Senna did. Many think that both had a steering column failure. The car bounced off the safety rail and apparently without steering Lauda “drove” it back onto the track. The fire happened because another car then piled into Lauda, no one was rasing flags and Lauda’s car did not turn away as could have been expected. The driver piled into Lauda, hence the fire.

Of all the people that Lauda thanked: the doctors who helped him; the nurses; his family; the famous priest who gave him the last rights that he heard, which saw his metabolism change and him start to recover; the ambulance guys, the guys who stopped and helped him (the same ones who almost killed him), of all those people, I would rate the F1 drivers as the least necessary to thank.

My father flew a Typhoon in WWII, finishing his flying when the war ended. He was the only member not to be shot down and he uniquely in his squadron completed complete a full tour mission. He told a pilot after his third mission that there had been no flack. He was told next time he felt that, to look around at the tail of his aircraft. So on his fourth mission, he did so. His entire tale was surrounded by concentrated flack. He then radically pulled out . He says that without that advice, he would be dead. I asked him if he thanked the guy for the advice. He was quizzical, and he said of course not. Those guys had what has been referred to as the “right stuff”. Where thank you is not part of the game. A game that at that time was more dangerous than now. Bruce McLaren, Piers Courage, Jochen Rindt, Pedro Rodriguez, Joe Bonnier, Siffert , Roger Williamson, Peter Revson, Mark Donohue, Tony Brise, Tom Price, Ronnie Peterson, Gunnar Nilsson and I’ve left some F1 guys out. And at the Ring unlike other tracks, it was necessary for the drivers to assist. It was mandatory to help at the Ring.

The Ring‘s last race was when Lauda smashed and lost his almost certain world championship. After the Ring, all F1 safety work was supposed to be handled by the track side officials.

Further on Lauda, you can’t just pick out single events and use them as proof of anything with Lauda. The reason why instances of behaviour don’t describe Lauda is because he is a complete enigma. It’s the various contradictions that make him so curious, and unique in F1. For instance he was from a rich family, yet he defied his parents and went racing. Secondly he wasn’t very good at racing so he borrowed money, his trivial wins barely kept his loans at bay. The securities for his increasing loans were based on promises that his family may not have supported, so they were quite posably false promises I remember . He tried hill climbs, then I think F2 and then F3. The odd success kept him going and he got more loans to buy a drive in F1. He almost defaulted on numerous occasions and just as it got very serious someone he would earn some racing money. Some saw talent in him and he had a person who became his manager and he supported Lauda. He then got enough to cover his borrowings. Then someone at Ferrari liked something about him and Lauda joined them.

Was he self made man, or did he just buy his way in? Was he talented, or was it his money? Was he cunning or not? Was he scared or brave? Was he selfish and uncaring or just brutally honest? Was he stupid or clever?

I don’t really care, but its tough to answer because he’s full of contradictions. He did though pay his way, and he did at times drive fast, but you could argue various ways. He also was brilliant and hard working at times, and at other times indifferent. He was a great developer yet he would he didn’t try at all when the car was poor.

As to his mouthing off, that’s true and many have thought him crazy to do so. It may be annoying, and crazy, but he’s got guts.

For instance, when the his 767 crashed, he flew to Asia and inspected the damage. I recall that he found damaged parts of the plane that indicated to his technical mind reverse thruster failure. He flew to Europe and duplicated the incident. He then went to the world media and said that it was Boing’s fault, the reverse thruster set up design was duplicable and Boing’s fault not his airlines.

Blow Boings lawyers, blow his managers, he just spoke what he thought. That may be crazy, and people may hate it, but its Lauda.

Lauda also used to mouth off against Enzo Ferrari. In fact he used to just walk in and they would have shouting matches. Despite this, he was kept on at Ferrari, and they had great drivers. And Enzo was bitter that lauda pulled out of the wet Japanese Grand prix, because if Lauda had of toured around, Ferrari would have beaten james hunt's McLaren in the WDC. I guess Enzo saw Lauda as being selfish, a call others rightly accuse him of. However on this occassion his eyes did not see properly in wet conditions...

Lauda certainly isn’t like any of my close friends. But I love following his efforts. His enigmatic behaviour is fascinating, and he’s enriched the F1 scene enormously. I think its good that he’s at Jaguar, not because he may or may not help the team, but because its going to be more fun to watch him try like hell and shoot straight, rather than guess at the machinations of modern cunning business and psychologically savvy types that Ford might put in if – should I say when - Lauda fails.

[Gary Grant]

Melbourne Park,
I'm afraid that I have to take you to task over your comments. Calling the drivers who pulled him from the car the last people he should thank is an odd assertion. Doctors and nurses (and I might know a thing about this...) are merely doing their job - treating someone for burns involves no personal risk on their part, and once fluid regimens are started, whether the patient recovers is largely out of their hands. The priest read Lauda the last rites and this (supposedly) inspired Lauda's recovery - but this was not due to any conscious effort on the part of the priest to aid recovery, so why does he deserve thanks? Similarly, it would be a very poor family indeed who did not support a relative in a near-death experience. In effect, they too were just doing what was expected of them.

However, Ertl, Edwards, Lunger, Merzario and the track marshals who aided with fire extinguishers risked their own lives to save him - and for what gain? Without their bravery Lauda would be dead. Period. Who else, who Lauda apparently had more cause to thank, could we say that about?

To say that there was an unwritten rule among the drivers that they would rescue each other at the 'Ring because all the other circuits had skilled rescue teams, is also wrong. As you correctly point out, this was the seventies - a different era. Where were the 'skilled rescue teams' when Courage crashed in 1970 (Zandvoort), when Siffert crashed in 1971 (Brands Hatch) , when Williamson crashed in 1973 (Zandvoort) , when Regazzoni crashed in Argentina (without Hailwood's actions he too would have died), and even when Ickx and Oliver crashed in Jarama? As the Pryce accident would tragically prove one year on, effective, safe marshalling and rescue facilities did not exist anywhere on the Grand Prix calendar. Therefore, the Ring was not really much different to the other tracks, for all the drivers' protests - and I don't recall the unwritten rule of drivers helping one another saving Courage, Siffert or Williamson. Finally, in 1978, who pulled Peterson from his burning car? Not the supposed 'skilled rescue teams', but his fellow drivers - and this was at the startline at Monza.

There is, as you correctly point out, no set reward for saving someone's life, but saying thank you is not too much to ask - in fact, it is only human. F1, for all its inherent dangers in the 70s, was not war - it was still merely what it ahs always been - a sport. Much though we admire GP racers, to cast them as heroic gladiators on a par with those who fought in Wars (including your father) denigrates the achievements of those who would fight and die for a just cause in which they believed. Niki Lauda was a sportsman whose life was saved by the bravery of five individuals, and yet you find reasons for him not to say so much as 'thankyou'? He certainly never thanked Edwards or Ertl, and if he did thank Merzario, why did he leave it one whole year, then turn up late when he did (doing more important things, one supposes)?

There is of course, another story about Niki I haven't mentioned. Perhaps someone can similarly find excuses for him about this one? After the Peterson fatal accident, Niki's voice rang loudest - 'Ban Patrese - it was his fault'. Niki, the two-time World Champion and influential member of the GPDA had in effect set up a 'kangaroo court' which almost destroyed the Italian's career. Subsequent TV and photographic evidence, of course, exonerated Patrese. Call me cynical, but I feel that Niki's own trial, judgement and execution (without evidence) of RP had a lot to do run-ins he had had with the Italian in previous races....

I have nothing against you personally, Melbourne Park - you are clearly an intelligent and articulate poster, but I'm afraid that Niki Lauda has always struck me as one of the most distasteful characters to ever exist in F1 (worse even, then the much-vilified Didier Pironi, IMO) and no amount of 'F1-enhancing comments' or 'enigmatic behaviour' on his part will change that.

[Melbourne Park]

Gary,

Thanks for your post and your kind criticisms.

Firstly, wow, I feel silly, wondering why the heck am I here defending someone I couldn't care less about? Only because I got annoyed about foolish and insincere attacks on Lauda’s business capabilities. These were based basically on a premises that Lauda must be bad at business because his airline went broke .

Now I’ve got sucked into a false issue about him not saying thank you, which I had not been aware of. But that’s no surprise because he did say thank you after all, as has been evidenced by other people. What a waste of time!

As to the issue of importance of saying thank you, I suspect you and I might have a cultural difference over its importance. Our traditions of bravery have always been coupled with understatement. Our better heroes have been humble, they’ve not done it for praise, ore expected it after the event. They’ve thought praise doesn’t matter, it’s the deed that matters. The saving’s the achievement. The fact that those who did save Lauda got world publicity was certainly not why they saved Lauda. In fact I’d have thought that there was a life to save was why they did it, regardless of who it was. But then I could be wrong. I guess that in different cultural and age groups that’s not the case. There must be special forms and processes of thank you required. From my own perspective, if I was hauled out of a fiery trap, I would hope that I’d do something that would have an appropriately meaningful form gratitude.

You said that Ertl, Edwards, Lunger, Merzario and the track marshals who aided with fire extinguishers risked their own lives to save him - and for what gain? I would have thought the gain was saving a life. Period. Same goes for the paid ones.

The name Lunger rings a bell. Was he the one who drove into Lauda? I will say again what others have said, (I don’t know what in fact happened), that Lauda HAD thanked those who helped him. So if Lauda HAD thanked those, is it right to criticise him for not thanking them, when he did thank them? If thanking is so important, then why criticise him when he did say thanks. Especially if its so important, when he did say thanks.

I don’t recall at the time any issue about thanking or the lack of it. At the time there was the issue of the bravery of I think Merzario for risking his life to save Lauda. Then there was criticism of the Ring. Then the various medical stories. The courage to drive again and get points, what 6 weeks later. Then Enzo’s fury for Lauda pulling out after only two wet laps I think. How could someone who drove 6 weeks later, pull out in the wet after just two laps? Another contradiction. I suppose the whole incident has increased the aura, both good and bad and unknown, that surrounds Lauda.

I have never read anything said about a lack of Lauda thanking his saviour. But then I never read anything about him saying thank you. I don’t recall reading any thank you’s for that matter. Or for that matter from the Ferrari team. Not from his family. Not from his manager either. I suppose they all stand condemned for not saying thank you.

On not having to thank people because they are professionals, I agree thanks when your getting paid is not mandatory. Once again I guess it depends on the culture. Normally if a professional does something outstanding, it becomes recognised by if not the public, by ones professional peers, be that work mates or by professional bodies. If Lauda was disliked by his peers, maybe that’s a form of condemnation. If he was thought a poor driver and team member, that’s real professional condemnation.

On the Ring, it was ackowledged for years as the most dangerous European track. That’s why the bikers wouldn’t drive on it. And why they closed it for a year (or two years? I forget…). I remember were that the Ring was notoriously dangerous and after efforts to make it safer the track was banned for ever more.

As for him being distasteful etc., I don’t know about that stuff. But without stories about who did not like him, and why, I don’t count them. its just fan gossip or people mouthing hate because they get some sort of kick out of it. So I discount it if it does not make sense to me. I don't know about Lauda. I haven't even read a book on him, or one of his books. I've only viewed him from a very great distance, and looked at his achievements as they got reported and read the odd article. I suppose the other books etc I've read where he was mentioned would not have gone out of their way to criticise him anyway. I have heard about people having to pay for his signature though. I also recall his reputation for being truthful, even if what he said was hurtful. End of the day, who cares? He’s a legend, and there are different views about him.

[Runner]

Originally posted by Melbourne Park
I got annoyed about foolish and insincere attacks on Lauda’s business capabilities. These were based basically on a premises that Lauda must be bad at business because his airline went broke .

Sounds like a reasonable assumption to me.

[Melbourne Park]

Since Runner you didn't send me your GMAT, I am not surprised...