Being Valentino Rossi...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mylexicon @ Dec 22 2007, 02:07 AM) [snapback]105033[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Here's the gig. The manufacturers compete, they agree to pay all expenses to get to the events they don't get money from the events. The manufacturers get free advertising and a place to develop their future products. The riders are contract employees of the manufacturers and so are the tire companies.

Dorna/FIM aren't even in a contract with the tire manufacturers. The manufacturers have to get FIM approval to supply, that's about it.

The tire companies don't work for Dorna, neither do the manufacturers. If Dorna gives specific instructions to the manufacturers or the manufacturers contract laborers, those people should be considered employees of Dorna. Unpaid employees are called slaves.

If you want to have tires built by slaves, then yes, Dorna should be allowed to tell B-stone what teams to supply.


I'm afraid you are living in 1970 still. Racing is a business nowadays, in the sense that either a profit is made out of racing, by each team/company involved, or these teams/companies stop racing. It is not an open-end investment made for a marketing return any more! It is also that, of course, but they make a profit while doing their publicity.

HRC came into existence for that purpose... Ducati Corse also. These companies are separated from the mother factories Honda and Ducati and have to make a profit each year on their own just by racing, by getting sponsors, by selling kits to satellite teams, etc. etc.

So Bridgestone Racing also have to make a profit by selling race tyres to teams and manufacturers. Simple. As suppliers, they should supply all those who choose their goods and they should be happy if more ask for them (which means they are being successful).

But if they enter into hush-hush deals with some manufacturers only and refuse to supply others with obvious excuses like the 'insufficient capacity', well, then Ezpeleta has all right to threaten a control tyre.

(wake up call)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(J4rn0 @ Dec 22 2007, 09:42 AM) [snapback]105052[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I'm afraid you are living in 1970 still. Racing is a business nowadays, in the sense that either a profit is made out of racing, by each team/company involved, or these teams/companies stop racing. It is not an open-end investment made for a marketing return any more! It is also that, of course, but they make a profit while doing their publicity.

But if they enter into hush-hush deals with some manufacturers only and refuse to supply others with obvious excuses like the 'insufficient capacity', well, then Ezpeleta has all right to threaten a control tyre.

(wake up call)


These two things cannot be true simultaneously. If B-stone are making a profit supplying tires, then they have no problem supplying the entire grid because they know they will get return on their investment. Obviously, B-stone is losing money supplying tires, because racing is still, and always will be glorified advertising.

If B-stone are currently making money, then they are convinced that supplying the entire grid would hurt their company because Dorna wouldn't allow them the revenues they need to break even.

This Rossi Bridgestone sitou was classic avoidance-avoidance decision making--you could tell just by how badly they were dragging their feet. Do we want to lose $xxx by pulling out of racing or do we want to lose $xxx by supplying another rider who publicly bad-mouths products he doesn't like.

Nobody runs hush hush deals that hurt the bottom line.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mylexicon @ Dec 23 2007, 01:35 AM) [snapback]105078[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
These two things cannot be true simultaneously. If B-stone are making a profit supplying tires, then they have no problem supplying the entire grid because they know they will get return on their investment. Obviously, B-stone is losing money supplying tires, because racing is still, and always will be glorified advertising.

If B-stone are currently making money, then they are convinced that supplying the entire grid would hurt their company because Dorna wouldn't allow them the revenues they need to break even.

This Rossi Bridgestone sitou was classic avoidance-avoidance decision making--you could tell just by how badly they were dragging their feet. Do we want to lose $xxx by pulling out of racing or do we want to lose $xxx by supplying another rider who publicly bad-mouths products he doesn't like.

Nobody runs hush hush deals that hurt the bottom line.


Well, since figures are not public it is difficult to have any proof of profit, but still logic says that Bridgestone racing MUST be making a profit just like all other racing outfits in motoGP. Maybe small, but profit. For sure, nobody is losing any money! The only ones doing 'glorious advertising' are the sponsors nowadays...

Unfortunately, rubber manufacturer have been doing hush-hush deals that hurted the bottom line for many years. Michelin have done that in Superbike for years, favoring Ducati, and the only solution has been the single tyre regulation... At the same time in motoGP they were favoring Honda and Rossi with the infamous 'saturday night tyres'... Now that Bridgestone have got the upper hand working closely with Ducati, they refuse to supply others... Michelin are currently favoring Pedrosa...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(J4rn0 @ Dec 23 2007, 11:04 AM) [snapback]105088[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Unfortunately, rubber manufacturer have been doing hush-hush deals that hurted the bottom line for many years. Michelin have done that in Superbike for years, favoring Ducati, and the only solution has been the single tyre regulation... At the same time in motoGP they were favoring Honda and Rossi with the infamous 'saturday night tyres'... Now that Bridgestone have got the upper hand working closely with Ducati, they refuse to supply others... Michelin are currently favoring Pedrosa...

I agree with you on this point. Rossi has recently said that michelin were developing their tyres for honda/pedrosa, not him. Casey stoner has said he wasn't getting the same tyres as the factory honda team in 2006 when he was on the lcr honda.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(michaelm @ Dec 23 2007, 11:23 AM) [snapback]105090[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I agree with you on this point. Rossi has recently said that michelin were developing their tyres for honda/pedrosa, not him. Casey stoner has said he wasn't getting the same tyres as the factory honda team in 2006 when he was on the lcr honda.


Honda and Michelin are obviously butt buddies

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(J4rn0 @ Dec 23 2007, 03:04 AM) [snapback]105088[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Unfortunately, rubber manufacturer have been doing hush-hush deals that hurted the bottom line for many years.

Not to keep dragging this out, but again, this isn't possible. A company is either trying to make money or capture market share in the short term to raise profit in the long term. Plenty of companies have failed trying to spend their way to market share, but they aren't trying to go out of business.

No company sits down and says "how can we lose money every year in perpetuity?"

Plus, I'd be amazed if any team is turning a profit at this time in Motogp. In the last 7 seasons they've run three different formulas in the premier class. KR is broke. Kawasaki doesn't even have a title sponsor. Yamaha have to come up with $25M in sponsorships just to pay Rossi and Burgess. Gresini is known as Gresini because they lost their title sponsor. Ducati (the parent company) can't even turn a profit , if Corse has a surplus I'll do backflips (actually they might have this season for the first time). Suzuki are misers so they might turn a profit, Honda are huge they might turn a profit as well.

I'm certain, a majority of the motogp activity is taken out of the advertising and development budget of the parent company.

Just look at the bike design, it tells you everything. The new RC212V has tiny fairings, front and otherwise, and a tiny tail section. If HRC was supposed to maximize profit autonomously, they wouldn't have chopped 3 square feet of advertising space off of the bike.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mylexicon @ Dec 23 2007, 07:58 PM) [snapback]105111[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Not to keep dragging this out, but again, this isn't possible. A company is either trying to make money or capture market share in the short term to raise profit in the long term. Plenty of companies have failed trying to spend their way to market share, but they aren't trying to go out of business.

No company sits down and says "how can we lose money every year in perpetuity?"

Plus, I'd be amazed if any team is turning a profit at this time in Motogp. In the last 7 seasons they've run three different formulas in the premier class. KR is broke. Kawasaki doesn't even have a title sponsor. Yamaha have to come up with $25M in sponsorships just to pay Rossi and Burgess. Gresini is known as Gresini because they lost their title sponsor. Ducati (the parent company) can't even turn a profit , if Corse has a surplus I'll do backflips (actually they might have this season for the first time). Suzuki are misers so they might turn a profit, Honda are huge they might turn a profit as well.

I'm certain, a majority of the motogp activity is taken out of the advertising and development budget of the parent company.

Just look at the bike design, it tells you everything. The new RC212V has tiny fairings, front and otherwise, and a tiny tail section. If HRC was supposed to maximize profit autonomously, they wouldn't have chopped 3 square feet of advertising space off of the bike.



HRC have only 1 main sponsor and its name is big enough on their fairing already... isn't it

A business may or not succeed in actually making a profit, but that's part of the game! Nobody is throwing money for glory any more in MotoGP...

Your theory is the opposite - you say that Bridgestone have a right to supply who they want at their discretion, because they are supposedly in racing at their own expense, giving tyres away for free and for the glory.

But that is not true: they are selling them for money, they are not satisfied with having their little logos on the bikes.

So, Bridgestone not wanting to supply Honda and Yamaha is wrong, just as if Magneti Marelli or Brembo refused to supply their ECUs or brakes to some of the teams...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(J4rn0 @ Dec 23 2007, 06:11 PM) [snapback]105131[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Your theory is the opposite - you say that Bridgestone have a right to supply who they want at their discretion, because they are supposedly in racing at their own expense, giving tyres away for free and for the glory.


I don't think anyone is racing for glory outside of the riders. The tire manufacturers are racing to get orders from the manufacturers for road tires, and they are worried about selling to the end consumer. They aren't terribly concerned about maximizing profits from their on grid activities.

Advertising and development budget is a very inexact science. If a tire manufacturer believes it has invested the appropriate amount in race marketing with the appropriate teams, they shouldn't be extorted for more because the governing body makes fanciful threats.

Frankly, I find your complete disregard for free enterprise and free contract to be disturbing. I think it would be great to have everyone on Bridgestone because it would be "fair" and entertaining, but I'm not willing to destroy the competitive engine that drives the sport for a few years of equipmental "equality".

MotoGP is a privately run endeavour so they have the right to do whatever they want. The more fickle the work environment becomes the more manufacturer interest will wane. In time the series will become spec whether people like it or not.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mylexicon @ Dec 24 2007, 07:48 AM) [snapback]105137[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I don't think anyone is racing for glory outside of the riders. The tire manufacturers are racing to get orders from the manufacturers for road tires, and they are worried about selling to the end consumer. They aren't terribly concerned about maximizing profits from their on grid activities.

Advertising and development budget is a very inexact science. If a tire manufacturer believes it has invested the appropriate amount in race marketing with the appropriate teams, they shouldn't be extorted for more because the governing body makes fanciful threats.

Frankly, I find your complete disregard for free enterprise and free contract to be disturbing. I think it would be great to have everyone on Bridgestone because it would be "fair" and entertaining, but I'm not willing to destroy the competitive engine that drives the sport for a few years of equipmental "equality".

MotoGP is a privately run endeavour so they have the right to do whatever they want. The more fickle the work environment becomes the more manufacturer interest will wane. In time the series will become spec whether people like it or not.


Try considering also that we are talking about a champioship for bike manufacturers, riders and teams. There is no title assigned for tyres, as there is no title for best suspensions or fuel or brakes.

This means that those are just suppliers, they are not - and must not become - contenders.

If they are left free to do business as they want, with preferential contracts etc., - which amounts to them having weight in deciding who wins - then I'll welcome the single tyre regulation.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(J4rn0 @ Dec 24 2007, 05:03 AM) [snapback]105146[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
If they are left free to do business as they want, with preferential contracts etc., - which amounts to them having weight in deciding who wins - then I'll welcome the single tyre regulation.

I will too. I was angry when Bridgestone refused to supply the grid when it looked like a Michelin pull out was imminent. Dorna should have moved to a control tire rule and then accepted bids from the tire manufacturers.

But Dorna didn't. They threatened B-stone with a control tire, obtained good rubber for the newest Dorna official of all, then left the remaining Michelin runners to develop their way out of the competitive disadvantage with an apathetic factory.

I have no idea how that deal sustained the day to day of motogp.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mylexicon @ Dec 24 2007, 05:07 PM) [snapback]105156[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I will too. I was angry when Bridgestone refused to supply the grid when it looked like a Michelin pull out was imminent. Dorna should have moved to a control tire rule and then accepted bids from the tire manufacturers.

But Dorna didn't. They threatened B-stone with a control tire, obtained good rubber for the newest Dorna official of all, then left the remaining Michelin runners to develop their way out of the competitive disadvantage with an apathetic factory.

I have no idea how that deal sustained the day to day of motogp.



Apathetic?! I'm not so sure. The choice of Honda and (half) Yamaha could still prove to be the right bet. I think that Honda and Yamaha were willing to stay with Michelin, after all. They could have got Bridgestone also if they wanted, after the Ezpeleta ultimatum.

But they wanted to stick to the French rubber. Only Rossi did not want any of it anymore, so he was allowed to go alone and now the whole matter is perceived as something personal for Rossi. But it wasn't.

Michelin are almost bankrupt, that's been the real problem for the last two years. They've been cutting costs. Maybe HRC will be financing Michelin Racing's R&D now...?! Who knows... That would explain why they seem so confident in a comeback

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mylexicon @ Dec 24 2007, 04:07 PM) [snapback]105156[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I will too. I was angry when Bridgestone refused to supply the grid when it looked like a Michelin pull out was imminent. Dorna should have moved to a control tire rule and then accepted bids from the tire manufacturers.

But Dorna didn't. They threatened B-stone with a control tire, obtained good rubber for the newest Dorna official of all, then left the remaining Michelin runners to develop their way out of the competitive disadvantage with an apathetic factory.

I have no idea how that deal sustained the day to day of motogp.


I think i would accept Bridgestones actions if they had a sole contract with Ducati, but they supplied Suzuki and Kawasaki with little fuss.

Did Ducati put pressure on them not to supply Yamaha and Honda because they are more powerful manufacturers?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(an4rew @ Dec 24 2007, 06:18 PM) [snapback]105191[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I think i would accept Bridgestones actions if they had a sole contract with Ducati, but they supplied Suzuki and Kawasaki with little fuss.

Did Ducati put pressure on them not to supply Yamaha and Honda because they are more powerful manufacturers?


Imo, no. Bridgestone already has their hands full developing for their teams, chances are they are gung ho about Ducati.

If both Honda and Yamaha switched to Bridgestone, B-stone would have owned the grid and they probably could have made Honda and Yamaha pay tons of money to get their tires and offset the cost of expansion. At which point Yamaha and Honda would have gone to the governing body to get control tire legislation. There is no doubt in my mind it would have been granted.

So B-stone would have spent a good sum of money to get the personnel to supply all the teams and their needs, and then the governing body would have capped their revenues immediately.

That's why I think they said "no".

I had not considered it previously, but J4rnO's point about michelin being nearly bankrupt may be a large factor in what has gone on, and may explain why they gave away their previous advantage for what may not have been only ostensibly cost-cutting reasons.

michelin tyre compan are NOT bankrupt they have been scaling back on tyre r&d and production for the last 3 years. Possibly this could be a factor

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mylexicon @ Dec 12 2007, 12:24 PM) [snapback]104130[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
This is the greatest thing ever written until the end. By slaying Honda, Valentino is now a near absolute in MotoGP. For God's sake, the man just got the governing body to force a private manufacturer to supply him with tires! Traipsing over contracts entered into voluntarily by private profit-seeking individuals smacks of dictatorial regime. Okay, hyperbole aside, it's not that bad because Rossi's only card is to cut off the revenue stream he brings, and the only fear keeping the governing body in check is the fear of being less rich

I love the anti-Honda rant, but let's not pretend Valentino is still the noble fun-loving champion. Losing has put more jagged edges on his personality.
Why isn't it fact, because you don't believe it? Because a large group of people don't believe it?

Welcome to the existential universe. It's been this way in the West since after the industrial revolution. Now that we're all educated and wealthy beyond all reasonable levels, we have completely abandoned any discussion about static, quantitative issues for intangible, qualitative ideas.

It's just a culture clash. In Europe maximizing the number of opinions seems to be part of a cooperative understanding? (gross)

In America, intelligent people are taught to be focused sectarians (the proper way to do things).

Does that surprise you considering how we got here? Now who's being unaccommodating? Actually it's still us. But hopefully you realize you can't maintain your silly ideology unless you're willing to play by our lowly, uncivilized rules too.

Let the record show that I hate Biaggi with a burning passion, but I am a John Adams so I took the case anyway.

who does jon adame ride for?
you are also sooooooooo american - soooooooooo many words, some of them long and all to say so little

You think Bridgestone would have been happy to add a seven time champion to their books.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mstar @ Dec 25 2007, 02:23 PM) [snapback]105207[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
michelin tyre compan are NOT bankrupt they have been scaling back on tyre r&d and production for the last 3 years. Possibly this could be a factor


They've been scaling back because they have financial difficulties. Bankrupt is a little strong, I agree, but we can safely say that they have serious problems.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mjpartyboy @ Dec 25 2007, 06:26 PM) [snapback]105214[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
You think Bridgestone would have been happy to add a seven time champion to their books.


I am sure they are actually, but they cannot be open about it because there must be some clause in their contract with Ducati forbidding them to supply Ducati' most serious competition. So the whole thing had to be (or appear to be...) 'forced' on them...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mjpartyboy @ Dec 25 2007, 09:26 AM) [snapback]105214[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
You think Bridgestone would have been happy to add a seven time champion to their books.


You mean the 5 time world champion who bad-mouths his equipment when he doesn't win.........that's great press.

You already have the reigning world champion on board, why do you need the curmudgeon?

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah