This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Suzuki worried about their plummet...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Oct 24 2008, 11:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yes, I agree with your post. And I do think the race bosses need to be held more accountable. If you were the team owner, seeing how poorly Team Suzuki has performed, with two capable rider like Vermi/Capi, wouldn't you start axing a few higher ups (hint,: Paul Denning)? And when you are done with them, perhaps start to rethink your riders too.

Vermi is a cool cat, but I would have gambled with Spies.

slightly off on a tangent here, but not in a "tom the engineer with multiple opinion disorder" way.
when the decision to re-sign cap&verm was taken, did anyone know a control tyre was on the way?
was it still too early in the season bearing in mind that we found out about it long after the teams did.
might require some lexian thought to get it to fit, but not impossible. if so, that might be why verm was retained, having some experience of control tyres and how the system works. its a small advantage i know, but any advantage is still an advantage..

<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigAl @ Oct 24 2008, 05:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>as for the commitment, in this day and age, you dont run a very expensive race team and lack commitment. you may lack knowledge on how to best get results, but not commitment.That's total BS. Every team in motogp is "very expensive", yet D'Antin, for example, was so "committed" that he got booted off of his own team halfway through the year! He was so committed last season that apparently Barros didn't even have a suspension tech or spare suspension!

Sure they're all committed by some standard or other, but some of the teams and factories are more committed than others.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mattsteg @ Oct 25 2008, 12:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That's total BS. Every team in motogp is "very expensive", yet D'Antin, for example, was so "committed" that he got booted off of his own team halfway through the year! He was so committed last season that apparently Barros didn't even have a suspension tech or spare suspension!

Sure they're all committed by some standard or other, but some of the teams and factories are more committed than others.
and you should be committed too!

<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigAl @ Oct 24 2008, 03:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>slightly off on a tangent here, but not in a "tom the engineer with multiple opinion disorder" way.
<
<
<

Ok. I'm glad I took the time to look at your post before I signed off for the weekend. Thanks, I will now go for a spirited ride having the certainty that the forum is in good hands.

I wonder if Tom will ever retract his ri....ulous statement that Kevin Schwantz is "overrated"? If he did, that would only be minus one of 10000000 ...... opnions, but hey, it would be a start, eh.




Good night now.

Go Hayden! The Ducati will love you.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Oct 24 2008, 11:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Perhaps. I guess what I'm saying is that Suzuki, if they want to make a credible effort in MotoGP, need to start looking like a committed team to change their mediocre standing. Something I think hasn't been done and certainly not the message they sent out by keeping both their average riders.
I see your point,they could have gone for a promising guy like Spies but then they would still need someone like Capirossi for developement if they don't have three bikes.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Oct 24 2008, 02:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>We can thank the Bush/McCain's of the world for socialism of the rich. While countries like most 1st world place in Europe, and Canada have a 'socialized' health system which benefit all their citizens, you are happy to elect people who would do this for the top 1 percent of the nation only. And you want to cry ‘socialism’. You are dumb but you do spell fair, so what is your problem?

I can't argue with you there. I agree that much of Bush's stimulus package was excessive after we stabilized in 2004 & 2005.

Whatever you do, don't look where you're going. Much better to overreact to the injustices of the past.

I'm not blinded by the present, I'm acutely aware of the future. You will soon understand. A generation of people approximately 25-50% larger than subsequent generations will be dying off. They must be replaced by smart-responsible individuals from our generation. In the near future most of us will be getting promoted to fill the void they will leave behind.

The rich have already earned their money. It cannot be taken from them. The only rich people you can get even with are the ones who haven't yet been created. In short, it's America's youth.

So the old have gotten wealthy in the 80s and 90s. They have taken their profits and they have saddled us with enormous debts. Obama says the solution is further punishment to the generations who have been victimized?

You will soon learn who Obama has pandered to. The same people Bush had to pander to----greedy ... old baby boomers. We are their whipping boys. Enjoy.

Medicare, higher payroll taxes, social healthcare. Who do you think will be the main beneficiaries? It's not going to be you or me. The young wealthy forward thinking individuals with the solutions we need for the 21st century will be forced to pay for the luxurious retirements and the slow medically-prolonged suffering of the irresponsible individuals who have ruined the country.

You hate Bush but you've signed up to pay for all of his medical bills.
<
Obama can say whatever he wants, it won't make one bit of difference. Baby boomers won't stop stealing from us what they think they are owed.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Austin @ Oct 24 2008, 09:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It's been said and said. And oddly enough I agree with Migs (more or less, I think). Migs, tell me if you disagree with what I'm saying. Signing Spies would have been great for a few years down the line should they ever get the factory behind them and Denning to run the team properly and have the team do their jobs properly. But until that happens, Suzuki MotoGP will be a mess and they need all the stability they can get. Capirossi is a perfect fit for them until he decided to hang up his leathers and I think Vermeulen has shown his speed when the GSVR is running properly and maybe has another season in him to prove it.

Spies would have been great for Suzuki if they could pull their heads out. But until that happens, it's not likely Spies could have done much more than Cappers or Vermy.


Best post here. Ben is good, so are the other guys but you cannot make a silk purse from a pigs ear.
<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Oct 25 2008, 11:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I can't argue with you there. I agree that much of Bush's stimulus package was excessive after we stabilized in 2004 & 2005......

........ Baby boomers won't stop stealing from us what they think they are owed.


I thought you'd like this one Lex. A little bit of Jefferson (governed least is governed best...)



Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'
'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too.
It's unfair that he got ten times more than I got' 'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'
'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

I know its off track....sorry
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Oct 24 2008, 02:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hey .......Spies had appendicitis at Laguna, and did not know it... a couple day later was in surgery.. so I suggest you STFU
<

Excuses are Like Asholes, and everybody has got one, in Bens case he got his Mommy..
Coulda Woulda Shoulda means .... all, mabe you need to STFU Curve you know it all.
<
 
I don't think there is much need for alarm. 2007 was clearly an anomaly in Suzuki's results and 2008 actually continues the general upward trend in results from 2003 - 2006.
 
jumkie, lex & roo... take the politics & economics to the lounge please. thank you very much from your friendly niegborhood mod team...
<
<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (frosty58 @ Oct 26 2008, 01:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>jumkie, lex & roo... take the politics & economics to the lounge please. thank you very much from your friendly niegborhood mod team...
<
<



Most humble apologies sir.
<


If there isn't a US election economic crisis thread I'll be starting one (after work). Hey, I have to work on a Sunday. That sucks
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Oct 24 2008, 03:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Totally disagree. Is that what you would have advised Rossi before Yamaha signed him?
Ben Spies and whatever screw-up he would have been handed for a crew chief couldn't touch Rossi and JB with a 40-foot pole.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Oct 24 2008, 03:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It’s like asking a broken car to fix itself before you take a ride in it, WTF.
But you're suggesting fixing the car by giving it a new paint job. I think Spies is an immensely talented rider, I don't particularly care for him but I won't deny his talent. As I've said previously, I think he may be more talented than Hayden. But the problem with Suzuki lies internally. You may be right, replacing Vermeulen with Spies may have been the shakeup needed. But I'm more inclined to think that the change needed within Suzuki needs to come higher up.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Oct 24 2008, 03:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Adding Spies against Dennings wishes should have been the statement that Suzuki were truning the page on a failed effort. Look how Team Alice improved after they got rid of D'antin.
You can't compare the changes within a team where the manager did not pay his hotel bills to what would happen if Denning's power was taken away. Alice finally got the support they needed and results improved. You and I agree that Suzuki needs change from the top. We just disagree on how to do it.
 

Recent Discussions