Will a control tire fix nearly everything?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Aug 25 2008, 02:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Interesting post lex. What I miss in this Rossi -> Bridgestone thing is what kind of leverage does he have? Not the weight or length of his leverage but the type. Because if we look at it he has the same type of leverage as all the other riders; his reputation and results as a rider. Nothing else. Sure, there are sponsors following riders but that's really just a part of that reputation and will depend on sitizenship and contacts. But any way we turn it the riders have only that single asset to go into a negotiation, nothing more nothing less. And that's what they try to use to the fullest to achive their goals and ambitions every one of them.
I agree that Rossi might have a very long and heavy leverage but it's buildt only on his reputation. He doesn't own any substantial interests in Dorna or have some dirty secrets on Ezy (that we know of) so all he have is his reputation. So he does what all the other riders are doing, he negotiate with his reputation as leverage. I can agree that Rossi might have become too big and to powerful but you can hardly blame him for it. First of all beacuse Dorna, FIM and the media has done their best to help him build that reputation, secondly because in the end it's buildt on his own merits.
Is it political, sure, everything is politics, didn't you know? Is it dirty, no way, if he sat on both sides, or paid off those on the other side it would, but him using the leverage he got is to do exactly what everyone else does.
Well now that is not exactly accurate. Rossi if you guys read anything other than this site was thinking about leaving the sport. He didn't want to really as it read but he said that he couldn't continue with a BIKE that wasn't competative and a tire of the same. IF you remember that at the end of last year his yamaha contract was up and threatend to leave and go to DUCATI and was also bitching about Michelins. HE surely has pull with dorna since he is the MOTOGP posterboy and with the lack of strength in the paddock and popularity of the sport EZY didn't want the greatest of the sport to leave and do something else that would bring less attention to GP. So really what Rossi wants he gets. People all around the sport especially if you know a professional rider in GP's or even SBK world or AMA will tell you this. You can find this information for yourselves by reading crash.net, MCN, Superbikeplanet, etc. There is no queston that Rossi has earned his place but is it fair? Who knows if the sport is elevated year to year. Look at Indy. The U.S. has two events and it hasn't even been but a few years since we got Laguna. Don't want to derail the gravy train and Rossi really is the Engine. For now.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ROCKGOD01 @ Aug 25 2008, 07:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well now that is not exactly accurate. Rossi if you guys read anything other than this site was thinking about leaving the sport. He didn't want to really as it read but he said that he couldn't continue with a BIKE that wasn't competative and a tire of the same. IF you remember that at the end of last year his yamaha contract was up and threatend to leave and go to DUCATI and was also bitching about Michelins. HE surely has pull with dorna since he is the MOTOGP posterboy and with the lack of strength in the paddock and popularity of the sport EZY didn't want the greatest of the sport to leave and do something else that would bring less attention to GP. So really what Rossi wants he gets. People all around the sport especially if you know a professional rider in GP's or even SBK world or AMA will tell you this. You can find this information for yourselves by reading crash.net, MCN, Superbikeplanet, etc. There is no queston that Rossi has earned his place but is it fair? Who knows if the sport is elevated year to year. Look at Indy. The U.S. has two events and it hasn't even been but a few years since we got Laguna. Don't want to derail the gravy train and Rossi really is the Engine. For now.

I'm not arguing agaist that he said he didn't want to compete with uncompetetive material, it's not at all surpriceing either. Seen in the lights of this years events that more or less confirm Rossi's suggestion that both the engine and the tires were uncompetetive wouldn't you say the same if in his shoes?
But in the end what leverage was he using? That statment were nothing but using his reputation for all it was worth. To say he would consider to quit must be close to as far as it is possible to push his leverage and if he failed this year it would be more than a huge dent in his reputation.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Aug 25 2008, 12:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>But in the end what leverage was he using? That statment were nothing but using his reputation for all it was worth. To say he would consider to quit must be close to as far as it is possible to push his leverage and if he failed this year it would be more than a huge dent in his reputation.

Of course he used his reputation for all it was worth and he used it for deviant purposes.

Using his reputation to breach/renegotiate with Yamaha and depart for another team with an opening would have been the proper use of his reputation. If Yamaha refused using his reputation to vilify Yamaha would have been good use of his reputation.

Lobbying the head marketing company and the governing body to rewrite the rules so you can have the equipment you want was NOT a good use of his reputation.

Using his reputation to illicitly obtain equipment for himself while using rhetoric to pretend he wanted to improve the sport all along. Complete and total garbage.

If you are his fan and his supporter, you should demand he stops.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Aug 24 2008, 11:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The strange thing is that so many think there are some very special, secret, super tires the manufacturers are handing out to a slected few riders. I got news for you: as long as it is a real tire competition out there Michelin and Breidgestone can't afford to keep the best tires from most of the riders. They need to supply the best they've got to win the tire war.

But Rossi and Stoner would get the new stuff to try first.. this always seems the way.
I'm hoping a One Tyre rule will slow down tyre development.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Aug 25 2008, 09:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Of course he used his reputation for all it was worth and he used it for deviant purposes.

Using his reputation to breach/renegotiate with Yamaha and depart for another team with an opening would have been the proper use of his reputation. If Yamaha refused using his reputation to vilify Yamaha would have been good use of his reputation.

Lobbying the head marketing company and the governing body to rewrite the rules so you can have the equipment you want was NOT a good use of his reputation.

Using his reputation to illicitly obtain equipment for himself while using rhetoric to pretend he wanted to improve the sport all along. Complete and total garbage.

If you are his fan and his supporter, you should demand he stops.

What rewriting? Control tire? Can't be as it is still on the agenda. If that was for Rossi's sake why didn't it disapear when he got what he wanted?

What do you mean by illicitly obtained equipment? Last time I checked he is running on legal Bridgestone tires just like the majority of the MotoGP riders, and they were obtained by a contract for him only in a team of two. Also a fact that has been overlooked by the conspiracy theorists is that Bridgestone hardly expected a one man deal. They expected a team of two.
He negotiated an new contract with a new suplier when the old contract ran out. Obviously illegal, NOT.

I hope he continue to demand what equipment that works best for him under the regulations present and that he continue to cut through the ........ of politics soley on his reputation if it's regarding equipment of safety issues. That's actually very cool.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (an4rew @ Aug 25 2008, 09:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>But Rossi and Stoner would get the new stuff to try first.. this always seems the way.
I'm hoping a One Tyre rule will slow down tyre development.
They would get the stuff first. And slow dev? Are you nuts. We have in the consumer market benefited from the dev and cause it is so fast it trickles down to us so we have safer products. Guess you don't like having the latest and greatest.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ROCKGOD01 @ Aug 25 2008, 09:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>They would get the stuff first. And slow dev? Are you nuts. We have in the consumer market benefited from the dev and cause it is so fast it trickles down to us so we have safer products. Guess you don't like having the latest and greatest.

I think it would slow dev but not stop it completely... Bridgestone are not gonna waste any more money than they have to be the best if they got the deal.
Bridgestone would be finishing in every position anyway.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Aug 25 2008, 01:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>What rewriting?

Are you suggesting DORNA don't write down all of the rules changes they make behind closed doors.


SCANDALOUS!!!!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ROCKGOD01 @ Aug 25 2008, 01:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>They would get the stuff first. And slow dev? Are you nuts. We have in the consumer market benefited from the dev and cause it is so fast it trickles down to us so we have safer products. Guess you don't like having the latest and greatest.

RockGOD, generally I'm with you but let me explain to you how this game works.

First companies start building motorcycles. In the beginning the compete with one another to see who can build the best products. At some point the competition causes development to greatly surpass the consumer market. In general the over development of racing products leads to excessive consumer cost.

At this point there is an enormous opportunity for new upstart companies to enter the market and make good consumer products at significantly reduced cost. In order to protect their profit margins, entrenched companies have to move upmarket. They continue adding superfluous technologies to their products while using marketing to convince consumers that their upgrades are not only superior but 100% necessary. If you want an example think about horsepower. What is the marginal cost of horsepower when related to displacement? Practically nil, but we pay out our ..... for it.

That's how the game works. It has nothing to do with the progress of human kind, it has to do with the evolution of marketing and consumer purchasing habits. For the most part, Western consumers buy enormous amounts of unnecessary technology from a quantity and a quality standpoint.

A control tire will not significantly hurt the consumer experience, though, it may wound our vanity.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Aug 25 2008, 11:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Are you suggesting DORNA don't write down all of the rules changes they make behind closed doors.


SCANDALOUS!!!!
Dorna suggest rules, they don't make them.
Exactly what rule canges were you refering to that was made for Rossi to stay in MotoGP.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Aug 26 2008, 01:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Dorna suggest rules, they don't make them.
Exactly what rule canges were you refering to that was made for Rossi to stay in MotoGP.

Not in regards to tires. Ezy already told us that their is no operating agreement with the tire manufacturers and Ezy has a free hand to do what he pleases.

That's the report I was waiting on to lend credence to my early season observations that their were fishy things going on with the tires. Who knows, maybe Vale and Stoner were testing the control tire for this year. Maybe that why Bstone took him on. That's why Stoner was amazed at the high performance of his regular tires when he got them back after LeMans

In any event it wasn't legit.

The rule I'm referring to is the one they hammered out in the technical tire meetings of 2007. Bridgestone publicly refused Yamaha, then months of heating debate, they accept ONE RIDER--Vale.

That is the rule, agreement, biased-manipulation-of-an-otherwise-unbiased-set-of-rules that I'm referring to.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Aug 25 2008, 09:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>RockGOD, generally I'm with you but let me explain to you how this game works.

First companies start building motorcycles. In the beginning the compete with one another to see who can build the best products. At some point the competition causes development to greatly surpass the consumer market. In general the over development of racing products leads to excessive consumer cost.

At this point there is an enormous opportunity for new upstart companies to enter the market and make good consumer products at significantly reduced cost. In order to protect their profit margins, entrenched companies have to move upmarket. They continue adding superfluous technologies to their products while using marketing to convince consumers that their upgrades are not only superior but 100% necessary. If you want an example think about horsepower. What is the marginal cost of horsepower when related to displacement? Practically nil, but we pay out our ..... for it.

That's how the game works. It has nothing to do with the progress of human kind, it has to do with the evolution of marketing and consumer purchasing habits. For the most part, Western consumers buy enormous amounts of unnecessary technology from a quantity and a quality standpoint.

A control tire will not significantly hurt the consumer experience, though, it may wound our vanity.
No need to explain this to a former VP of sales. I understand completely how these things shake out. The problem is that in direct relation to the consumer market, racing these TIRES gets us to the next evolutionary step. Now with the sbks we can purchase making upwards of 160 hp without modifications the development of safer stronger gripier tires are very important. This is all I am saying as simple as I can make it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ROCKGOD01 @ Aug 26 2008, 09:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No need to explain this to a former VP of sales. I understand completely how these things shake out. The problem is that in direct relation to the consumer market, racing these TIRES gets us to the next evolutionary step. Now with the sbks we can purchase making upwards of 160 hp without modifications the development of safer stronger gripier tires are very important. This is all I am saying as simple as I can make it.

What next step? Last time I checked Qualifiers aren't the highest selling tires in the United States.

Without a rhetorical dedication to "better" how are you going to convince people to buy more unnecessary grip? Marketing, that's how. The evil economic engine that forestalls the recession associated with contentment.

Now I suppose it is possible that racing could lead to the development of a Qualifer that lasts 10,000 miles, but I'd hate to be the executive who adds that to the tire lineup.

Of course you're in sales. Obviously you know how the game works and obviously it's bad for the sales of entrenched companies. I hope you're not using your own product. You know what they say about dealers who use.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Aug 26 2008, 07:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>What next step? Last time I checked Qualifiers aren't the highest selling tires in the United States.

Without a rhetorical dedication to "better" how are you going to convince people to buy more unnecessary grip? Marketing, that's how. The evil economic engine that forestalls the recession associated with contentment.

Now I suppose it is possible that racing could lead to the development of a Qualifer that lasts 10,000 miles, but I'd hate to be the executive who adds that to the tire lineup.

Of course you're in sales. Obviously you know how the game works and obviously it's bad for the sales of entrenched companies. I hope you're not using your own product. You know what they say about dealers who use.
LOL yeah. It isn't the qualifier I was really even referring to so. Well we all knows what happens when you don't do much t develop better products.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (an4rew @ Aug 26 2008, 06:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>But Rossi and Stoner would get the new stuff to try first.. this always seems the way.
I'm hoping a One Tyre rule will slow down tyre development.

Why slow down tyre development??

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>(an4rew @ Aug 26 2008, 06:20 AM)
But Rossi and Stoner would get the new stuff to try first.. this always seems the way.
I'm hoping a One Tyre rule will slow down tyre development.

im interesting in knowing your reasoning behind this too. with statements like this you are inviting the irish jokes.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Aug 26 2008, 05:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Not in regards to tires. Ezy already told us that their is no operating agreement with the tire manufacturers and Ezy has a free hand to do what he pleases.

That's the report I was waiting on to lend credence to my early season observations that their were fishy things going on with the tires. Who knows, maybe Vale and Stoner were testing the control tire for this year. Maybe that why Bstone took him on. That's why Stoner was amazed at the high performance of his regular tires when he got them back after LeMans

In any event it wasn't legit.

The rule I'm referring to is the one they hammered out in the technical tire meetings of 2007. Bridgestone publicly refused Yamaha, then months of heating debate, they accept ONE RIDER--Vale.

That is the rule, agreement, biased-manipulation-of-an-otherwise-unbiased-set-of-rules that I'm referring to.

Eh, the deal where Rossi got bridgestone tires are not a rule but a deal. Dirty or not it's got nothing to do with rules. And the face saving step were exactly that -ONE RIDER, not a team as Bridgestone were refering to when refusing Yamaha. If the deal took some pushing from other parties are still unkonwn and for you to speculate wildly in.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (alex29 @ Aug 26 2008, 08:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Why slow down tyre development??
That is what don't get. They are not going to stop developing the bikes. Tires are such a major thing to slow down in this regard.

well come on andrew, were all interested in why you want tyre development to slow or stop. you cant say something like that then not come back to follow it up !

I thought the whole idea of a control tyre was to reduce tyre development costs, keep corner speeds within safe limits and level the playing field. If a control tyre was developed as the current tyres are then the first two points woulnn't be achieved at all.