Newsgroup: it.sport.formula1.moderato
Titolo: [ENG] Ferrari responds

Source: 
grandprix.com
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns14432.html
Ferrari has responded to the statement of the other nine Formula 1 teams
about testing by saying that the team is the only one developing
Bridgestone tyres and that this is not fair.
"When the previous testing agreement was coming to an end we tried to
find a new compromise that took this situation into acccount but
unfortunately this did not happen," said team spokesman Luca Colajanni.
"Therefore we felt that no testing guidelines were in place any more."
Colajanni added that the testing was more efficient in terms of manpower
and resources and that this will lead to a reduction in Ferrari's testing
bill this year of around $2m.
This explanation is tenuous at best. Ferrari is the only major F1 team
using Bridgestone rubber because the other teams that were supplied by
Bridgestone came to the conclusion that the tyres being built were
designed solely for Ferrari and felt that, as a result, Michelin was a
better option. Whether this analysis is correct or not is not the issue
at hand: that was the perception.
Ferrari's situation with tyres is, to a large extent, seen as being a
situation of its own making, caused by its desire to win. The company
could have agreed to a control tyre formula last October if it was
worried about such inequalities. It did not.
When asked whether or not Ferrari accepted that the decision to throw
away any testing bans might be viewed as an attempt to break up the
anti-Ferrari alliance Colajanni did not answer the question. He was then
asked whether Ferrari does any market research to ascertain the level of
discontent amongst the fans about the team's current policies in F1. He
said that the team judged the reaction of the fans by the number of
Ferrari flags waving in the grandstands.
It was pointed out that in recent months the majority of the feedback to
the F1 media has been negative towards Ferrari. Colajanni said that the
F1 media does not represent the racing public because its members are not
elected to their positions. In fact, this is exactly what happens: people
read certain publications and not others and thus the publications which
best reflect public opinion survive and the others do not.
What is clear from this exchange is that Ferrari either does not see the
wave of feeling that exists against its current policies amongst F1 fans;
or it does not care.
We can only judge the situation based on our feedback and it is fair to
say that the majority of this is anti-Ferrari. There is a small but
voceriferous pro-Ferrari minority who criticize any stories which reflect
the feedback we receive from other fans.
While Colajanni's remarks might be judged as being clumsy it is probably
fair to say that Ferrari has now reached the point at which it no longer
listens to the other teams and no longer listens to criticism in the
media.
There was a time when one would never hear the suggestion that the sport
would be better off without Ferrari but increasingly that is a view being
heard in F1 circles.
We believe the trend is increasing.
Ferrari, however, seems unlikely to accept that view until there are
fewer Ferrari flags in the grandstands.
Copyright 1988-2005, Inside F1, Inc.
-- 
Automatically gathered from the web
Subscribe/unsubscribe/info at
http://www.grandprixpassion.com/mailman/listinfo/webnews

 not elected to their positions.
Beh, i casi sono due, o Colajanni si č rincoglionito del tutto, oppure
non vedo perché preoccuparsi troppo per il futuro. Se questi sono i
presupposti su cui si basa l'attuale gestione, non credo che andrą molto
lontano: se si viene percepiti in maniera negativa, i primi ad
accorgersene sono gli sponsor...
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 (o_        Vinci                     registered Linux User #276630
 //\         " Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent "
 V_/_                     Salvor Hardin, Foundation

 contrario, la dovrebbe rafforzare
Se siamo tutti d'accordo a fare X giorni di test ci sto. Se Ferrari gira
quanto vuole, invece, allora me ne frego anch'io del limite di X giorni.
Tale comportamento da parte di una o piu' squadre avrebbe portato a una
spaccatura nel gruppo dei 9.
E' questo il senso, a quanto capisco.
Ciao,
Luca

 spaccatura nel gruppo dei 9.
OK, giusto, in effetti quando la Ferrari non aveva firmato c'era stato
qualche tentennamento all'interno dei 9, con la BAR che aveva ipotizzato
di aderire al limite solo se fosse stato accettato da tutti e 10.


 
Limitare i giorni di test non serve a limitare le spese,
(forse le spese degli altri che non hanno
le piste), visto che la Ferrari ha Fiorano
e puo' girare quanto come e dove gli pare.
Se volevano limitare i costi, era sufficiente
fare come in coppa America di vela, ovvero imporre
un tetto al budget della squadra. In coppa America
si era fissato mi pare 100 (o 80) milioni di dollari,
per cui anche il secondo uomo piu' ricco del mondo,
Larry Hallison, on Oracle-BMW, si e' dovuto attenere.
Ciao.

 un tetto al budget della squadra.
Mi pare che sul NG se ne fosse parlato, però pare essere un'opzione che
in F.1 non piace (quasi) a nessuno.
