Newsgroup: it.sport.formula1.moderato
Titolo: [ENG] F1 teams reject Ferrari plan

Source: BBC Sport - F1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/4074023.stm
Ferrari have had a proposal to limit testing and cut costs rejected by
their Formula One rivals.
"It's completely unacceptable," said Renault boss Flavio Briatore at a
meeting of team principals in London.
Nine of 10 teams, including Ferrari-powered Sauber, signed up for their
own initiative to halve testing at the last race of the 2004 season in
October.
But Ferrari, fresh from winning their sixth constructors' championship in
a row, refused to lend their support.
The Italian team are resistant to overall reductions in testing because
they have their own tracks in Italy and a special relationship with tyre
maker Bridgestone.
Ferrari sign Gene
Ferrari have been known to test at three circuits at once and signed Marc
Gene as a second full-time test driver last month.
Their proposal suggested restricting testing during the season to
15,000km per team for car development.
There would also be a limit of 15,000 km for each of the two tyre
manufacturers.
But Minardi's Australian owner Paul Stoddart was also among those to
rubbish the plans, which were faxed by Ferrari in the absence of a team
representative at the meeting.
Asked beforehand what would happen if rival teams rejected his proposals,
Ferrari boss Jean Todt said: "It's very simple; we will all be free to
test how and where we like."
Meanwhile, Stoddart has revealed that Minardi raised $1.5 million through
an auction of old Formula One cars and memorabilia last month.
He said the money would go towards the struggling team's 2005 car.
Stoddart had put his collection of old cars from various teams and
surplus merchandise accumulated over the years up for sale but much of it
failed to meet reserve prices.
He said only 30% of what was on offer, and just 17 of the 39 cars, were
sold.
© BBC MMIV
-- 
Automatically gathered from the web
Subscribe/unsubscribe/info at
http://www.grandprixpassion.com/mailman/listinfo/webnews

rights, but
   when these conflict with their work, they usually feel that their work
   is more important.
 
   132. It is well known that people generally work better and more
   persistently when striving for a reward than when attempting to avoid
   a punishment or negative outcome. Scientists and other technicians are
   motivated mainly by the rewards they get through their work. But those
   who oppose technilogiccal invasions of freedom are working to avoid a
   negative outcome, consequently there are a few who work persistently
   and well at this discouraging task. If reformers ever achieved a
   signal victory that seemed to set up a solid barrier against further
   erosion of freedom through technological progress, most would tend to
   relax and turn their attention to more agreeable pursuits. But the
   scientists would remain busy in their laboratories, and technology as
   it progresses would find ways, in spite of any barriers, to exert more
   and more control over individuals and make them always more dependent
   on the system.
 
   133. No social arrangements, whether laws, institutions, customs or
   ethical codes, can provide permanent protection against technology.
   History shows that all social arrangements are transitory; they all
   change or break down eventually. But technological advances are
   permanent within the context of a given civilization. Suppose for
   example that it were possible to ar