Rich Energy logo row doesn’t reflect on Haas – Steiner

22 comments on “Rich Energy logo row doesn’t reflect on Haas – Steiner”

1. 

   chawkii
   25th May 2019, 0:12

   Re: CotD

   He did pay tribute to him, just not at an FIA press conference. I didn’t realise there was a sliding scale of how meaningful a tribute is that peaks at “mentioned at official FIA event”.
2. 

   [TR]
   25th May 2019, 0:39

   On Ferrari keeping their veto power: if I were one of the other teams, I’d also be worried. Have you seen their decisions, recently? At this point, they shouldn’t even be handed a menu, much less steer a sport!
3. 

   Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
   25th May 2019, 0:53

   I find comments on Hamilton’s behaviour (or anyone else) disrespectful, frankly. We all deal with grief differently, and it’s up to every own of us to do what we feel is right to take the necessary steps to get over those very sad days after someone close to us passes away. It’s like people commenting on Schumacher’s family decision to keep it all private.

   Leave him alone. He’ll come round it and speak out his mind about it. Some people like to talk about it, others prefer to mourn in silence for a few days.

   I’d love to hear what he has to say too but we should all respect others after something like this.
   1. 

      @HoHum (@hohum)
      25th May 2019, 1:32

      Agree @fer-no65, cotd misses the point that the journalists are not all as respectful as the real F1 insiders, there will always be aholes from the tabloids trying to provoke an emotional outburst by fair means or foul, mostly foul, a pox upon them I say.
      1. 

         @HoHum (@hohum)
         25th May 2019, 1:35

         PS, Lewis has already made his statement online, and very eloquent it was, he does not need to be cross examined on it.
   2. 

      Jere (@jerejj)
      25th May 2019, 7:35

      @fer-no65 I thoroughly agree with you.
   3. 

      Gav
      25th May 2019, 17:28

      Completely agree. But it’s Lewis, so the boot has to go in.

      Watson is a senile fool, and was twenty years ago when he was commentating.
4. 

   Anon A. Mouse
   25th May 2019, 1:45

   We shouldn’t venture into the game of telling people how, when, and how much to pay respects to people who’ve passed. COTD, to me, sounds like saying Hamilton didn’t do enough to satisfy what they thought was enough. We all handle loss in different ways and, assuming it’s non-destructive, we should leave people to handle it how they feel works best for them. And this isn’t meant to be an attack on Sonny Crockett, nor John Watson, just a reminder for folks to remember that high visibility figures are people too.
5. 

   Foggy
   25th May 2019, 3:26

   Whilst I understand that some people may be upset that Hamilton did not face the press and express his sadness at the passing of a great man, please remember that he was excused his media duties by both Mercedes and the FIA, who have a greater insight as to how he was feeling and his ability to carry an effective press conference given the kind of questions some of the less respectful press members were likely to have asked.
   As others have already stated we all deal with grief in different ways and it make no difference how famous an individual is, they should be allowed to grieve in their own way without criticism from the insensitive media and those of us who have no idea of the individuals emotional state. I personally find the criticism both insensitive and disrespectful.
6. 

   Tristan (@skipgamer)
   25th May 2019, 4:01

   The aeroscreen look so gooooood! A sleek, well designed, integrated solution. God the F1 cars are so ugly by comparison.

   That IndyCar actually looks like the kind of futuristic concept drawings of what a future F1 could look, F1 on the other hand? It’s a laughing stock, and the looks are just the tip of the iceberg of all that’s wrong.
7. 

   geargrinder
   25th May 2019, 5:15

   I do not understand the fixation on the Rich Energy logo by racing journalists.
   This is not racing news. It has no effect on the team or the car. Why are they covering it?
   Can’t they do better reporting on why Mercedes continues to increase their gap on the field? How about some more analysis of what strategies worked in the last race and which didn’t? How about an analysis of Gasly’s performance in comparison to Albon’s?
   Oh, that’s too hard? Writing articles about a barely-related court case is so much easier.
   1. 

      anon
      25th May 2019, 8:38

      geargrinder, the whole affair has raised significant questions about Storey, given that the judge called him an unreliable witness and basically accused him of forging most of the documentation that was submitted to the court.

      It raises significant questions about his integrity and the source of his funding, and in turn it brings into question how reliable Haas’s due diligence processes are and the judgement of those within the team who approved a deal with a company where the source of funding is not transparent and the individuals behind it are evasive and dishonest.
   2. 

      Phylyp (@phylyp)
      25th May 2019, 9:53

      geargrinder – while the discussion specifically about the logo is quite irrelevant, information that has emerged in the ruling is something that bears relevance to Haas and F1, since it raises questions as to whether they’re good for the sponsorship money.

      As anon has mentioned above, the judge, in her ruling, called Storey an unreliable witness:

      [Storey] had a tendency to make impressive statements, which on further investigation or consideration were not quite what they seemed. For example, when Mr Wyand in cross-examination tried to understand his evidence about the sales figures of Rich Energy drinks, and put to him that he had been quoted in the press in February 2019 as saying that the First Defendant had produced 90 million cans, Mr Storey explained that it had produced 90 million cans, but had not yet filled and sold them. He said he would have to check the figures, but in 2018 he thought the First Defendant had filled and sold “circa 3 million cans” of Rich Energy drink.

      @bascb also commented yesterday that:

      Joe Saward (speaking on the missed apex podcast) said that Haas obtained bank guarantees in respect of the Rich Energy sponsorship money, so it is a no brainer that the team signed the deal despite precious little suggesting Rich Energy is good for the money. The money will get to the team by hook or by crook.

      So yes, does the deer head logo matter? Not a whit. But does it raise concerns about Rich Energy’s funding? Yes, it continues to do so, as it has for several months. Having seen how close Racing Point came to folding, and how Williams is also tight on funds, funding for the non-manufacturer teams should be a matter of concern for us.
8. 

   bosyber (@bosyber)
   25th May 2019, 5:35

   On Steiners quote, I usually think he says true and useful things, but here that is only true because him toeing the sponsors line helps maintain that relationship.

   It might well be that w/o the publicity of the F1 deal, Rich would have remained too obscure to be noticed by (well anyone, but also by) a sports bike brand who seem focused on delivering their products to customers, but when they did, surely they had to defend their brand!?

   Esp. with driver Grosjean having used that bike in recent times, there could have been confusion.
   1. 

      anon
      25th May 2019, 8:30

      @bosyber, I believe that Whyte Bikes actually started their legal action against Rich Energy before the latter signed their deal with Haas, so it is more of a case of the publicity of the F1 deal bringing attention to what was an ongoing case.
9. 

   Pedro Andrade
   25th May 2019, 6:53

   Agree with what others said regarding Hamilton not wanting to speak to the media. A person close to him just died, drivers are not just media figures, they are human too, just allow them their privacy.
10. 

    bob (@riptide)
    25th May 2019, 7:11

    And we now have the third attempt to run this ‘disrespectful Hamilton’ story. Pathetic.
    1. 

       ColdFly (@)
       25th May 2019, 16:00

       Agree @riptide.
       Is the disgrace that the editor of this site again tries to lure us into commenting based on this ridiculous less-than-tabloid-level story.
11. 

    Jere (@jerejj)
    25th May 2019, 7:38

    An image of the SF15-T as the thumbnail image of the tweet, LOL.
12. 

    jv
    25th May 2019, 8:58

    I thought the halo was impracticsl for indycars since you cant look far enough into the turns on ovals and this is pretty much a halo with a windshield
13. 

    Philip (@philipgb)
    25th May 2019, 9:56

    The comment of the day isn’t agreeing with Watson, the comment of the day is a respectfully made opinion. Watson used the chance to provoke controversy and briefly inject himself into the story for attention. He and the rag that published it are pathetic

    As for the opinion of the comment of the day, given how vulture like some of the press are I also wouldn’t trust them not to make cheap questions to get in my head or grab some click bait headline. I agree with Hamilton skipping the press, how he grieves is personal and I won’t question how someone deals with loss
    1. 

       Phylyp (@phylyp)
       25th May 2019, 10:36

       I also wouldn’t trust them not to make cheap questions to get in my head or grab some click bait headline.

       @philipgb – yeah, given how some journalist booed (IIRC) when it was announced that Hamilton won’t be attending the presser, one can only guess as to the mentality and objective of that individual.

       Hamilton’s tribute on social media was eloquent, and if any media house wants to share Lewis’ opinion of Niki, that information was right at hand for them.

Comments are closed.