USF1 -- F1's All-American Challenger

[WhiteBlue]

Obviously, all you have to do is to collect the truth of the day out of Anderson's mouth?

I'll listen to this Autosport interview any time of the day than to one of your rants. The difference is you are a Monday coach and Ken went and did it. A man can try and fail and still keep some respect for trying.

[bill shoe]

I can respect trying, even if the end result is failure. Projects and businesses are hard.

I don't respect a failure when the partners consistently said everything was fine up until the moment they were forced to concede it was not. I don't respect a failure where $20 million was spent, but nothing that resembles a car was produced. I don't respect a failure where the guys in charge didn't even have the balls to lay off the staff themselves.

And the bullsh*t talk still continues today!! Andersen is now making vague but confident claims that he definitely has investors and funding lined up to finish the job and all they need is the guranteed 2011 entry!! Yea, nothing attracts reliable new investors like failure and excuses.

There are plenty of failing people and projects in the world that do in fact deserve some respect. Anderson-Windsor would have to climb a couple rungs up the ladder to get to that level.

[Pandamasque]

I'll listen to this Autosport interview any time of the day than to one of your rants. The difference is you are a Monday coach and Ken went and did it. A man can try and fail and still keep some respect for trying.

You must be joking. Did WHAT? Tricked FIA into getting a license, wasted some money and ruined some careers?
WhiteBlue, you are pushing the outside of the envelope in posting utter BS!

[Professor]

WB, I'm okay with your opinion. The guys who are busting your chops are a little like neocons: they know the answer even before the question is asked. Their ideology makes the answer to any question predictable. The movement is associated with the inability to consider any possible answer that falls outside the ideological predictions.

Most real world situations are more complex and require insight, consideration, and judgement. The easy way is to just hit the button and read the answer that the "holy ideological machine" spits out.

The traits are:Always negative, never optimistic, generally finding the worst in all situations, and never seeing the trees for the forest. Simplistic may be the best way to describe neocom ideology.

Responses are often curt, emotional, offensive, and arrogant. They are know-it-alls.

A couple of your foils are like the description above. But, I may be wrong.

[nipo]

And seriously where's PW and his big mouth at this kind of times?

[Scorpaguy]

Well I just have to jump in here...been lurking for months (it took that long to read the whole thread). How 'bout just a tad of love for us here in the States. We are not a bunch of brain-dead NASCAR junkies (but I do like it ... go JPM). I have followed F1 for years and have always been amused by the anti-US leanings. Now USF1 throws gasoline on the fire! Following the team from its inception, it was clear professionality did not abound. Hopefully its not as bad as some are hoping for. We Yanks want to see a homegrown F1 team succeed...and that would be good for the sport. Whether thats USf1 or not...we have to trust the FIA to make the right decision.

...my gut tells me not to invest heavily in USF1 though.

[countersteer]

WB, I'm okay with your opinion. The guys who are busting your chops are a little like neocons: they know the answer even before the question is asked. Their ideology makes the answer to any question predictable. The movement is associated with the inability to consider any possible answer that falls outside the ideological predictions.

Most real world situations are more complex and require insight, consideration, and judgement. The easy way is to just hit the button and read the answer that the "holy ideological machine" spits out.

The traits are:Always negative, never optimistic, generally finding the worst in all situations, and never seeing the trees for the forest. Simplistic may be the best way to describe neocom ideology.

Responses are often curt, emotional, offensive, and arrogant. They are know-it-alls.

A couple of your foils are like the description above. But, I may be wrong.

+1

[xpensive]

Obviously, all you have to do is to collect the truth of the day out of Anderson's mouth?

I'll listen to this Autosport interview any time of the day than to one of your rants. The difference is you are a Monday coach and Ken went and did it. A man can try and fail and still keep some respect for trying.

So we are "Ken" now, are we, rings almost as affectionate as "Michael", doesn't it? You're just a copy'n paste merchant without a firm opinion of your own WB, I think most people know this by now, this is why your stance changes all the time.

[raceman]

let us close this thread, no use in discussing us f1 anymore - just a waste of time

wot say?

[xpensive]

Not at all, the aftermath is the interesting part, Renckens interview with KA speaks volumes of this man.

A very sad mythomaniac, quite obviously

[Fil]

Their official reason for failing is the short time from the Concord agreement and a cash flow crisis due to a sponsor withdrawal

Are you kidding me?

"Losing those four months was always going to be difficult to recapture, but we were on schedule right up until mid-January, and that was when some issues arose with sponsors that kind of locked us up."

Anderson himself admitted right there, yes the wranglings made it difficult BUT they were on schedule in January.

If you still don't get it, it means he admitted the mid-year FIA/FOTA delays had no bearing on their work schedule. They were on-time.


That's if he is telling the truth.

But we also know sponsors fled when they realised the team was in shambles..
Maybe, due to the mentioned legal mid-year issues, they weren't on-time, and that's when sponsors fled & that locked the team up even more-so.


So its one excuse or the other Mr Anderson.. you can't use both when they clearly conflict within your one answer.

[gibells]

Following the team from its inception, it was clear professionality did not abound... We Yanks want to see a homegrown F1 team succeed...and that would be good for the sport.

I would love a team from the US to succeed. Just rather something with credibility like Penske or Haas or people like that. Also not to embarrass yourselves by saying you do it better. Just joining in and doing it would be great. You can then talk about it all you want- afterwards.

[WhiteBlue]

Their official reason for failing is the short time from the Concord agreement and a cash flow crisis due to a sponsor withdrawal

Are you kidding me?

"Losing those four months was always going to be difficult to recapture, but we were on schedule right up until mid-January, and that was when some issues arose with sponsors that kind of locked us up."

Anderson himself admitted right there, yes the wranglings made it difficult BUT they were on schedule in January.

If you still don't get it, it means he admitted the mid-year FIA/FOTA delays had no bearing on their work schedule. They were on-time.


That's if he is telling the truth.

But we also know sponsors fled when they realised the team was in shambles..
Maybe, due to the mentioned legal mid-year issues, they weren't on-time, and that's when sponsors fled & that locked the team up even more-so.


So its one excuse or the other Mr Anderson.. you can't use both when they clearly conflict within your one answer.

I don't know why dealing with some Aussies rubs me the wrong way. Perhaps it is the exceptional courtesy in language that is hard to digest for a country boy from Bavaria. Be advised that I'm not kidding you. I just repeated in short what was claimed by Ken Anderson.

It happens to fit nicely to what I have perceived so far. If you draw other conclusions or have other opinions you are completely entitled to that. I don't see a conflict in Ken Anderson's explanation. The first rumors by Bernie were about financial difficulties (22th December 2009). This obviously induced some nervousness and sponsors may have stepped away. By mid Jan he met the payroll late and could not pay suppliers (for instance Cosworth) which brought things to a grinding halt. That's exactly what I have said. Very tight schedule without reserves and a cash flow crisis which wasn't helped by Bernie's rumors.

[xpensive]

What you have to understand Fil, is that WB has evolved from a "Mosley-megaphone" to a "Todt-telegraph", where this is some kind of damage-control to try and make the FIA not look too bleeding stupid in their selection of USF1. Correct WB?

[Roger the knife]

Well I just have to jump in here...been lurking for months (it took that long to read the whole thread). How 'bout just a tad of love for us here in the States. We are not a bunch of brain-dead NASCAR junkies (but I do like it ... go JPM). I have followed F1 for years and have always been amused by the anti-US leanings. Now USF1 throws gasoline on the fire! Following the team from its inception, it was clear professionality did not abound. Hopefully its not as bad as some are hoping for. We Yanks want to see a homegrown F1 team succeed...and that would be good for the sport. Whether thats USf1 or not...we have to trust the FIA to make the right decision.

...my gut tells me not to invest heavily in USF1 though.

I don't think most of the criticism is aimed at the US in particular, the cock up's been caused by poor management, not by being in the US. If someone like Steve Nichols had been heading up this project, I think it would have been successful, but unfortuantely Ken's a dreamer, he likes doing the first 10% of the project, and then loses interest. An F1 team is about the people, not the location