CET Racing Entry in trouble? - Page 2

paul-collins · 25 Jun 2007, 18:48 (Ref:1946604)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TWK

As to relevance to the thread, it is "ALMS 2007 Post Le Mans," isn't it?

As it threatens to overwhelm other ALMS news, I've split off the discussion of CET - really, it deserves its own topic now anyway.

Hugewally · 25 Jun 2007, 20:08 (Ref:1946679)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Sorry, not my job to investigate and find the facts to verify the "investigative report" at LTC! It is the "reporters" responsibility to have the substantiating facts to prove the implications. Otherwise it is just scurrilous rhetoric.

L.P.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TWK

The response to much of this is in Part 2

So, it might be the responsibility of the reporters to have the facts, but they don't always have to be spelled out or listed do they? Is it the reporters job to spoon feed people too? Do you do the same thing with articles in the newspaper or on TV too?

HORNDAWG · 25 Jun 2007, 21:37 (Ref:1946779)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugewally

So, it might be the responsibility of the reporters to have the facts, but they don't always have to be spelled out or listed do they? Is it the reporters job to spoon feed people too? Do you do the same thing with articles in the newspaper or on TV too?

Let me just say; National Inquirer or Wall Street Journal, your choice! I know what mine is.

Also http://www.trackbytes.com/news.php?id=3291 or

http://www.racingfanatics.com/Hot%20...PRs/CETPR1.htm

L.P.

SebringMG · 25 Jun 2007, 21:44 (Ref:1946786)

Hmmm this gets more interesting by the day

Hugewally · 25 Jun 2007, 21:45 (Ref:1946789)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Let me just say; National Inquirer or Wall Street Journal, your choice! I know what mine is.

Also http://www.trackbytes.com/news.php?id=3291 or

http://www.racingfanatics.com/Hot%20...PRs/CETPR1.htm

L.P.

It's easy to tell...

HORNDAWG · 25 Jun 2007, 21:52 (Ref:1946797)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugewally

It's easy to tell...

Yes it is, mine is the one with all the facts and figures. With a reputation for integrity and accuracy.

L.P.

Hugewally · 25 Jun 2007, 21:59 (Ref:1946808)

Stop it, you're killing me...

Please point out the fact and figures you're talking about.

Fogelhund · 25 Jun 2007, 22:02 (Ref:1946811)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Yes it is, mine is the one with all the facts and figures. With a reputation for integrity and accuracy.

L.P.

Before people make statements about facts and figures, integrity and accuracy, I think it would be prudent to allow this to play out. For now, it would suffice to say that there are claims made in this announcement, that appear to be untrue. Whether these claims are relevant to the team's future is questionable at best, but it does make you wonder about claims that are relevant.

HORNDAWG · 25 Jun 2007, 22:08 (Ref:1946815)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Before people make statements about facts and figures, integrity and accuracy, I think it would be prudent to allow this to play out. For now, it would suffice to say that there are claims made in this announcement, that appear to be untrue. Whether these claims are relevant to the team's future is questionable at best, but it does make you wonder about claims that are relevant.

So are you saying that the Wall Street Journal does not put forth facts and figures, and is not known for its accuracy and integrity?

L.P.

Fogelhund · 25 Jun 2007, 22:12 (Ref:1946817)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

So are you saying that the Wall Street Journal does not put forth facts and figures, and is not known for its accuracy and integrity?

L.P.

I am talking about the Solaroli release and nothing more.

HORNDAWG · 25 Jun 2007, 22:31 (Ref:1946829)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

I am talking about the Solaroli release and nothing more.

Funny thing that. I have not stated anything about the first Solaroli 'investigative report' since the continuation was put forth. And nothing at all about the continuation itself! My posts have been in response to a single individuals effort to silence my opinion (except for the links to the release from Solaroli)!

L.P.

Fogelhund · 25 Jun 2007, 22:37 (Ref:1946832)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Funny thing that. I have not stated anything about the first Solaroli 'investigative report' since the continuation was put forth. And nothing at all about the continuation itself! My posts have been in response to a single individuals effort to silence my opinion (except for the links to the release from Solaroli)!

L.P.

It sure looked like discussion of the press release and 'investigative report' to me, so I apologize if I misunderstood.

Perhaps it would be best, if we left the derailment arguing alone going forward, and stick to discussion of Solaroli, the press release and the 'investigative report' then?

TWK · 25 Jun 2007, 23:48 (Ref:1946855)

So, how many articles have you seen lately that are footnoted? Interesting that you find it all so easy to dismiss.

Is the Securities and Exchange Commission one of those "scurrilous" and undependable sources?

So far, there has been nothing written in either of those installments that's not verified by a written document. Can you say the same about your points of view and about a press release? I hope that the drivers referred to in that release soon comment. In fact I was pretty surprised that they did not, since having them do so is pretty much PR "standard practice."

When they do, I hope they tell us they will soon be in that Spyder. Perhaps they will even say when that will be. As for the subject of the articles, we've asked for comment on its content, and not gotten any thus far.

I've no axe to grind at all. I research a subject, and because we believe it is important news to the sport and those who follow it, we published it. You can believe it or not. Were we expected to "sit" on such information? If anyone wants to, they can verify most of it in the same way we were able to.

The359 · 25 Jun 2007, 23:53 (Ref:1946857)

No confirmation that they will be at Lime Rock though.

Fogelhund · 26 Jun 2007, 00:17 (Ref:1946868)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The359

No confirmation that they will be at Lime Rock though.

They won't be.

TWK · 27 Jun 2007, 22:55 (Ref:1948598)

Nor is there a confirmation that they will be at Mid-Ohio.

Interestingly, the two drivers named as "announced," (past tense in that press release...when did that happen?). Have not made any comment at all. I find that exceedingly odd, as I don't recall a driver announcement in this sport that didn't include a quote from the driver(s) involved.

It's especially striking in this case, since the drivers are so well known and have large "fan bases." There have been attempts to reach them - to no avail.

Nor did the press release tell us when and where the team would be racing, testing, or anything else. That is, if there is actually a team. Has any member of that team surfaced other than the principal (and the two mute drivers)? By name? Not that I recall. (Please correct me if I am wrong.) OK, I recall Nick Jordan being mentioned. Perhaps Mr. Jordan will grace the racing community with an endorsement?

It seems likely - just a guess here - that the subject release was a "defensive move" in response to the articles on LTC. At least the timing ( and the absense of any "real" content) is suspect.

The359 · 27 Jun 2007, 23:48 (Ref:1948622)

If you look really hard for suspicious actions, you're going to find them whether they exist or not.

TWK · 28 Jun 2007, 02:21 (Ref:1948662)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The359

If you look really hard for suspicious actions, you're going to find them whether they exist or not.

An analytical response fully worthy of thoughtful discourse. Yup, that explains all.

canam · 28 Jun 2007, 06:14 (Ref:1948698)

The drivers could have been paid a small amount to keep quiet and could, technically, be on a small retainer. Given that both of these excellent drivers do not have full-time drives this year, it would not be rational for them to say something that could imperil that (even very small) probability of getting a well paid drive in (what is touted by one man to be) a well-funded team.

The hole is already very deep and Mr S seems capable if digging an even deeper one. Forget about engine technology; he should go into gold mining....oh perhaps he will...uh oh...he will soo be making a bid for Barrick Resources.

The359 · 28 Jun 2007, 07:57 (Ref:1948751)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TWK

An analytical response fully worthy of thoughtful discourse. Yup, that explains all.

I'm not explaining anything, I'm just saying I think you're reaching a little. Especially in claiming that the press release was caused by your article.

TWK · 28 Jun 2007, 09:08 (Ref:1948809)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The359

I'm not explaining anything, I'm just saying I think you're reaching a little. Especially in claiming that the press release was caused by your article.

A "guess," (in my mind) is different than a "claim" and I only did that because I got another (related) e-mail just a few minutes before the release. OK, fine. It wasn't. The timing was coincidence. Thanks.

MulsanneMike · 28 Jun 2007, 10:57 (Ref:1948896)

To those that doubt Tom's reporting, here's one question to ponder. CET has had their cars for nearly two months now...why haven't they tested anywhere? I hear the cars have sat as they were delivered and that there's very good reason for that. The house of cards is collapsing.

Hugewally · 28 Jun 2007, 16:15 (Ref:1948946)

Maybe we should just shoot the messenger when its news we personally don't like?

paul-collins · 28 Jun 2007, 16:23 (Ref:1948954)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

I hear the cars have sat as they were delivered and that there's very good reason for that.

Well, they have been painted.

Hugewally · 28 Jun 2007, 16:26 (Ref:1948957)

Or at least one of them...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Time (UK or CET) for Bathurst start?	Piglet	Australasian Touring Cars.	5	8 Oct 2005 23:55
Aussie Racing Car trouble?	tobc	Australasian Touring Cars.	6	31 Jan 2004 01:15
Fernández Racing in trouble? (Portland gravevine)	Muzza	ChampCar World Series	4	19 Jun 2002 07:26
Important notice: Race starts 5 am CET, 4 am UK time	R	ChampCar World Series	1	27 Oct 2001 21:07
Trouble in the pits = trouble on the track?	KC	NASCAR & Stock Car Racing	3	18 Feb 2000 15:49