Pre-season Humor: “I’m A Top Three Driver”
Written by George Katinger · March 10, 2007
With not much else to discuss and comment about one week prior to the season opener in Australia, I’m always grateful for the inflated ego’s that comprise a great portion of the character’s in Formula One
planet-f1.com: Ralf: ‘I’m a top three driver’
autosport.com: Ralf says title a matter of time for Toyota
feedmef1.com: 2007 Driver Lineup Analysis: Ralf, Trulli and DC
Comments
9 Responses to “Pre-season Humor: “I’m A Top Three Driver””
Got something to say?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Where?
In Chump Car?
Maybe Ralfy could win over there. I hear they are looking for drivers.
And cars.
And title sponsors.
And a clue.
I’m slipping in advanced age. I should have added:
But they have an “official” wine sponsor!
All things considered that may be a VERY good thing.
Well let’s face it, if his name had been Ralf Smith, would even be there?
On a even more interesting note, there is the prospect that Toyota may be outperformed by their customer Williams this season. Too early to tell but it appears Williams (at least for now) hold the upper hand.
Now now Marc, let the dying depart with some peace and tranquility; the same atmosphere you will find at most “races” this year.
And besides this was an F1 observation. As for Toyota, I’ve predicted the possibility of a Toyota win at the Las Vegas race tomorrow. Wouldn’t that be ironic, a NASCAR win in their first year and nothing in F1 after four years and 2 billion dollars!
george, toyota seems to have already won. if they hadn’t entered F1, exactly how much press would they be getting here and on other fan sites? is bad press worse than good press? they didn’t need to enter either nascar or f1 to get to be the biggest/best manufacturer. even without winning in f1 they’ve not hurt their sales or reputation. when ford withrew from F1 their slide from grace was well in progress. most would have concluded that their lack of success in F1 promoted their downward spiral. yet, it’s my opinion that, in the states at least, motorsports does little for the bottom line of any manufacturer. just props up the egos for a few engineers. the only advertising value they get out of it is having their name on a car. I doubt many people see a nascar monte carlo as proof that chevy can build quality cars. on the other end of the spectrum, if toyota doesnt win in nascar do you think hordes of people will go out and sell their camrys because they’re perception of quality has been diminished?
in the old days, F1 had at least a small real world connection to car manufacturing because of it being the pinnacle of engineeering. since the rules no longer allow for innovation, what are the manufacturers really there for?
advertising, win lose or draw they still get their names in front of the public, most of whom are already set in their buying habits. it’s hard to calculate how many ferraris have been sold because of multiple world championships, but if winning were the criteria, it would seem ferrari would be leading the sales figures by millions of cars. being a F1 fan for over 40 i’ve seen many sponsors come and go, with few except tire and oil suppliers profit from the investment. so it’s my opinion that the only real goal for most sponsors is to get their name in front of the buying public, then hope their product can support the investment.
Wow dufuss, wanna come and market FastMachines?
While I understand and some what agree with your comments, I gotta believe that in auto sales at least, good PR is better than bad PR. In Hollywood it doesn’t matter if they say bad things or good things about you, as long as they’re talking about YOU.
Can’t believe the same theory carries over to car sales regardless of the segment. Ferrari sales are probably the strongest they’ve ever been, but they almost went under when they were in the doldrums in F1 competition before Schumi showed them how to win. That’s why Fiat bought the franchise, to save Italian pride.
I agree. If they weren’t dominant during the last decade in the F1, Ferrari would disappear. For many years Ferrari has been the only profitable branch of the Fiat company. And given their cars’ prices they sell very well. I am nothing of an economist but I’m pretty sure they have the best Revenue Per Unit numbers in the industry. Advertising in motorsports doesn’t fit any product but what’s better place to advertise a sportcar?
Corporate profits aside, does anyone remember the real purpose of racing? To drive cars . . . fast. Behind the veil of advertising and sales figures are car makers, engineers and drivers who simply love to build fast cars and drive them. Racing is still the best way to lose a small fortune, and, by in large, it is done simply for the love of speed. All the rest of it
On a theoretical level I have to agree with you pc, and all of the SCCA events I’ve been to bear that out. The thrill of racing is the over riding factor.
On the manufacturer’s level I think it’s an entirely different game. I agree it’s still about the racing, but the costs to develop a car, a team, a system of excellence, are intrinsically tied to the name. A winless Toyota racing effort may not hurt sales of Camry’s, but it may have an impact on sales of the Lexus brand, and it definitely impacts on the company’s prestige.
Look at the lack of sponsorship in the IRL and Champ Car series; there’s nothing to sell there but the competition and it is universally viewed as mediocre, so there is nothing to be gained by a sponsor fronting 4-5 million dollars to fund a team.