![]() I think Toyota might disagree with the educated fellows here. Also, from what I could quickly get from their model, it assumes a progressive relationship between effort and results. E.g., the 'value' of the Ferrari brand, indirect roi on improved brand awareness and image (Toyota, Renault, BMW, etc). Advertising revenue is indirectly linked to the current season's performance, and has many non-result related factors which can not easily be quantified. One of the most dominant ones: Advertising revenue. They are highly hypothetical models based on a lot of assumed underlying mathematical and economical logic, leaving out a lot of relevant information. The mathematical models are totally useless. Maybe its me tho, i become increasingly less sure of things F1 the more i use this forum (can something become 'increasingly less'? I'm not even sure of that, see)ĮDIT: I should point out that the double post is simply due to lag and me pressing the thing twice cos I thought I hadn't pressed it first time. ![]() So you understand tho, it suggests that FIA rule changes that aren't aimed at improving safety are done for increased revenue to the FIA and that audience increases if the cars are more powerful (powerful meaning top speed and number of horsepower), the former is dubious in the extreme (if the FIA was interested in making loads of money it would have sold the tv rights to BCE for considerably considerably more, the latter is plain wrong. Wouldn't want to stop others reading it tho, I may be entirely wrong, it may be first class. Only read first two pages, but it already makes rather leaping assumptions without backup.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |