rec.autos.simulators

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

Eddie Petti

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Eddie Petti » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 21:38:52

If you believe that story... As I see it, the rich were tired of sending all
that money back to England, they wanted to keep all that money here, yes,
they still wanted it collected, but they wanted to be in charge of it...  So
they started a revolt against the tax which lead to the Revolution.

Screwing, you talk about the government screwing people and that we won't
take it?  We've been taking it for as long as I can remember.  They take so
much money from us that the average individual must work until the end of
April just to pay for the taxes they have levied against us.  That's crazy.

Greed is the American way...

Thanks.





> > > You want to keep SV the channel that it is?  Buy it.  If you can buy
it
> you
> > > can program as you see fit.  That's my point.  Sure, current viewers
can
> > > complain and they should, but threatening boycotts...

> > Boycotts are as American as apple pie and special interest groups do it
> > all the time. Remember the christian groups that boycotted Disney Corp?
> > How about the gay and lesbien groups boycotting Dr. Laura's syndicated
> > TV show. I'm not saying any group is right or wrong initiating a
> > boycott, but they do tend to get results. MTCW.

> > Gary

> Boycotts are the only way to get your opinion heard.  Here's one for you:

> You can buy our tea, at a grossly inflated price, it's the only tea
> available, and if you don't like it you can get your own damn tea
> plantations.  Oh that's right, you can't.

> remember that one?

> What happened to the American ideal of liberty?

> You wouldn't take this kind of treatment from a democratically elected
> government, but as soon as a private business finds a way to***you for
> more money while giving you less, you roll over and take it?
> There will be people who will have a stark choice- either pay up for
> "NASCAR" branded, reduced value motorsport coverage, or cut off their nose
> to spite their face have no motorsport coverage.

> If speedvision is not *losing* money, then betraying the customers who
have
> made it successful enough to be WORTH selling to Fox is simple greed.
> If speedvision is losing money, though, then you'll have to say it was
nice
> while it lasted, but at least with NASCAR branding, you might get to watch
> something, if not everything you'd like.

> Eventually, such rationisation, merger, acquisition and elimnation will
> result in no choice for anyone.
> Then all Americans will be equal, all wearing the same clothes, eating the
> same food, driving the same cars.

> What do I care, I've got motorsports programmes coming out of my ears over
> here.

> cheers
> John

Eddie Petti

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Eddie Petti » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 21:45:54

Well, I don't know about you, but I grew up in a poor family and we have
worked our way up to owning our own business.  If I wanted to sell it and
some people came along and talked about boycotting in an attempt to ruin
said sale or in an attempt to threaten my living, I'd certainly be upset.

As for learning with age, I'm over halfway through my life expectancy now
and believe I know how things work.  Everything revolves around the mighty
$, if you don't think so, I simply suggest you look around.  Generally,
people only do things for money, take charities for example, did you know
that organizations like the FOP, United Way, etc, spend less than 40% of
their donations to actually help people or do what they say they will?  Most
are far less.

FTR, I have been involved with Fortune 500 companies and have seen all sides
of the corporate coin.  The large corporations are out of control, I prefer
operating a small family run business where you can actually provide
customer support and be proud of the product that you provide

Thanks.



> > Wow, it's stupid to think that Speedvision exists to make money?

> You must be one of those corporate spoiled brat, my son... You will learn
> with age to enjoy the small time left before you die, like everybody.

> --
> -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
> -- May the Downforce be with you...
> -- http://www.ymenard.com/
> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
> Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Uncle Feste

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Uncle Feste » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 21:51:14


> Wow, it's stupid to think that Speedvision exists to make money?  That's
> what your saying?  It exists out of the goodness of someone's heart?  If you
> believe all that nonsense they try to sell you about how it's dedicated to
> racing, I feel for you.  Everything is dedicated to the mighty dollar.

<Snip>

Frickin' Capitalists.  They don't have a clue.  It's there *because*
it's different.  And Jan, as part of The Market, is speaking up in
opposition to this stupid move.  I agree wholeheartedly with Jan.

--

Fester

Eddie Petti

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Eddie Petti » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 21:52:35

Well, the threat of boycotting wasn't only to SV, which I have no problem
with.  The part that I had a problem with was threatening boycott FOX and
NASCAR for changing SV, the change of SV is ultimately up to Speedvision
Network LLC.  I don't see how you can blame FOX and NASCAR for making such
an offer...

You can have your opinion and express it and I can have mine and express it.
If you expect me not express views that don't agree with you, then I suggest
that you filter my posts.

Thanks.



> > You want to keep SV the channel that it is?  Buy it.  If you can buy it
> you
> > can program as you see fit.  That's my point.  Sure, current viewers can
> > complain and they should, but threatening boycotts...

> Uhhhh, TV is a medium for the viewers primarily.  Ratings decide, only
that.
> Advertising is directly related to the ratings.  If I don't watch SV
> anymore, is the way a simple viewer shows it's disagreement with the
> business decision a channel may take.

> You are defending a dead horse.  It's almost close to DGF's level.

> --
> -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
> -- May the Downforce be with you...
> -- http://www.ymenard.com/
> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
> Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Uncle Feste

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Uncle Feste » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 21:56:37


> I remember those days!  I can't see the coverage going away with FOX
> SportsNet around, unless of course the market isn't there.  I have no idea
> what the ratings are for these various types of racing on SV.

So unless your interests mesh with the Mindless Majority, which then
Corporate America can assemble together to make money off you, it
shouldn't get coverage at all?  Get back under your rock, you
Capitalist.

--

Fester

Uncle Feste

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Uncle Feste » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 21:59:32


> You want to keep SV the channel that it is?  Buy it.  If you can buy it you
> can program as you see fit.  That's my point.  Sure, current viewers can
> complain and they should, but threatening boycotts...

So you're telling me that you're stupid enough to financially support
those who go in opposition to your interests & viewing desires?  To
complain & do nothing else is useless.  The Corporations just ignore
you.  Hit them in their damn wallet.  They'll have to comply sooner or
later.  Or fold.

--

Fester

Eddie Petti

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Eddie Petti » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 22:08:27

I guess calling me a 'Capitalist' (in 2 separate messages) is meant as some
type of derogatory comment?  What, are you some kind of 'Socialist'?

What's wrong with 'Corporate America' making money?  I guess you feel people
should get the same amount of money whether they actually earn it or not?  I
guess you also feel that Corporation should give their products away rather
than trying to make a profit for their shareholders?

Thanks.



> > I remember those days!  I can't see the coverage going away with FOX
> > SportsNet around, unless of course the market isn't there.  I have no
idea
> > what the ratings are for these various types of racing on SV.

> So unless your interests mesh with the Mindless Majority, which then
> Corporate America can assemble together to make money off you, it
> shouldn't get coverage at all?  Get back under your rock, you
> Capitalist.

> --

> Fester

Eddie Petti

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Eddie Petti » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 22:12:52

Where have I said that I'm financially supporting "those who go in
opposition to my interests & viewing desires"?

If I didn't like what FOX/NASCAR did with SV, I'd complain and then cancel
my SV subscription.  I wouldn't boycott all of FOX or all of NASCAR, simply
SV.

FWIW, in today's economy, you can't hit a corporation in their wallet...
Especially not in this situation.

Thanks.



> > You want to keep SV the channel that it is?  Buy it.  If you can buy it
you
> > can program as you see fit.  That's my point.  Sure, current viewers can
> > complain and they should, but threatening boycotts...

> So you're telling me that you're stupid enough to financially support
> those who go in opposition to your interests & viewing desires?  To
> complain & do nothing else is useless.  The Corporations just ignore
> you.  Hit them in their damn wallet.  They'll have to comply sooner or
> later.  Or fold.

> --

> Fester

Stephen Smit

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Stephen Smit » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 22:27:25

Jan, all,

Don't bother to fight it.  It's gonna happen...no matter what.  Might as
well sit back & enjoy it.

My own view is that NASCAR has peaked (probably with the death of our
beloved Dale).  It's already way overexposed.  And confused.  If "Friends"
jumped from NBC to Fox in mid-season, they'd lose a ton of viewers.  That's
what the Cup races are doing, and while it may line the capitalist tools'
pockets, it's sowing the seeds for a future meltdown.

Just so's you know, Roger Werner, the founder of SV (and the OLN, and the
godfather of ESPN), swears SV will turn into the NASCAR Channel "over my
dead body."  So remember the election promise after the election, huh, guys?

Maybe this will force some of us off the couch and off to the races.  CART
could use some better attendance figures....

--Steve Smith



sanctioning body completed a $2.8 billion
With viewership at an all-time high, Fox and
channel.  The plan is to convert Speedvision, an
varied racing events besides NASCAR Racing,
same.  We DON'T want a good racing channel
watch it.  I'll have the cable package (which I
good format that shows alot more varied racing
on there...I can bet my bottom dollar that
favor of NASCAR sanctioned events.

Uncle Feste

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Uncle Feste » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 23:43:05


> Where have I said that I'm financially supporting "those who go in
> opposition to my interests & viewing desires"?

> If I didn't like what FOX/NASCAR did with SV, I'd complain and then cancel
> my SV subscription.  I wouldn't boycott all of FOX or all of NASCAR, simply
> SV.

Pretty hard to attempt to force them into change like that....

Difficult but not impossible.  Depends on how angry/determined you are
at striking back.  A little research will divulge all the interests the
company(ies) has in other enterprises.  Boycotts are pretty effective,
BTW.  Look at the '50's & '60's south in the US.  Helped to change a
lot.  :-)

--

Fester

Uncle Feste

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Uncle Feste » Fri, 29 Jun 2001 00:01:25


> I guess calling me a 'Capitalist' (in 2 separate messages) is meant as some
> type of derogatory comment?  What, are you some kind of 'Socialist'?

Funny.  Many shortsighted people only see things on a "us or them"
basis.  If you're anti-Capitalist, you must be Socialist/Communist,
they'll say.  Realists, on the other hand, see the problems in BOTH
systems.  I don't go with the "lesser of 2 evils" outlook.  If it's
wrong, it's wrong, regardless of who/what is involved.  Capitalism is
every bit as *** as Socialism/Communism.  

Absolutely not.  THAT'S part of why I'm an anti-Capitalist. ;-)  As a
company president, for instance, to make money for your shareholders &
keep them happy you basically have to steal.  The everyday
worker-in-the-trenches is the one keeping the company afloat.  Let's say
that as a worker, your labor gives a value-add to the company's end
product of $50.  But they only paid you $30.  Sure they made a profit.
Mr Company President gets a bonus check, the shareholder get dividends,
etc.  But they took (stole) $20 from you!  If you like that, so be it.
It happens to me every day & it makes me angry as hell.

I'm a mechanic by trade.  The company I work for gets paid $70 per new
car prep.  The company demands we get at least 6 done an hour.  Let's
see... at my rate of pay, that's slightly less than $3 per prep.  THEY
deserve the remaining $67?  Legalized theft is what I call it.  So quit
your job & go elsewhere, someone will invariably suggest.  Sorry, in a
capitalist society, that kind of scene is played out in every business
out there.  No options.

There's also the matter of Drug Companies & AIDS *** for Africa I read
recently.  Generic, more affordably priced AIDS *** were made
available to the sick in Africa (and still making a profit even at the
greatly reduced price!) but the US Drug Companies stepped in to stop
them.  Seems if they can't make tons of money on you, you're life's not
worth spit.  You may be proud of such a system, but it causes people
like myself to hold people with such viewpoints in derision.

:-)

--

Fester

Eddie Petti

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Eddie Petti » Fri, 29 Jun 2001 00:38:16


Complete and utter rubbish.  The employee in the trenches didn't take a risk
operating or starting the company, in most cases the employee in the
trenches just wants to work specific hours and go home when it's done.  They
don't want to have the responsibility of coming back or staying late when
things go wrong or extra work is needed.  The employee in the trenches can
simply go find another job if the company goes out of business.  Decisions
of the shareholders and the president either make or break a company, a
front line employee has little effect on the overall picture.

Sounds to me like you just don't have what it takes.  I was with a Fortune
500 company and didn't like the decision they were making, what did I do?  I
left and started my own company.  I didn't sit there and whine about
'legalized theft'.  Do something about your situation or deal with it.

Tell me how the US Drug Companies were able to stop worldwide distribution
of a certain drug, unless of course they produced it.

Uncle Feste

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Uncle Feste » Fri, 29 Jun 2001 01:17:08




> > Absolutely not.  THAT'S part of why I'm an anti-Capitalist. ;-)  As a
> > company president, for instance, to make money for your shareholders &
> > keep them happy you basically have to steal.  The everyday
> > worker-in-the-trenches is the one keeping the company afloat.  Let's say
> > that as a worker, your labor gives a value-add to the company's end
> > product of $50.  But they only paid you $30.  Sure they made a profit.
> > Mr Company President gets a bonus check, the shareholder get dividends,
> > etc.  But they took (stole) $20 from you!  If you like that, so be it.
> > It happens to me every day & it makes me angry as hell.

> Complete and utter rubbish.  The employee in the trenches didn't take a risk
> operating or starting the company, in most cases the employee in the
> trenches just wants to work specific hours and go home when it's done.  They
> don't want to have the responsibility of coming back or staying late when
> things go wrong or extra work is needed.  The employee in the trenches can
> simply go find another job if the company goes out of business.  Decisions
> of the shareholders and the president either make or break a company, a
> front line employee has little effect on the overall picture.

Without the product they produce, there'd be nothing to make a profit
ON.  Where is upper management's value-add on the product?

So in order to defend from being stolen from I should therefore join the
ranks of the thieves?  No thanks.

Bingo.  Patents.  Instead of caring for your fellow human being.
Sickening.

--

Fester

Eddie Petti

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by Eddie Petti » Fri, 29 Jun 2001 01:56:18


The employees in the trenches are easily replaceable...  Good upper
management is hard to come by, just look at the dot-com world to see this.

Well then quit complaining about your lot in life.

Patents?  You mean intellectual property?  You are against intellectual
property rights?  A company spends millions or billions to develop something
and they are supposed to allow people to just give it away?  You certainly
live in dreamland...  What happens to all the shareholders of the company
that invested those millions or billions of dollars?  Out of luck?  No ROTI?
Get real...

I believe I'm through with you on this subject, you obviously don't agree
with my concepts or capitalism and I certainly don't agree with your
'socialism' which doesn't work btw, see Russia.

Thanks.

ymenar

WARNING: Fox conversion of Speedvision to 'NASCAR-vision' eminent...

by ymenar » Fri, 29 Jun 2001 02:20:26


> You can have your opinion and express it and I can have mine and express
it.
> If you expect me not express views that don't agree with you, then I
suggest
> that you filter my posts.

Welcome to the Usenet my boy. If you can't stand the heat, you know what to
do...

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
-- http://www.ymenard.com/
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.