Forum Replies Created
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
8th March 2012, 22:41 at 10:41 pm
Gutierrez is a good bet and Valsecchi and van der Garde will be there but I wouldn’t rule out Eriscsson either. He was only ever slightly off Sam Bird’s pace last year and if Bird was in this years field I think he’d be a clear favourite.
Coletti has shown great race pace in the past too so he should be up there as well. After that I expect Chilton to finally put a season together and Calado, Nasr and Dillman to be getting near the podium at the end of the year. An interesting season but far from what it could have been if FR3.5 wasn’t so popular.
7th March 2012, 21:55 at 9:55 pm
I’m sure the hard working mechanics at Caterham have a different nickname than ‘Speedy’ for him! Valsecchi and van der Garde are good drivers but this has to be their last chance. Gutierrez showed glimpses of being a great talent last year so if he is going to make it to F1 then he needs to be competing for the title.
I’m looking forward to following Calado this year, he should be aiming for regular top 8 finishes considering the field he’s up against. I wouldn’t rule out Chilton or Palmer either though, both have showed glimpses of pace in the past so in the 3rd and 2nd years in GP2 it’s about time they were competing for wins. Palmer looked good in F2, yes he was beaten by Stoneman but it was close..hardly a trouncing!
Is still such a shame that FR3.5 has several drivers who would be favoured above all of these drivers for this years GP2 title.
6th March 2012, 23:05 at 11:05 pm
@Joel Holland Teixeria has no business being in a formula as prestigious as GP2 and he wasn’t even the worst driver at the test today! There are some great prospects in GP2 this year (the GP3 graduates and Nasr particularly) but the series loses a lot of respect when you list the drivers that should be competing this year but aren’t.
With Sky giving GP2 great coverage it is a fantastic platform for young drivers (and sponsors) but it loses a lot of the shine. I’ll still look forward to the races but i’ll keep a closer eye on FR3.5. Van der Garde, Valsecchi , Ericsson, Gutierrez and Colletti should compete for the title and hopefully the likes of Calado, Chilton, Palmer and Nasr can get in the picture too.
6th March 2012, 21:57 at 9:57 pm
GP2 had a chance to be special this year but it’s spoiled by the ludicrous expense of it. FR3.5 used to be the poor cousin of GP2 but this year it’s field is comfortably better. Money has always bought average drivers a seat in the lower formula (and F1) but a few teams this year stand out as missing a trick. In particular Marussia not promoting Robert Wickens to GP2 is such a shame after the great year he had. Haryanto has had 2 average seasons in GP3 so they’ve taken the money over genuine talent. Caterham are also disappointing in taking Gonzalez and all his cash over Rossi. Gonzalez will never get near F1 on talent but Rossi genuinely could. Such a shame.
Add to those two, Roberto Merhi who will probably end up in DTM, Marco Wittmann, Valteri Bottas, Sam Bird, Jules Bianchi, Kevin Magnussen, Richie Stanaway, Lewis Williamson and Alexander Sims who should all be in GP2 and most would be if they had the budget. That would be a proper feeder series for F1.
8th December 2011, 23:03 at 11:03 pm
How can you say the majority take a certain time unless you are a Sky technician! I sincerely doubt you would get any change out of £200 if you had to pay for the service to be installed yourself. Anyone who’s ever called out a tradesman in their life can see that.
What is in it for Sky to sell 1 channel? Their costs are the same whether you watch one or 200 channels. The amount of channels gives a choice and caters for all types of people. You happen to be only interested in F1. Sky don’t change my monthly charge just because I only watch the same 10 channels, several of those being terrestrial channels.
I initially subscribed as I wanted to watch my other sporting love, boxing. I had a choice to make, was boxing worth the subscription to Sky and the Sky Sports package. It all came down to whether I wanted to spend money to watch boxing and sacrifice other things or not watch any boxing. Many F1 fans will have to make the same choice.
Sky’s subscription is not “all or nothing” either. The basic package is £20 per month. I’ve managed to somehow end up paying a ridiculous £72.50 per month although this does include telephone, broadband and 4 out of the 6 packages. I’ve thought about dropping it many times but it comes down to how much I value the service sky gives me and is it better than their competitors. The answer has always (somewhat begrudgingly) been that it is worth the price.
I don’t have to pay for it but I choose to do so. I’d prefer to have that money in my pocket each month but it’s my choice to have Sky instead. If you can’t afford £7 per week then I sympathise with you but Sky aren’t a charity and you still get 10 races live and rest on a highlights package on the beep.
8th December 2011, 21:26 at 9:26 pm
I don’t think you’ve paid for many tradesmen by the hour if you think that doesn’t cost! Mine was there for closer to two hours. Also, if the boxes cost a similar amount to Virgin boxes (which I do know the cost of) then you are way off with your estimations. If you go back 15 years, you had to pay for all of these things up front when you signed up to Sky and it cost several hundred pounds then.
You are only asked to sign up for 12 months, the pricing has to cover that period as you are free to cancel after that.
Whether you watch 1 channel or 200 channels is not the point. What’s for sale is a range of channels and you can choose to watch what you want. I don’t go into the supermarket, take out a box of biscuits and moan because I can’t buy just the ones I want. They’re sold as a box, just like Sky is sold as a package and you can choose to buy or not.
At £7 per week it is not expensive. A little over £5 per week if you get a £100 cash back off offer as I did. If someone really wants to watch every race live then they can sacrafice a few pints or some other luxury every week. It’s their choice to decide whether F1 is worth that.
I watch a lot of boxing and there are currently 5 pay channels which show live coverage. Add to that several pay per view events per year. I don’t blame TV channels for this, I’d prefer if they were all on terestrial television but simple economics shows that that isn’t possible. I simple work out what I can afford to pay for and what I think is worth paying for. Simple. Moaning that you don’t get something for free any more doesn’t get you anywhere. You need to live in the real world.
8th December 2011, 12:40 at 12:40 pm
It’s worth keeping an eye on deals from websites like Quidco.com too. You can usually get at least £100 cash back for a 12 month subscription. Never order from someone in a shopping centre as they are just bagging this cash.
As for the assertion that £363 for a 12 month subscription is a bad deal, I think this is ludicrous. £363 for someone to install a satelite dish, wire it to your living room and give you a Sky decoder box along with 12 months of television is great value.
Do you expect Sky to incurr this considerable cost for you to be able to order 1 channel at a low price?! The cost of installation and hardware is offset over the 12 months.
If you want to watch all races live next year then sign up to Sky, there are lots of deals about. If you don’t think it’s worth £30 a month (exluding deals) then don’t sign up. It’s simple economics, if you think it’s worth the cost then buy, otherwise don’t. Moaning doesn’t get you anywhere.
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)