Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto
But.. defining fuzzy lines like that is a slippery slope for F1 (moving into "diplomacy"). Otherwise, just cancel it to keep things simple.
Richard
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bella
i don't believe in calling f1 sport, but i also don't agree that sport should automatically transcend politics and moral and ethical barriers. given that no country is capable or willing to take the risk of returning the favour on putin-claimed territory, it's kind of difficult to know what to do. if anyone thinks it's simple they're vastly underestimating the lunacy being waved around.
|
why does it have to be any of those things?
how many F1 fans lost money in the markets today, how much more will your household pay for energy consumption, how many less cars are going to be sold because of increasing gas prices etc?
F1's main demographic is essentially working age to older population? so tax payers and those either looking to build their investment portfolios or those increasingly or already at an age where they are living off of them.
so why does geo politics even have to come into this?
F1 is a product and if its customers (fans) are being negatively and materially/financially affected by one of their suppliers (Russia) then they should be looking to replace that supplier/support their customers or risk losing said customers.
add in the more important issues surrounding morality, the unnecessary displacement of people and loss of life it should become a fairly simple calculation for the F1 stakeholders to make i hope.
if one lesson can be drawn from the recent Olympics imo its that declining viewership numbers based on viewers growing distaste for participating in sportswashing seems to be a real phenomenon.
that said while i may be just looking at this from a personal financial perspective and while that may be fair for me to do for myself, i agree that none of this is simple and there are many perspectives to listen to.