Merger talks again? - Page 12

Amar7605 · 18 May 2006, 16:58 (Ref:1613599)

One thing that I remember reading once was that KK and TG mentioned that a merger now would be difficult because of the long-term sponsorship commitments that each series has. Is that something that can be worked out? I would imagine so because for the sponsors, the benefit is greater exposure for their products on a larger scale.

indycool · 18 May 2006, 17:34 (Ref:1613636)

Amar, I didn't hearthat in connection with sponsor commitments....I heard it in connection with venue commitments.

indycool · 18 May 2006, 17:34 (Ref:1613637)

Sorry, double post.

marcus · 19 May 2006, 09:04 (Ref:1614058)

Um well its the Month of May Team Owner is rather busy this month

coyote9999 · 19 May 2006, 14:43 (Ref:1614261)

Yep I bet. Especially with all the discussions going on....

racinthestreets · 19 May 2006, 15:17 (Ref:1614277)

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...30/1004/SPORTS

Talks continue no scheduled announcement this month.

the.cosmic.pope · 21 May 2006, 22:55 (Ref:1615887)

Been told to expect an announcment soon, but most likely for 2008, not 2007.

luke · 22 May 2006, 09:24 (Ref:1616095)

2008 wouldn't be a suprise as they are still doing deals for races for their own series for next year...

climb · 22 May 2006, 09:43 (Ref:1616115)

Agreed, as far as now an unification for 2007 is extremely unlikely, to say the least

racinthestreets · 22 May 2006, 14:59 (Ref:1616362)

Quote:

Kalkhoven recently said reconciliation by August could still allow for a combined series in 2007. George wouldn't put a deadline on talks but said both sides likely will have their individual schedules lined up by then.

From the article in the Indy Star linked above. I am not sure that 2007 is a realistic target, but apparently at least one of the players in this believes it can happen. I think that the race in San Jose is a real target if the merger takes place in 2007. Hopefully an announcement is made before then!

Fogelhund · 23 May 2006, 16:37 (Ref:1617242)

A source tells me no merger for 2007.

indycool · 23 May 2006, 17:22 (Ref:1617272)

Starting to act that way, isn't it? Everyone got all whooped up over a totally erroneous Autoweek article and a lot of bandwidth wasted.

Tim Northcutt · 23 May 2006, 18:44 (Ref:1617315)

I'm just glad that they're talking....

Eventually merging or possibly merging is better than "No Way Ever" merging.

mountainstar · 23 May 2006, 20:22 (Ref:1617364)

Stay tuned until next May when the irl leaks out rumors of a merge(thanks autoweek). Fans interest will be piqued, columnists will write long columns extolling the virtues of a merge, sponsors will get excited, etc. just enough to get interest in open wheel racing stirred up enough indy can fill the field. Yea.

Yes, they are talking but this isn't rocket science. Even us here on this board can put together a reasonable enough proposal that will appease most everyone.

indycool · 23 May 2006, 20:32 (Ref:1617372)

1. What's your source that the IRL leaked anything to Autoweek.
2. Maybe some of us on the board CAN come up with an acceptable proposal, but I recall your post stating that TG issuing a public apology (not stating to who) be part of such a deal. So I kinda doubt on that basis that your thoughts are anywhere near an acceptable proposal.

The Snout · 23 May 2006, 22:35 (Ref:1617478)

IRL still touchy on that leaked thing huh.

indycool · 24 May 2006, 16:14 (Ref:1618008)

Well, try this:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/motor...4-newman_x.htm

Newman says he's seen the proposal and it isn't "fair and balanced." Nation and Kalkhoven say no such proposal exists.

Fogelhund · 25 May 2006, 01:29 (Ref:1618324)

Quote:

Originally Posted by indycool

Well, try this:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/motor...4-newman_x.htm

Newman says he's seen the proposal and it isn't "fair and balanced." Nation and Kalkhoven say no such proposal exists.

A misquote at best IC. The article stated that Newman had said, that TG's "offer" wasn't "fair and balanced". Nation and Kalkhoven said that there is no "Offer to Merge".

The difference being an "Offer to Merge" is a binding and legal contract agreement, which to nobody's suprise does not exist yet. (If ever).

If you want to slap Newman with something, perhaps a poor choice of words that has the internet lawyers in a knot. Look, we all know that TG and KK had discussions, which surely would have included the type of framework that might be acceptable to each under a merger, sort of an offer so to speak. You know, this is the type of framework that the IRL has to offer in a merger... nothing more, and certainly not worth getting worked up about.

-----------------------------------------------------------

As far as the accusations that the IRL "leaked" this for some grandeur, how very ridiculous. Everyone involved in this has admitted discussions, and the reality is that neither group is doing particularly well at the moment (and knows it, and has pressures from many different groups). This us vs. them thing is absolutely ridiculous.

indycool · 25 May 2006, 01:46 (Ref:1618334)

Tell that to Newman, then, Fogel. He's setting himself as the authority on the subject and slapping TG around with it.

Fogelhund · 25 May 2006, 02:00 (Ref:1618343)

Quote:

Originally Posted by indycool

Tell that to Newman, then, Fogel. He's setting himself as the authority on the subject and slapping TG around with it.

I believe your making a mountain out of a molehill. Newman is a crusty old man with an axe to grind. I don't read where he is setting himself as an authority on the subject, and yes he is slapping TG around. So what, he doesn't like what TG "offered", but not "Offer to merge", KK in their discussions. He is entitled to his opinion, moreso than the internet experts who battle it out day to day, over what any merger should look like.

It is what it is, and the saddest thing about it is the way that the fractionalized factions doing battle, try to use every quote, or misquote to extract a point in some misplaced notion that they can push their side to victory.

So what, Newman has an opinion, as does AJ, and they are polarized. Big deal.

indycool · 25 May 2006, 02:14 (Ref:1618351)

I agree. Newman's a crusty old man with an axe to grind. Believe what he says about an offer or proposal that apparently doesn't exist as you wish.

When it comes down to it, we know very few facts and I submit he doesn't know much either. We know KK and TG are talking. We don't know if anything on any element is decided and if something has been decided, we don't know if it's going to get traded off into something else as discussions continue.

IMO, Newman doesn't either.

Amar7605 · 25 May 2006, 02:35 (Ref:1618354)

Also, a merger in essence hurts Newman-Haas because it takes away their dominance that they enjoy right now. A merger means more competition, and against Penske, Ganassi, and AGR.

mountainstar · 25 May 2006, 04:09 (Ref:1618370)

Quote:

Originally Posted by indycool

Believe what he says about an offer or proposal that apparently doesn't exist as you wish.

Really. I guess kk and tg have been discussing skiing and wine the whole time. Obviously offers or proposals or whatever you want to call them are being traded back and forth. I think they call it N-E-G-O-T-I-A-T-I-O-N. And based on past history, I can almost guarantee tg is throwing around kooky ideas.

I wouldn't describe Newman as a crusty old man.
1. He's been a successful actor
2. He's been a successful race car driver
3. He's been a successful team owner
4. He's given millions to charities world wide

I'd say he has a lot to offer compared to most. Yes, he has a problem with the management. Well SO DO I and fer good reason.

mountainstar · 25 May 2006, 04:10 (Ref:1618371)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amar7605

Also, a merger in essence hurts Newman-Haas because it takes away their dominance that they enjoy right now. A merger means more competition, and against Penske, Ganassi, and AGR.

They've been there before, so I can't see how that is an issue.

JohnSSC · 25 May 2006, 09:53 (Ref:1618502)

It is an issue, mountainstar, because Haas is the ONLY source for all of your Lola's needs. Karl, like the rest of them, has primarily his own interests at heart.

If there is an equipment change in any merger that may or may not happen, the revenue stream Haas currently experiences will diminish considerably - even if a Lola chassis remains an option.

And I think what Indycool was doing re: his Newman comment was to demonstrate how much talking people are doing. On one hand the principals are saying: "Agreement? What agreement?" and then you get PLN (or whoever) giving their analysis of "the agreement!"

I just wish the non-combatants would hush up and let the main protagonists do their thing.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Merger A Done Deal!	TedN	ChampCar World Series	5	9 May 2006 07:42
Gerry talks F1 Merger	The Snout	ChampCar World Series	20	24 Feb 2003 06:11