CET Racing Entry in trouble?

The359 · 20 Jun 2007, 22:42 (Ref:1942981)

You're correct.

Mariantic says that CET Solaroli wont be at Lime Rock. Here we go again...

vorsprung · 21 Jun 2007, 14:33 (Ref:1943419)

A photo of CET Spyder, posted by a Floridan Porsche owner to Pelican Parts forums.

PINK!

Speed-King · 21 Jun 2007, 14:44 (Ref:1943424)

Red, I'd say....not the best livery I've ever seen...

paul-collins · 21 Jun 2007, 14:58 (Ref:1943435)

vorsprung, can you show where that was originally linked? Was there any discussion relating to it? When was it posted?

vorsprung · 21 Jun 2007, 15:14 (Ref:1943449)

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul-collins

vorsprung, can you show where that was originally linked? Was there any discussion relating to it? When was it posted?

Posted yesterday, no discussion, except "New local Racer!"

MORE random pics, page 725 (some pictures in that thread are borderline NSFW)

paul-collins · 21 Jun 2007, 15:40 (Ref:1943464)

Thanks, vorsprung.

TWK · 21 Jun 2007, 19:12 (Ref:1943600)

We might see that car on a grid, or we might not. If we do, it may not be for long, and it may not be with the rumored (but delayed) big name drivers.

The conclusion of this article, is...

Quote:

"We’ll be pleasantly surprised to see CET Racing on a grid anywhere, anytime."

The359 · 21 Jun 2007, 19:52 (Ref:1943640)

And why, pray tell, did this whole thing suddenly collapse? I find it hard to believe Porsche would sell two RS Spyders to someone without some belief that it'd actually happen.

paul-collins · 21 Jun 2007, 20:06 (Ref:1943646)

I'm not so sure it has collapsed, yet. Those cars were not cheap, and Porsche doesn't loan this sort of thing out.

Still, Porsche went to some effort to ensure they were ready to supply engineering support.

almzkid · 21 Jun 2007, 20:44 (Ref:1943682)

Murphy seems to be smokin the good stuff lately, He should write for L#sr.net instead, the rafanelli rumours, CEt is now dying, flip flop goes the pendulum of momentum.

JAG · 21 Jun 2007, 20:50 (Ref:1943689)

Is anything ever straight forward in the ALMS, or are people looking for problems were there aren't any?

TWK · 21 Jun 2007, 21:08 (Ref:1943706)

Quote:

Originally Posted by almzkid

Murphy seems to be smokin the good stuff lately, He should write for L#sr.net instead, the rafanelli rumours, CEt is now dying, flip flop goes the pendulum of momentum.

Murphy reports rumors - you never noticed that?

He doesn't pretend to be a news blog, does he? If you want news, then go ahead and wait for AutoWeak...no wait...their news is wrong sometimes, too, isn't it?

As I recall LMSR.net called its reports news...Murphy doesn't do that.

If you want news, go to dailysportscar or The Paddock.net. If you want opinion, features and photos go to sportscarpros.com, or to Last Turn Clubhouse. They are all Murphy favorites.

By the way, Murphy had CET right...what he reported was absolutely right, and has since been confirmed by the principals, and (for the drivers) every other outlet around. You heard it on the Le Mans broadcast, right?

By the way, nothing in that LTC report says the deal is "dying." It is an investigative report on company history that pre-dates the whole CET Racing/Spyder deal. The fact is that CET is not independent, it is owned by Infinity Networks, and Infinity Networks is selling for 14 cents a share...about $13 million total value. Seen any adiabatic engines out there lately? Heard about any big contracts that would yield $50 million to go racing with?

To add to this story, CET was not at Road Atlanta today, even though they were expected...that part of the story has been updated

What makes you think Rafanelli won't be back?

TWK · 21 Jun 2007, 21:14 (Ref:1943714)

Evidently "due diligence" for Porsche didn't include Infinity Networks, John W. Bush, or Don Miller, or any of a number of Nevada Corporations with no reported revenue. (Nor does Infinity Networks have any revenue we've been able to find...aside from proceeds from what appear to be occasional "pumping" of share prices...perhaps the SEC should be taking a look?)

Perhaps Porsche felt all that stuff (and that nonsensical adiabatic engine baloney) was unimportant because dear old Al had plenty of independent wealth? Hope so. I was one who was rather looking forward to a plethora of Porsches.

bil588 · 22 Jun 2007, 05:14 (Ref:1943908)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TWK

Perhaps Porsche felt all that stuff (and that nonsensical adiabatic engine baloney) was unimportant because dear old Al had plenty of independent wealth? Hope so. I was one who was rather looking forward to a plethora of Porsches.

Why? Because a Porsche parade is what the ALMS needs in the LMP2 class? At least Porsche is winning in one class.

TWK · 22 Jun 2007, 06:54 (Ref:1943943)

Quote:

Originally Posted by bil588

Why? Because a Porsche parade is what the ALMS needs in the LMP2 class? At least Porsche is winning in one class.

No, because we're finally getting - with both Porsche and Acura - an LMP2 class that's worth watching, with quality cars, teams, and drivers. Two more, especially as described in Mr. Solaroli's pronouncements, can be nothing but good. More Porsches don't bother me because I have little doubt that Acura - and perhaps others - will rise to the challenge.

aeroehl · 22 Jun 2007, 12:47 (Ref:1944240)

If the Solaroli deal did fall through, I think there is still a pretty good chance we would see the 2 Spyders on the grid later this year, as there seem to be a large number of teams looking into the cars (Conzus).

The Badger · 22 Jun 2007, 16:23 (Ref:1944372)

I heard a figure of 4 million euro with Porsche support for 1 RS Spyder per season from some German journalists at Le Mans .

HORNDAWG · 22 Jun 2007, 16:57 (Ref:1944389)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TWK

We might see that car on a grid, or we might not. If we do, it may not be for long, and it may not be with the rumored (but delayed) big name drivers.

The conclusion of this article, is...

All this scurrilous rhetoric may or may not have anything to do with the team racing. Can anyone point me to the statement from CET/Solaroli that says they will not be at Lime Rock.

L.P.

TWK · 22 Jun 2007, 22:48 (Ref:1944639)

You can call it scurroulous rhetoric if you like, but that's not the term I would use for reporting what is on the public record.

Why the heck would someone make a statement that they're not going to show up? Not usually. If there is some material error or misrepresentation in the article, perhaps they should comment on that.

HORNDAWG · 24 Jun 2007, 01:42 (Ref:1945219)

When a story (report) is produced I would hope it is factual. As I am assuming it was here, since I did not check all the sources. Referencing Infinite Networks Corporation's business practices and then putting forth/implying that they are Al Solaroli's with no evidence to that fact, then yes I consider it scurrilous rhetoric!! According to the report, Al Solaroli was bought out and then made President of the new 'CET Technologies a wholly owned subsidiary of Infinite Networks Corporation' in Jan./Feb. with no explanation of his actual role, if any, other than in name. Where are the facts that connect Al Solaroli to Infinite Networks Corporation at a level to dictate business practices to his corporate bosses?
Also where are the facts that make Infinite Networks Corporation a partner of any degree in the CET Racing/Solaroli Motorsports race team? Where are the lines (facts) to connect the dots? How much is Al worth since the buy-out? By straight extrapulation from current stock value vs. value when the buy-out occured INNX was worth 133,500,000. how much of that did Al get?

L.P.

Hugewally · 24 Jun 2007, 04:40 (Ref:1945265)

How little you know...

HORNDAWG · 24 Jun 2007, 16:59 (Ref:1945585)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugewally

How little you know...

You are exactly right! Because there are no facts produced to say that there is a connection! I am more than willing to be educated on the facts that pertain to this story, but refuse to color someone in that light when to this point it is just hearsay as there has not been anything produced to prove that! Am I saying it is not a possibility? No! Am I saying its not a probability? To that I do not have the answer and the story/article/report supplied no facts to prove it! So unless you are willing to step up and provide those facts this little quip is rather obtuse.

L.P.

Hugewally · 24 Jun 2007, 17:55 (Ref:1945618)

Google...

HORNDAWG · 24 Jun 2007, 21:17 (Ref:1945744)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugewally

Google...

Sorry, not my job to investigate and find the facts to verify the "investigative report" at LTC! It is the "reporters" responsibility to have the substantiating facts to prove the implications. Otherwise it is just scurrilous rhetoric.

L.P.

TWK · 25 Jun 2007, 17:00 (Ref:1946493)

The response to much of this is in Part 2

As to relevance to the thread, it is "ALMS 2007 Post Le Mans," isn't it? So whether a team that was announced with great excitement and fanfare shows up - or not - and why, would seem to be "spot on" topic.

Apologies for the link, but part 2 of this is 2100 words, and reproduction here won't serve any purpose (except to clog up the thread).

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Time (UK or CET) for Bathurst start?	Piglet	Australasian Touring Cars.	5	8 Oct 2005 23:55
Aussie Racing Car trouble?	tobc	Australasian Touring Cars.	6	31 Jan 2004 01:15
Fernández Racing in trouble? (Portland gravevine)	Muzza	ChampCar World Series	4	19 Jun 2002 07:26
Important notice: Race starts 5 am CET, 4 am UK time	R	ChampCar World Series	1	27 Oct 2001 21:07
Trouble in the pits = trouble on the track?	KC	NASCAR & Stock Car Racing	3	18 Feb 2000 15:49