Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 48 of 48

Thread: Formula One 2019

  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,418
    Anyway, are you saying Lewis is a profiteer? Sorry I don't quite understand the meaning of that picture.

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    1,521
    So has anyone got any points about the article rather than the subject?

  3. #43
    Ask me about my bottom br
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    ox.mx
    Posts
    3,040
    I was going to ask what article as I didn't see the hyperlink I was expecting to find.

    So there, that piece is so well written it became invisible. I have nothing further to add, except that Liberty has shown a worse side than Bernie on some things; for example getting rid of the timing app, which along with both the "possibility of a pass" and betting odds graphics signal a crazy mixture of trying to appeal to a wider audience and trying to fix that which isn't broken.
    acket.

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Croydon, UK
    Posts
    380
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan P View Post
    So has anyone got any points about the article rather than the subject?
    I think your article makes a good point, and is mostly very readable, I like the conversational tone.

    In terms of nit-picking:

    The second and third paragraphs start with very long sentences, which are a bit hard to read - I'd probably recommend splitting them up for clarity.

    There are quite a few words that are capitalized, which wouldn't usually be, (Marketing agency, Betting companies, Live Odds, Gambling Ads, Virtual signage, etc) - I find this slightly confusing as a reader as I wonder if they're referring to specific companies or what-have-you.

    'Occurring' should have two 'r's


    In terms of the conclusion, and this is a matter of opinion, to me it's a bit of a strong statement to call the live odds plan a non-runner. I think it's a very good point that there are multiple countries it won't be allowed in, and that therefore (a) they'll need a technical solution that allows them to only have it appear in selected countries, and (b) they won't make as much money as if it was shown globally. However, without more research I imagine that most EU countries and the US will permit it (?), and that would make it worth doing on a country-by-country basis.

  5. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    1,521
    Quote Originally Posted by samoht View Post
    I think your article makes a good point, and is mostly very readable, I like the conversational tone.

    In terms of nit-picking:

    The second and third paragraphs start with very long sentences, which are a bit hard to read - I'd probably recommend splitting them up for clarity.

    There are quite a few words that are capitalized, which wouldn't usually be, (Marketing agency, Betting companies, Live Odds, Gambling Ads, Virtual signage, etc) - I find this slightly confusing as a reader as I wonder if they're referring to specific companies or what-have-you.

    'Occurring' should have two 'r's


    In terms of the conclusion, and this is a matter of opinion, to me it's a bit of a strong statement to call the live odds plan a non-runner. I think it's a very good point that there are multiple countries it won't be allowed in, and that therefore (a) they'll need a technical solution that allows them to only have it appear in selected countries, and (b) they won't make as much money as if it was shown globally. However, without more research I imagine that most EU countries and the US will permit it (?), and that would make it worth doing on a country-by-country basis.
    Thank you. I've made some changes and sent it off for publication on grandprix247.com

  6. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,418
    Oh, you wrote the article and wanted some constructive criticisms! I totally missed that... I thought you just copied and pasted from somewhere...

    I was like... we donít like gambling and thatís that... what else do you want us to say?

  7. #47
    Junior Potato
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,106
    Quote Originally Posted by FaultyMario View Post
    I hate that our consumption-driven society is okay with profiteering.
    Eh. People have gotta eat. Nobody in the world will do what they love full time if it doesnít pay the bills.

    In general, itís ok.

    But when the welfare of living animals is at stake it can go blow a goat.

  8. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,418
    There are people who slaughter chickens, pigs, cows for fair amount of profit..., I think most are fine with that.

    As for profiteering, thatís making excessive obscene amount the profits... as loan sharks or just ripping people off in black markets... even when no animals involved, Iím sure most are not okay with that.

    Anyway, current f1 business model is probably already hovering very closely between the fine line of making profit and profiteering...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •