19
Radio Le Mans claims that Audi aborts entering F1
(twitter.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2023
19 points (95.2% liked)
Formula 1
9048 readers
66 users here now
Welcome to Formula1 @ Lemmy.world Lemmy's largest community for Formula 1 and related racing series
Rules
- Be respectful to everyone; drivers, lemmings, redditors etc
- No gambling, crypto or NFTs
- Spoilers are allowed
- Non English articles should include a translation in the comments by deepl.com or similar
- Paywalled articles should include at least a brief summary in the comments, the wording of the article should not be altered
- Social media posts should be posted as screenshots with a link for those who want to view it
- Memes are allowed on Monday only as we all do like a laugh or 2, but don’t want to become formuladank.
Up next
2024 Calendar
| Location | Date |
|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 United States | 21-23 Nov |
| 🇶🇦 Qatar | 29 Nov-01 Dec |
| 🇦🇪 Abu Dhabi | 06-08 Dec |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Audi doesn't own Sauber yet, only 25%. And what level of communication goes on between the parties is unknown.
Sauber has to know of the deal falls short, likely even by law. And plenty of motorsport outlets cover both F1 and sportscars and somehow Radio Le Mans is the only one where not one but two sources said the same and nobody else heard of it? Doubful.
Depends on how the deal is written. Audi is buying chunks of the team, not it all at once. It would be pretty stupid for them to not have an out. And it's not uncommon for company acquisitions to fall through.
It's also not being reported as a story, but as a rumour. And not by Radio LeMan but someone on a podcast. Someone who will have connections within Audi through sports cars.
Eve Hewitt uses the "@radiolemans" handle, so I guess when Hewitt says it, it's the same as Radio Le Mans saying that:
Not really.
They're also saying it's a rumour they're trying to follow with and confirm. The only one treating it as fact seems to be you.
I literally wrote that I don't believe it until other outlets also report on it with their own sources. You replied to my comment saying that, so you know my position. This means that you making that claim about me is not in good faith. I won't continue this discussion with you because of that.
I meant in the sense that you're treating it as a reported fact. Rather than the rumour it's being presented as.