Kimi Raikkonen 7 Support

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#378900

By Jabberwocky - 01 Nov 13, 18:31

- 01 Nov 13, 18:31#378900

If you company did not pay you how long until you stopped turning up to work?

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

A racing car that does not win, is just art

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#378902

By LiamCatterson - 01 Nov 13, 18:37

- 01 Nov 13, 18:37#378902

To be honest, if I wasn't getting paid, I probably would call for a strike. I mean, Kimi has said he hasn't been paid all year round and that is pathetic to me. I can see where Kimi is coming from, I mean, I wouldn't be happy either if my job was basically a non-paying scenario.

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#378924

By NHcheese - 01 Nov 13, 20:21

- 01 Nov 13, 20:21#378924

If it was my dream then I would be appy just to drive. I would like money too I guess. Kimi's rich anyway. Is he saving for a Ferrari La Ferrari caus' he doesn't like his Lotus Elise.

I'm a Lewis Hamilton h8r and it burns my @ss that he's now a two time WDC.

img]http://i61.tinypic.com/2drtpw4.gif[/img]

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#378926

By What's Burning? - 01 Nov 13, 20:29

- 01 Nov 13, 20:29#378926

If you company did not pay you how long until you stopped turning up to work?

I agree with the sentiment but it's not entirely like that either. If my company didn't pay me but I was still making 80% of my income from sponsorship deals I get because of the visibility of my work then it's a little more gray area.

It's never a good deal to air your dirty laundry, better finish the job you were signed for and then let the lawyers handle trudging through the sludge. Why make yourself seem like a potential spoil sport?

"I don't want to be part of a forum where everyone has differing opinions." Boom...

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#378928

By Jabberwocky - 01 Nov 13, 20:40

- 01 Nov 13, 20:40#378928

Maybe Kimi threatened to go to the press unless they paid, this is an image driven sport. How do you think it looks to anyone who deals with Genii will view it all? So when they did not pay kimi could not back down without looking weak

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

A racing car that does not win, is just art

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#378952

By CookinFlat6 - 01 Nov 13, 23:42

- 01 Nov 13, 23:42#378952

Maybe Kimi threatened to go to the press unless they paid, this is an image driven sport. How do you think it looks to anyone who deals with Genii will view it all? So when they did not pay kimi could not back down without looking weak

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

Thing is Genii is a private equity fund, and its probably got them kudos for saving money by not paying a WDC employee. I doubt the investors in the fund will be losing any sleep about saving 10 mill. Its not like they have any public image to uphold like a public company. Those PE boys dont much believe in using vaseline when they make deals

2014 Monster 26x Bookie Mugger
2015, 2016 WDC: LH44

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#378958

By Jabberwocky - 02 Nov 13, 00:13

- 02 Nov 13, 00:13#378958

Fair point.

I just fimished watching the F1 show on sky. Ant Davidson said that drivers not getting paid has not been uncommon in the last few years

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

A racing car that does not win, is just art

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#378963

By NHcheese - 02 Nov 13, 07:53

- 02 Nov 13, 07:53#378963

It' stupid. Why cant they be happy with 2 million pounds. Anyon else would.

I'm a Lewis Hamilton h8r and it burns my @ss that he's now a two time WDC.

img]http://i61.tinypic.com/2drtpw4.gif[/img]

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#378968

By Jabberwocky - 02 Nov 13, 10:30

- 02 Nov 13, 10:30#378968

your you rather have 11 million in the bank or 2 million?

A racing car that does not win, is just art

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#378970

By zurich_allan - 02 Nov 13, 10:58

- 02 Nov 13, 10:58#378970

Whatever the amount outstanding or previously agreed is completely irrelevant. This is a really, really simple matter. If somebody signs to do a job for an agreed amount of money, then both sides are entitled to expect the other to complete their end of the bargain. If one side fails in their legal obligation, then the other has the right to withdraw provision of service until the breach of contract has been remedied. There is no other side to this argument - personal sponsorship, or the amount of money a person already has is not relevant to the issue.

Favourite racing series: F1, Indycar, NASCAR, GP2, F3, Formula E, Trophee Andros, DTM, WTCC, BTCC, World Endurance... etc. etc.

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#378987

By What's Burning? - 02 Nov 13, 13:16

- 02 Nov 13, 13:16#378987

We also don't know if Kimi just didn't show up to certain sponsor or media dates which preceded the delay of payments.

"I don't want to be part of a forum where everyone has differing opinions." Boom...

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#379006

By operaman - 02 Nov 13, 14:36

- 02 Nov 13, 14:36#379006

We also don't know if Kimi just didn't show up to certain sponsor or media dates which preceded the delay of payments.

If that were the case, I think Lotus would have said as much. Failure to live up to the terms of the contract is just :bs:

. The team should be sanctioned. Btw that goes for drivers too.

Re: Kimi Raikkonen#379007

By operaman - 02 Nov 13, 14:37

- 02 Nov 13, 14:37#379007

Whatever the amount outstanding or previously agreed is completely irrelevant. This is a really, really simple matter. If somebody signs to do a job for an agreed amount of money, then both sides are entitled to expect the other to complete their end of the bargain. If one side fails in their legal obligation, then the other has the right to withdraw provision of service until the breach of contract has been remedied. There is no other side to this argument - personal sponsorship, or the amount of money a person already has is not relevant to the issue.

Exactly.