Comments by "diehardcat" (@diehardcat) on "Business Insider" channel.

@JasonsDeathCurse Ford is not the underdog when it buys experts from race car companies like Lola Cars and Shelby. It's actually a big corporation + 2 race car companies + supercarrierload of money against 1 race car company. Yes it's heavily lopsided in favor of Ford no doubt!
14
@Loulovesspeed You don't understand the point again! The point here isn't Ford did attempt or successfully acquire Ferrari. The point is Ferrari was in a financial crisis so they didn't have even a fraction of the super container ship load of money Ford had to put in R&D. You keep on telling the story but didn't understand it! Ford was the underdog only when it hadn't hired race car experts and race car companies to develop its cars. And it had failed as the underdog. It had never won against Ferrari when it was the underdog. Once it changed and hired TWO race car companies and experts, they had not only leveled the playing field, but turned Ferrari into the underdog. Yes, money was critical and the deciding factor to Ford's win here. With money, Ford had bought real race car companies and race experts to win when Ferrari was under a financial crisis. There's no glory or 'underdog triumphant victory against the odds' here. It's just a simple story of a rich spoiled brat who couldn't take 'NO' as an answer so he must have his petty revenge at all cost. He must have thought he won but he's still a big fat loser to me! LOL!
7
@Loulovesspeed , Of course Ferrari or Ford both can buy anything they want! You didn't get the point. The point is saying 'Ford was the underdog' is wrong. That's what the general American narrative is. The other guy said Ford is the 'heavy underdog', so I had to correct him. It's not the underdog anymore when it hired race car experts and companies to built its race cars and raced for it using Ford's super container ship load of money. Ferrari then actually became the underdog when it didn't have a small fraction of that kind of money. The company was even having a financial crisis that lead to the acquisition by Ford earlier.
6
Flame Resistant Troll Thanks for pointing that out. If people look it up, Ferrari'd been having a internal crisis since 1961. Ford's fan are talking about the 'racing experience' edge but Ferrari lost most of the leading members of his racing department at the end of 1961, so he's forced to promote a 26-year-old engineer Mauro Forghieri to head the racing division. Eugenio Dragoni was hired as the new team manager but he had been in the selling perfume business not long before that. Ferrari didn't even have money to replace old machinery resulting in the departure of some new members of the racing team. So if one look closely and objectively, Ferrari was the underdog here. A family racing team in financial and personnel crisis was up against one of the world's biggest corporations with a lot of extra money to spend and an a-h0le hell-bent on proving he's THE biggest a-h0le! LOL!
2
That's a VERY stupid question! :v
1
@fanisgelis9980 Ford makes daily driving cars but it has a gargantuan amount of money to buy race car companies and experts to build race cars and race for them so what's the big deal here?!
1
@Loulovesspeed You are using a fallacy called 'bandwagon fallacy'. You just believe something is true because other people also believe it, not because you yourself have the relevant facts, evident and logic to support it! Using your dim reasoning, the world must be flat in ancient time because everybody in that time believe it was! LOL! Don't you have a brain of your own? Why do you have to depend on the belief of 'countless others' to support your point?! That proves you are just brainwashed into believing something that you yourself can't prove! Did you read their Le Mans history? If so, why don't you use it to prove Ford was the underdog? You're a Ferrari hater because you said I'm a Ford hater. And that was another fallacy (Ad Hominem) that you used. When you lose the argument, you turn and attack me personally! Why must I be a Ford hater while you're not a Ferrari hater?! You're so lame! LOL! When you don't have any decent facts, evidence, and logic to support your view of Ford being the underdog but keep on saying so to glorify Ford, you're definitely an @$$ kisser of Ford and a Ferrari hater. You are the one with all the B.S, no facts, evidence and logic here.
1
@user-gu1hl2kx2k That is irrelevant to this story. Because somebody said he insult Ford II so somebody has to correct it if he didn't. You can't use the fact of him insulting Lamborghini (while Lamborghini was his employee) to prove that he did insult Ford!
1
 @Loulovesspeed No you THE @$$ kisser here, not me you s0b! LOL!
1
@Loulovesspeed Don't tell me you read when it's so clear that you don't know how to! LOL!
1
There's no significant about this story. Henry Ford II was a spoiled brat who couldn't take 'no' for an answer. How can Enzo Ferrari said 'no' to the emperor? So the spoiled brat used money he inherited from his dad to enlist real race car company like Lola Cars and real race engineers/drivers like Shelby and Miles to build and race cars for him because even he knows after trying that Ford alone could never win races against Ferrari! So in the end, what did he try to prove? He had a lot of money which could buy anything? Or are he and his car company better than Ferrari's? He couldn't buy Ferrari so his money could buy many things but still not anything. For racing, he and his company can never be better than Ferrari, period, because Ford ALONE has STILL never won a single race against Ferrari! He 'won' by the works of others OUTSIDE of his company. He was still selling cheap cars for normal folks and Ferrari has still been selling street legal race cars for rich people. He could never change that!
1