Claude Rouelle?

[Driven]

In the interest of maintaining the status quo, effecting paranoia reduction, curbing premature stroke, heart-attack and general public concern, specifically to reduce the mental challenges for the mentally challenged, this message has been tinkered with.

[Driven]

In the interest of maintaining the status quo, effecting paranoia reduction, curbing premature stroke, heart-attack and general public concern, specifically to reduce the mental challenges for the mentally challenged, this message has been tinkered with.

[jack]

have you been to the seminar?

[Brent Howard]

Even so, he works at MoTeC and it is a MoTeC seminar. If you are surprised by the fact that they try to sell MoTec products I find that hard to believe. I'm not sure how it is conflict of interest for an employee to try to sell company products at a company seminar. These are sales presentations with the intent to have a more educated customer that uses the products in the correct manner.

I have been to many courses for oil and gas products that are the same way. Haliburton will put on mud seminars, Quinn Pumps will come and talk about PCP pumps, Barton will come and discuss Scada systems. It's marketing, not conflict of interest.

Brent

[Storbeck]

At no point during the seminar did he try to sell us motec products. I really don't think he is biased.

He doesn't work for Motec he works for OptimumG. Motec sponsors the seminar.

Have you been to the seminar?

I think we should be grateful for both Claude and Motec. THey're doing us a great service.

my $.02

[Denny Trimble]

I think he's running a racket...
1) Ask insanely difficult questions in the design event
2) Sell seminar seats

You see I mean? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It was a very enlightening seminar, I'm happy I went.

[Brent Howard]

Storback,

Sorry, I didn't realize that he didn't work for MoTeC as I haven't been to the seminar. I was just trying to prove that saying it's a conflict of interest was completly wrong.

Brent

[James Waltman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vector006:
unfortunately he wanted the answers without hesitation which i thought was a little unreasonable.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

He stopped by and talked to us for a little while in the pits. He explained it something like this:

If you have a girlfriend and you say you are in love with her then when someone asks you for her phone number you will know it by heart (without hesitation). If you have to go and look it up in a book – maybe you aren't really in love. He feels the same is true for numbers about your car.

The suspension numbers were never my thing on our car so I don't know them. I put a lot of work into adhesives and I know those numbers by heart. (My girlfriend might argue that I know those numbers better than I know her...)

[MattG]

My two cents worth is that...

1) The only way to separate the good teams from the really good teams, is to ask tricky questions.

2) Of course Claude has an interest in getting people along to his seminars, training race engineers is his living. I don't believe, however, that Claude is out to try and make a quick buck by trying to make people feel stupid. (See point 1)

3) While Claude works with MoTeC to provide seminars he readily told us, at his seminar, the (few) problems he felt the MoTeC system had.

[Charlie]

I don't understand the question. Are you saying there is something wrong with him giving a seminar, or that he shouldn't be a judge?

Conflict of interest? That implies he's doing something wrong. Do you think if you buy MoTec Claude will give you bonus points in design? Not likely.

The seminar is plainly sponsored by MoTec, so to say he has a conflict of interest by promoting thier product is stupid--thats part of the reason the seminar exists!

If you've been to his seminar though, it is definitely not a sales presentation. Claude gives his experience and lessons in using datalogging equipment to improve vehicle setup, and while MoTec stuff is used for example, the advice applies to any datalogging system and there is no 'hard sell.'

[Colin]

while claude's seminar is sponsored by MOTEC, claude covered very little about MOTEC at the seminar i attended and as far as i know claude is a dynamics judge so apart from datalogging i fail to see how being attached to MOTEC will affect the questions/responses he is interested in, if he was a engine judge it might be a different story. But where do you draw the line surely every judge has a connection with some automotive company/manufacturer?

[Ben Beacock]

He came by when we were displaying at the banquet and immediately mentioned the seminar. I know we need it badly and its painfully obvious to the judges, but we were totally tapped out financially(already commited to SVSU GP). He started to go on about how it is such a good deal and he's giving it at cost, the books require printing, ect. Might have been a bit of a miscommunication but I really got a bit turned off (even though I really want to go, but we were going to SVSU)

[Frank]

personally,

i loved his course
i like his attitude toward racing, engineering, and life in general

i find a great deal of the content in the coarse aimed toward using data aq to "tune" a car, as opposed to "develop a design"

having a blank sheet of paper to start a design presents a lot more problems for engineers to solve than engineers in "spec racing"... we're lucky to have that experience

i think no-one in their right mind wouldn't get their hands on a MoTeC DA system, if they had the funds available at the time

personally i still question the skill and repetitiveness of the "drivers" available, and weather that poses a fundamental restriction to the use of such systems to "tune" a vehicle

rant nearly over...

final point.,.,..

as long as no team is unfairly marked in design, for NOT using a MoTeC DA system, then I don't see a problem

regards

Frank

[Driven]

Conflict of interest depends upon the "situation and not on the character or actions of the individual".

[Big Bird]

I'd like to put my 2 Australian cents worth in by saying I couldn't give a fat rat's whether people think Claude has a conflict of interest. Here is a guy with a wealth of knowledge on the subject that we are all passionate about, the desire to share it with us, and you'd rather get your undies in a knot about implied motives? Good grief, get a life.

Yep, I've done his course a couple of times now, and I'll just add to the masses by saying that it was first rate. In terms of value for money, the $450 I spent on 30 hours with Claude is bloody good value compared to the $600 HECS fee we Aussies spend on each and every one of the academic subjects we do. What's more, Claude has always been remarkably approachable out of his seminars as well. He has always responded to questions I've forwarded by email, and when I've bumped into him at race meetings he has gone out of his way to show me stuff on the cars in the paddock and answer even more of my silly questions. No conflict of interest there, just a desire to share the knowledge. I can't even remember the word Motec being mentioned.

Yes, Claude makes money. So what. A person in his position could make a lot of money wherever he went. He doesn't need to get involved in student projects, but he is really interested in what we are doing. And having been to a raceteam seminar he did here before the FSAE ones started, I know he pushes the merits of FSAE pretty hard to the big teams looking for new recruits. He is an asset to this competition, let's not cut off our nose despite our face.

Earth to Driven. There is no FSAE Utopia where virginal white design judges fall from the sky, spurting forth endless pearls of motorsport wisdom and yet unencumbered by previous experience or allegiance. No-one is a completely blank sheet of paper. One thing I will say though, is that there are companies and individuals out there involved in FSAE, who are trying to help us out but are getting pretty tired of the little conflicts some of us seem to want to generate. Maybe we should be thinking of the bigger picture a little more rather than playing amateur detectives.

A post topic like this does not help our cause. Lets hope that Motec, Claude or the SAE do NOT see it or respond. We might find that we are worse off for it.

[Big Bird]

By the way, if driven were to stand by his convictions he'd put his name to them.

[Charlie]

I agree with Geoff, am quite certain that 'Driven' has never been to a Rouelle seminar, and don't put much stock in comments without a name or team.

I cannot say I know his complete schedule but I think that Claude is a very busy guy, and does a lot more than seminars. for example, consulting for some major racing powers. It is my belief that he has bigger fish to fry and attends FSAE because he loves to do it.

If anyone has a conflict of interest, it might be MoTec. Claude is not employed by MoTec, and as far as I know his only connection with them is his seminars. He's not paid on commission by how many MoTec products teams buy, or anything like that.

BTW, I heard that SAE is scamming us, by putting on this competition we love so much, they are only doing it to make us sign up as graduate members of SAE.

[Dick Golembiewski]

I've judged with Claude before, but this was the first time that we were in the same queue, and got to know each other. He is entertaining, charming, and genuinely interested in his fellow judges - and all of the students.


We've asked many of the same questions over the years, and all of us are going to ask more in-depth questions in the future, as it is the only way we can sort out who really knows what they did vs. those who simply copied a previous design.

Some of you are missing a big element of the design judging process. No individual controls the scores - not even Carroll when he ran things. In the first round, the judges in each queue get together and arrive at a concensus as to where you place. Similar activities take place in the semi-finals and finals. Input comes from both chassis and powertrain judges.

- Dick

[Driven]

Wow, evidently some things are more sacred than religion.

I realise that Claude is revered by many here. I realise that Motec are suppliers of class-leading products and are valued supporters of the competition.

I want to make it completely clear that I did not (and do not) claim that there was ever any improper judgement by any member of the judging panel based upon their commercial alliances. That was never the point of my argument.

Although I stand by everything that I had written, I think that the concepts were beyond some here and many contributors completely missed the point. Emotion blots out clear and reasoned thinking. See, even engineers get emotional from time to time. They can even become irrational.

I had hoped (somewhat misguidedly) that this discussion would lend itself to mature, intelligent, and yes, controversial dialogue of the role of commercial issues and possible conflicts of interest in F-SAE. Instead, it seems, all that was generated was a bunker mentality that would help no one. As such, I have decided to remove earlier posts outlining my concerns. I now realise that this forum is too public to air such sensitive matters.

Please, Dick, continue to ask tough questions. It pushes us to become better at what we do. I, for one, detected a fair amount of tongue-in-cheek in Denny's post, but many seemed to take the man seriously.

And Big Bird, you stay up too late. Get some sleep!

[Charlie]

Give me a break, if you delete your old posts that's hardly standing behind them. If people disagree then they disagree. You can take what everyone has said for what its worth. Deleting your old posts was completly spineless, but what else do you expect from an anonymus poster anyway?

If you think people get emotional or upset posting on the internet, hopefully you are wrong, because I definitely don't. Its just an internet forum. I will speak my mind though, don't confuse that with emotional outpouring. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Driven]

Easy now Charles. I too will speak my mind, and did so in the most reasoned manner, despite petty barbs from the likes of yourself.

It is "just" an internet forum, but I do feel as though some responsibility needs to be exercised nonetheless. Although everything that I had discussed was honest, I felt that the discussion path was not conducive to a positive outcome. Miscalculation on my behalf. But then it seems that you'd prefer I post it again? I think you might have a fight with Big Bird on your hands on that one. No, actually I agree with BB. Motec doesn't need to know this. I felt it was important, however, that we students had some understanding of the issues at hand.

Anonymous posting: What if you knew I was a member of Auburn FSAE? I could be... Would you insist I post my full name and school then? Or RMIT, Geoffrey? Thought not. No, I do not believe in collective punishment, and sincerely believe that anonymity is essential to ensure free transfer of ideas for controversial topics such as these.

It sure is easy to toe the party line and maintain the status quo when you drape yourself proudly in a banner...

[Charlie]

Yeah, if you were part of our team I'd prefer you posted so. If someone is to make an arguement or a statement, they are less likely to be doing it for the wrong reasons if they have a public face. Also, it helps to know where the person is coming from (literally and figuratively) when they make statements. Just like you could be on my or anyone's team, you could be working for a competitor of MoTec or Claude. I doubt that, but if you want to bring an issue to light at least be man enough to show your face.

Like I said, its just an internet forum not the the UN world council. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif But proof that people won't blame a whole uni on one person's opinion is Angry Joe. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[Driven]

Gee thanks Charlie for all your encouragement for me to come out and all... you're such an inspiration... http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

No Charles, no dice. I shan't be tempted today. Your arguments don't stack up. Read the (valid) criticism leveled at one Angry Joe in the "Worst Detroit Ever" string. There he was chastised for using his uni tag in saying some pretty controversial and inflamatory things - he is good at that. An alumni too. Never met the guy but he must be pretty passionate...

[Charlie]

Its true that some may hold a poster's team responsible. I do know, that when I say something here, people know who is saying it, and who to ask (or blame http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ) about what I've said. And they know how to contact me if they like. And I can say everything I say here is mine and I am (more or less) proud of it. If I'm a hypocrite, they'll know it. If I have something to gain from my arguements, they'll know that too. I talked a lot about FSAE-A scoring, and some didn't like it for sure. But when I had something to say, I said it myself.

What you are saying is, if you step out of line and do something others consider stupid, don't sign your name. I think those two things generally go hand in hand.

[Driven]

No, I just don't wish to risk the Angry Joe repurcussions just to satisfy your curiosity

I realise the issues that I raised were bigger than my sense of pride, and I felt that only negative would come from further posting, given that it was so misunderstood. Plus I felt a conflict of interest, with MoTeC being a supplier and sponsor to FSAE. Am I right to criticise them in such a manner in this public place?

Fully understand your comment about anonymous posters and where do they come from. But for the reasons I've outlined, anonymity is also valuble. So be it.

[Matt Gignac]

My 0.02$ canadian

It seems to me that many on this forum felt as if Claude was being accused by Driven by saying that there was a conflict of interest. In my opinion (and not my team's necesarrily), there is a conflict of interest in this situation, but that is not to say that Mr. Rouelle is in any way in the wrong.

I guess it all depends on your definition of what a conflict of interest is. Since Claude is hired by Motec to run the seminar, and is also a design judge, there is a possibility that something fishy could happen, but by all accounts, this is not the case.

And about this whole anonymity thing, what does it matter anyways? It's the internet for crying out loud. For all I know, I can be talking with a bunch of twelve year olds from god knows where that just happen to know a whole lot about cars. If a person brings up a good point (or a not so good one), I don't see how that person's message would be any different whether they were from Cornell or University of Wherever.

Matt G
McGill Racing Team
www.fsae.mcgill.ca (http://www.fsae.mcgill.ca)

[Denny Trimble]

Maybe we should adopt an "Anonymous Coward" subtitle for such people, like slashdot.org does.

[Sam Zimmerman]

Ok, time for my two cents. (You all know I can't resist getting on a soapbox when one is conveniently lying around.) http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Driven, if you are worried about potential conflicts of interest, why not bring up the fact the Milliken was a suspension judge? He was probably asking questions that one would be better able to answer if they bought one of his books available at the competition. How about Carroll Smith? He sold his books on how to design a racecar at the same competition in which he judged the design of racecars. Did he have an ulterior motive of selling more books?
There are also the no-points competitions. As concerned as you are about conflicts of interest, I would assume you are concerned about the fact that representatives from Ricardo are judging the power-train award and the folks from Continental Teeves were judging the brake system awards. Could they really be trying to reward teams who use their products?
Someone who is really concerned about conflicts of interest would be very upset that Dr. Woods is on the rules committee. Could he be trying to gain an unfair advantage for UTA?

OF COURSE NOT!!!!!!!! They are professionals who have a background in precisely what we are trying to learn.

These people are there to teach, watch, and enjoy the idea of student engineers working in an area that they love so much. Without these people this event would not exist. I would not be able to build a racecar with someone else's money, get a master's degree in an area that excites me, or (hopefully) have a thesis and two published papers on intake design by the end of the year. This program has opened doors for me and I am grateful for everybody who helps put the event on.

As for the anonymous posts, don't kid yourself. You are posting anonymous because you have an agenda and/or you would be heavily chastised by your team for making accusations of a conflict of interest that are thinly veiled under the guise of hoping to have an intellectual discussion.

Have a nice day.

[Sam Zimmerman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Matt Gignac:
My 0.02$ canadian

And about this whole anonymity thing, what does it matter anyways? It's the internet for crying out loud. For all I know, I can be talking with a bunch of twelve year olds from god knows where that just happen to know a whole lot about cars. If a person brings up a good point (or a not so good one), I don't see how that person's message would be any different whether they were from Cornell or University of Wherever.

Matt G
McGill Racing Team
http://www.fsae.mcgill.ca <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Matt,
It does matter whether somebody posts their name or not because it changes the perception of the readers as to why the person might be posting the message. If it were Charlie, Denny, James, Brent, etc. I would take it as a legitimate discussion point. As it sits, I assume it is somebody with an axe to grind and nothing more. I know I have posted topics about differing aspects of the competition that I have disagreed with but because they were signed (and not hostile towards the organizers/volunteers) others have opined about how their views differ from mine and did so with respect. Had I been an anonymous poster pitching conspiracy theories about why they (SAE) might start a west coast competition I think I may have gotten a little different response.

[The guru of guru's]

what an interesting topic...its a shame that some people would think of claud in such a negative way, the seminars may be of financial benefit to him, however you can see he enjoys sharing his knowledge with us. Im sure he is the type of person who could talk the tits off a bull about racing, and he does a damm good job. I dont think any text book could teach you as much abount vehicle dynamics in such a small amount of time.

Also, my 2 aussie cents about anonymity, i believe whatever you say and whereever you go, you are always represeting your team and furthermore your school. Therefore if you are to gutless to disclose your identity you should go back and hide under the rock you came from.

[MikeWaggoner at UW]

I think people may be too hard on posting anonymously. If you have a point or question to make, but think there may be bad repurcussions for your team if you make it, maybe posting anonymously is the right way to do it. I think the current topic is crap, but it isn't completely out of the blue, and a paranoid person might think their team could be hurt by making such an accusation.

I don't think calling names of the people that post anonymously is the right or mature way to handle it; obviously other people's views will be tempered by the fact the original poster didn't post their details.

[Big Bird]

The issue I have is that a valued member of the FSAE community was specifically named and linked to conflict of interest, by means of a topic heading in bold print for all visitors to the FSAE.com to see. The potential ramifications of this are pretty nasty for all concerned. The person who raised this writes well enough that it is obvious to me he was aware of the harm he could cause to Claude, yet doesn't want any fallout himself. A bit of a double standard really.

I applaud Driven for at least removing some of the inflammatory material, including the conflict of interest line in the topic title. Replacing some of it with barbs towards those of us who disagreed is of dubious merit though.

The topic could have been raised in a much more responsible manner by naming a topic "Conflict of Interest" and discussing possible problems without mentioning specific names and companies. If he had a specific problem with Claude he should have forwarded a letter of concern to the relevant people, not posted it for all to see on a public forum.

As for name calling, implying that all who disagree are mentally challenged indicates that Driven doesn't exactly set new standards of mature or responsible behaviour himself. The condescending tone is repeated through most of his posts.

Honestly I don't generally care if posts are made anonymously. But is someone is to post such deliberately inflammatory and dangerous material, then I repeat, they should at least stand behind their convictions.

[Driven]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Originally posted by Big Bird:
As for name calling, implying that all who disagree are mentally challenged indicates that Driven doesn't exactly set new standards of mature or responsible behaviour himself. The condescending tone is repeated through most of his posts.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've no problem with people who disagree with my argument. Anyone who understood what I said (it was pretty clearly explained) and disagreed with me, that's fine. If you didn't comprehend and/or misrepresented my argument, then you can consider that line to be an appraisal http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

As Charlie reminded us, it's the internet, not the UN. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Peace.

[Brent Howard]

Driven,

I think everyone fully understood your argument and disagreed with you fully. Not only was it, in my opinion, completly wrong, it was also poorly worded and offensive to Claude.

Claude attempting to sell MoTeC systems, if he does, is not a conflict of interest....it's their seminar. And as far as design judging, did all top 10 teams have MoTec? I have heard alot of great things about PE systems. If your issue with Claude is more pointed then say that. Did he specifically point to your ECU/datalogger and say...Well you would have made semi's had you run MoTeC?? As it stands you have simply made a point with absolutly zero supporting evidence.

Brent

[Driven]

Brent,

For reasons I have mentioned, I am not going to debate this issue further. If you would like to continue debating it... be my guest. I would suggest, though, that you find out what a "conflict of interest" is first. It does not specifically state wrongdoing. It does not say that it is impossible to execute your duties fairly. As I mentioned, I did not accuse anyone of unfairness. Let me give you a clue. Your latest post works against your line of argument. Check your definitions.

Perhaps you thought my posts were poorly worded because you didn't understand a few of the terms, no?

Another clue: (my earlier post - did you read it?) "Conflict of interest depends upon the situation and not on the character or actions of the individual."

Honestly, check your definitions. You're doing your side of the argument no favors.

[Brent Howard]

conflict of interest
n. pl. conflicts of interest
A conflict between a person's private interests and public obligations.

Your point is....

I think that we all can learn from Claude in that he has been able to make a good living doing exactly what he loves to do. If your going to debate terminology like a lawyer please back it up with something.

if the only point of your post though was to prove that Claude is employed in the automotive industry and also is interested in cars.....good job. I fully agree.

Brent

[Driven]

Good boy. Now sleep on it. Maybe you'll have it figured out by the morning.

[Mike T.]

Wow. It's nice to see that you know you are so much more of an enlightened man that the rest of us, Driven. I think you deserve a gold star for your brilliance.

[Denny Trimble]

Or maybe a Flying Birdie?

__________________
........................./´¯/)
......................,/¯..//
...................../..../ /
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·Â¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯\
........('(...´(..´......,~/'...')
.........\.................\/..../
..........''...\.......... _.·Â´
............\..............(
..............\.............\

It feels good to behave like a 12 year old... I'll have to do it more often.

[Sam Zimmerman]

http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
With Denny, even flipping someone off must be done with the finest of detail.

You crack me up buddy.
http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

(edited because my grammer sucked http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

[gug]

since you have deleted your posts, your point is a bit hard to determine now driven. but i believe your point was that you thought Claude was involved in a conflict of interest because he both judged and ran motec seminars?

who the hell are you? a lawyer? i refuse to believe that someone involved in fsae could be so anal as to worry over if Claude fits the dictionary definition of a conflict of interest, never mind the fact that he makes no money out of motec sales, or that if no1 brought motec gear and the company wound up dying he could probably make more money and not have to travel doing something else. if he fits the dictionary definition of a conflict of interest or not has no effect on his judging, or on the motec seminars. actually it doesnt matter for shit.

if your goal was: "I had hoped (somewhat misguidedly) that this discussion would lend itself to mature, intelligent, and yes, controversial dialogue of the role of commercial issues and possible conflicts of interest in F-SAE."
then why did you start out sugesting that Claude is involved in something that you made sound dubious? why did you want to involve Claude at all, especially by highlighting such a hopeless point?

normally i wouldnt have bothered replying to this, but your stuck-up attitude which is so strong it manages to come through your writing almost has me feeling sick at my desk. someone as pathetic as yourself (as far as we can tell, you came on this forum just to attempt to get back at Claude, and i have seen nothing to convince me otherwise) speaking as if they are superior to all of us infuriates me. i take it you adopt a somewhat more humble attitude in day to day life, because otherwise someone would have beat you so hard you would be stuck on life-support and unable to post on this forum. trust me, if you come down to earth and ask some of the people you have been pissing off some technical questions they will amaze you with their detailed knowledge and probably help you out more than anyone at your uni could. of course, thats if they would even talk to you now. nice job...

[Chris Boyden]

Nice text art Denny...! I'm gonna have to steal that one.

[John McCarthy]

If I may...

Perhaps us Engineers are getting too concerned with things non-engineering...

Many business practices are questionable, but you normally wouldn't hear about them. In this case, everything about the seminars is above-board. It is no secret that MoTeC and Claude work co-operatively to offer us students an opportunity to learn more about a subject which is shrouded in secrecy all too often and one that we are all passionate about. Partnerships like this are not uncommon or shady, ask any student on a commercially funded scholarship.

Anyway, I too am some $850AU in the hole after having travelled interstate to attend Claude's seminar earlier this year and see nothing that should raise any eyebrows.

And boy is MoTeC getting some mileage out of this thread...

Can we get back to talking about engineering stuff now??

[RiNaZ]

I agreed ...

[MoTeC]

Hi Guys,
Just a bit of debunking. Claude and MoTeC have been working together for quite a few years now. Claude likes our system and there is a very large number of his own clients who use it. Any mention of MoTeC in his seminars is more or less a common reference point.

Claude is very good for us as we can use his experience and feed back to improve our products. anyone of you can give us feedback as well.

MoTeC recognise that FSAE is an area where you guys can benefit from our experience and if we sell more units that is a good thing for all of us. We are not trying to monopolise the series and I don't believe we have ever tried any hard sell either, hey, we are probably the most expensive option you guys have and still we control about 75% (or more) of the Aussie teams. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Konstantin]

anyway it seems that Claudes seminar in UK is postponed.
Anyone know more about this?
I hope it has nothing to do with this battle here.

Konstantin