Hello all. Cookie is a contact of mine on LinkedIn and I told her I would sprout the message about the 100 quid sponsorship deals she has going.
Would be grateful to anyone who would spread the word or sponsor.
http://cutecookie.co.uk/gotg/
Printable View
Hello all. Cookie is a contact of mine on LinkedIn and I told her I would sprout the message about the 100 quid sponsorship deals she has going.
Would be grateful to anyone who would spread the word or sponsor.
http://cutecookie.co.uk/gotg/
She hasn't yet started posing undressed?
Major loss to the WRC after she left.
Is there an equivalent maxim in Dutch that 'sarcasm is the lowest form of wit'. Still at least she gave Matthew someone he could finish ahead of!Quote:
Originally Posted by MartijnS
Not sure which is worse; this or the Caterham crowdfunding……
If you want to sponsor/ fund a worthy motorsport cause, then the Brabham LMP project is probably better.
Lets wait and see... Catheram is giving T-shirts and caps... Louise may come up with something better.....Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
I actually like Caterham's crowd funding purely because they are literally having a garage sale. Just a bit sad that they haven't put up a fully functioning car.
But Cook's sponsorship area is placed in the worst possible place - the roof. Anyway, good luck
If you guys want to talk about ladyboy sports there is a forum for it...
As for the plea to sponsor someone with no potential at all i think it is a bit too much to ask.
I think you are deluded. Firstly, it is not a plea, at least not from me. From a marketing perspective the return on investment is pretty damn good given the coverage she gets. The ladyboy term just shows your ignorance and arrogance. There is no need to slag off at someone having a go. At least she is competing.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
the ladyboy comment was for that F1 discussion involving a bankrupt team...
I usually tend to agree with your comments, but this time you missed the mark. A crowd funding example and short comment doesn't mean that it belongs in a different forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
Hey, I fancy being World Rally Champion sometime. Can anyone sponsor me and I'll put your name on my car?
Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease? :)
you have to be really stringent with these things... there are many people in here who appreciate F1 and the hair products their girls use, so the discussion can get out of hand...Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky
Get out of this topic.
Whatever good or bad Louise Cook is as a rally driver, it doesn't matter, to my eyes most important thing is to add feminity in this sport(not only the pit babes or other things) ;)
Why is that important ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom206wrc
Maybe it's late at night but I've having trouble imagining currently male-dominated areas of life where an increased female presence would not improve them in some way, at least giving them some personal variety.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
I hope she gets her sponsorship goals and develops as a driver. Looking at her website she's obviously as committed as any young rally driver and she doesn't seem to have unlimited family funds to develop with. She may never be a champ (although so early in one's career there's no point predicting failure either) but I think rallying would be a more interesting sport if there were more women like her competing. Even if it turns out they are not Loeb.
I don't only watch and read about rally to obsess over minuscule differences of the finest drivers in the world at the top level - while that is fun, I also enjoy following lower championships and competitions which have some other interesting aspects; the cars/spec, the locations, the level of competition at a lower budget, and indeed the drivers themselves. Many people who show up or volunteer for regional events, watch or generate coverage of local competitions, etc. are probably like me.
Really does not matter who the person is, and their gender. Our sport needs more viewers and followers. Ken Block is not the best but what he has done for the sport through promotion has bought lots of new fans. Louise as well. Regardless of why they follow her. And yes, if you are a normal male, the female presence does add value, even if it means they are only there to take photos of an attractive girl. Personally, I say good on her for having a go rather than sitting on a lounge and slagging off at others.
I never understood why we must have women in some sports when it is obvious they cannot perform as good as men... if you want a female presence in your life activities other than relationship/family then there is something wrong with your life choices....Quote:
Originally Posted by kirungi okwogera
As for the sponsorship i also wish her well and she may get all the money she needs but her place judging by her performance is certainly not in any international competition, she can have all the fun she needs in local events.
What that 45 year old in need of a chin transplant (the beard helped i must say) did for the sport is attracted the wrong fans... so no we do not need women, blocks and the rest... we need people who can drive properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by litifeta
I think Womans are like GT cars. They are looking better and its better to see GT cars in the stages. Next year we will have GT Cup in Wrc. What we actually need is GT cars on the top level of Wrc and i think its the same for Women drivers.
you should not think... let other people do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sch17
I must respectfully disagree. Why is it any more important to have females in male dominated sports than it would be to have more people of color in White dominated sports or more Jews or Muslims in Christian dominated sports???Quote:
Originally Posted by kirungi okwogera
The major issue I have (only issue, really) with the push to bring more women into motorsports is that most of them rely solely (or mostly) on their gender and tend not to have the talent to be where they are. Of course, Danica is the best (worst) example. But from what I just saw of this Louise Cook person, she's not so different. She seems to have a bit of basic talent, but apart from her gender, she would not register on the radar of the WRC, IMO. She's probably a very nice person though. But so are a lot of people. They're not in the WRC (F1, NASCAR, or even the lowly IRL) either. She's cute, young and blonde... so she becomes a topic of discussion for those reasons alone.
Not to hijack this thread with a mention of F1, but I do give F1 credit for not always touting Lewis Hamilton's race. Other than when there was a racial dust-up in Spain during the Hamilton-Alonso War, Hamilton's race is never mentioned. But the fact is, he is not just the most successful British driver, he's also the most successful Black driver in history - but is that ever mentioned... can that even be mentioned? So now let's compare that with Susie Wolff, Danica Patrick and this Louise girl. If not for some sort of feminist angle, what would there be to talk about? IMO, not much at all.
Wait, you said you disagree with me right? So do you claim that motorsport is worsened by having female drivers competing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
Or, from what you've written, it looks like you're just saying you're not a fan of the few there are at the moment, or not happy with the fact that they are viewed as novelties rather than contenders failing or succeeding on a level playing field? Because that was kind of my point as well - we're actually in agreement. As for race and any other categories you can name, I don't think sex is more important than any other type of diversity, so we agree there too.
And N.O.T. my comment was in anticipation of yours. I understand that you are only interested in (to quote myself) "minuscule differences of the finest driver in the world at the top level". That's why I wrote my third paragraph. So women, thus far, haven't performed as well as men (except for the occasional ones who have), so what? And wanting a female presence in one's life outside family is not a wrong life choice and to be frank that's a pretty odd thing to think. I see enough of men at work and in public spheres, and women have much to contribute to an interesting life for those who want one. Welcome back to the year 1700 I guess.
Michèle Mouton ? Competing in the World Rally Championship for the Audi factory team, she took four victories and finished runner-up in the drivers' world championship in 1982...Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
http://www.biznews.com/wp-content/up...carousel_2.png
i do not want to talk about mouton... people are going to be offended.
But we are also talking about the 80s... compared to drivers of today these hamburger boys are nothing... good for their era but compared to todays drivers were jokes at least 80% of them.
Really? Then that means there was 20% who were good and that is far better than today...Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
You of all people have for years said nearly everybody are "sick dogs" and "village drivers" and a host of other intentionally derogatory title for all but maybe 3 maybe 4 drivers...And oddly enough, aside from the contemptuousness you write with I basically agree...
Problem is we know you are too young to have been around back then, and so you are just blabbering about things you have seen on TV or something; you really don't know...Truth is that plenty of guys were good then because more people had a chance to compete more and get experience.. Todays cars are orders of magnitude more expensive and too expensive for anybody but a few to drive. Guys like your hero Ben Klock, America's Rally God. (who you are right, he needs a chin! he ought to be able to afford one!)
I am not comparing them to Loeb or even Ogier Latvala Gronholm... that would be sacrilege... i am comparing them to guys like Ostberg, mikkelsen ects... compared to them and their speed they are not close... yes the cars were harder to drive and the rallies longer and all that romantic things we tell girls to impress them on dates, but those smoking, unfit, hamburger boys would not stand a chance against the middle level of todays drivers... maybe 1 or 2 of them and again i have my doubts.Quote:
Originally Posted by janvanvurpa
i am not generalising on women, of course there are areas where they can do a job as good as men in every day life and outperform men (i had a really smart comment inserted here but since all in here are sensitive little flowers you might get offended) but rallying is not one so they should stick to village events.Quote:
Originally Posted by kirungi okwogera
Rallying has Always been a "macho sport". Esp on local level its mostly middle aged men. So there are even more obsticles for women to even get a chance. I dont Think half of humanity should be excluded from any public arena! To promote the few who does break throu would be a benefit for all.
If they are only there because of their gender, then yes, I would say that motorsports (and any other area of sport or business) is worsened.Quote:
Originally Posted by kirungi okwogera
It sounds that we probably agree more than we disagree (if at all). I'm not a fan of many of the women who currently occupy seats in motorsports and play on their gender at every turn. Being primarily an F1 fan (and a former fan of CART), having otherwise respectable motorsports journalists and commentators claim that Danica would make a good addition to Formula One... "but only if she could get with a good team" (David Hobbs) - that causes my stomach to go into a twirl. Why in the world would a "good" Formula One team hire someone who has never won a road course race in her life and she's moving into her mid 30's??? Why? Well, of course, because she is a female (#1) and she has a high Q-rating in America (#2). My guess is David realizes the politically correct, gender hyper-sensitive times in which we live (where the word "misogyny" and the term "war on women" MUST BE used at least 37 times a day on American news outlets - I think Obama made that a law or something) and Davey felt that the easy thing to say would be in support of The Unaccomplished One getting a seat at Ferrari, Mercedes or McLaren. And see, I was thinking about buying a car from his dealership too. Sorry David, ya lost a sale.Quote:
Or, from what you've written, it looks like you're just saying you're not a fan of the few there are at the moment, or not happy with the fact that they are viewed as novelties rather than contenders failing or succeeding on a level playing field? Because that was kind of my point as well - we're actually in agreement. As for race and any other categories you can name, I don't think sex is more important than any other type of diversity, so we agree there too.
I like and have liked Simona de Silvestro for a long time. And I was hoping she'd get a chance to race in GP2, prove her worth and talent and then maybe get a legit shot at F1. Why do I like her so much? She doesn't do bikini shots. She spends more time working with her engineers than she does planning photo shoots. She's just a racer - not a girl racer... a RACER! I was a big fan of Angelle Sampey/Seeling/Savoie. I met her at a drag race years ago and though she was dang easy on the eyes, she was a true championship racer and that's why I became a solid fan until she retired - now I don't watch drag racing anymore.
So in summary, I root for people who work for what they get. I don't root for people (male, female, Black, White, Jew, Gentile, etc.) who feel a sense of entitlement. I don't believe in mandated quotas. And just because the current political climate says that quotas are bad when it comes to race, but they are good when it comes to gender (European Union, hello!), my feelings just become that much more hardened in opposition.
If this Louise girl is the real deal, then the best of luck to her. I mean that. But if she's just another Susie Wolff or Danica (even worse), the sooner she goes away, the better, IMO.
I'll just leave this here. Feel free to draw your own conclusions on how this situation came to be and how could this complete humiliation be avoided.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNP8...youtu.be&t=30s
Most of the complaints about this subject are egotistical rubbish. They are based on:
1. a female cannot beat a male. yes they can. Currently they are beating you, because you do not have the ticker to have a go. And do you seriously think that if you did have a go, you would be up to their quality. Do you seriously believe if you took up 400 metre running you could beat the local female champion. Seriously?
2. Aligning yourself as a male with champion males like Ogier. You are nothing like them. The only thing you have in common is your gender. You are NOT that type of man, you are not that good and never will be. Stop aligning yourself with champions and believing their is some superiority synergy simply through your gender.
litifeta, you seem to be missing their entire point. Women should not be promoted or kept in media attention purely because of their gender, which is the case with the examples some have posted. But they shouldn't get more attention than the people who finished ahead of her.
All I can remember of Louise Cook is that she was among the slowest in her WRC outings.
To be fair, at least she is out there giving it a go. Which is more than can be said for most of us. I have only ever entered the NZ WRC rounds as part of the local event, as I can't afford an FIA spec car, and I don't want to spend my life chasing sponsors so that I can, so good on her for doing it, it's more than I am!Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky
But in saying that, I do agree with the statement on her website about becoming world champion, that does seem a bit unrealistic given her level of skill shown so far?
lol...Quote:
Originally Posted by litifeta
I don't see how my questions and criticisms of this particular girl have any thing to do with what you're claiming here. But still, are we saying that anyone who is doing something that we cannot or have chosen not to do is immune from criticism? Does this new "rule" also apply to men, or is it just another convenient way to shield sub-par performing females from criticism? It's been often used by the DanicaManiacs in the U.S.: "well... well... well... yeah, so what if Danica has never won a road race! I bet she's still a whole bunch faster than you, pal!!!"Quote:
Originally Posted by litifeta
Well, I admit that is (and should be) true - given that I'm not and have never been a professional auto racer. But in relative terms, in our chosen fields, I am more accomplished in my field than Danica is in hers. I've actually had to accomplish things and build a solid track record to get where I am. I have not been able to pose in a swimsuit (although back in my weightlifting days, I wonder if Playgirl would have given me a ring? :D) to get a contract or a pay check. I take people seriously who actually accomplish things. Those that rely on their gender (race, religion, etc.) and expect to get a pat on the back simply because of their genitalia or who want to ride the current PC/feminist wave, I have no use for them. Again, Angelle Sampey, I greatly respect. She's the real deal: a champion and a winner. Danica, Susie Wolff and (the more I hear about her) this Louise Cook person are not winners and they seem to seek to be seen as special simply because of their gender.
In summary, if the only people these women are faster than are guys on message boards who have never raced a car, why in the hell are they even out there to begin with?!
Ha! That's hilarious. I like how at about 1:35 the commentator is like "THe men have ridden this course, so they know what it's like when it's wet. The ladies have not ridden the course when it's this wet". Shit! It looks like the women have ridden bikes before.Quote:
Originally Posted by Formaldehyde
The track is clearly horrible though, even the men's event that year looks pretty rough.
Back to the point of the thread. I think that the reason that Louise Cook gets a bit of hassle from fans is that she's portrayed (not necessarily by herself) as some sort of woman beating men at their own game, when it's clear to anyone close to the support that she isn't going to be "the first female world champion".
Is the exposure a good return on the investment? I think that a few years ago maybe, when the motoring press were still slightly interested. But £100 for an advert 50mm x 30mm on the roof of a car that runs in a class of <5 and will be a long way down the field? I don't see what there is to gain from that.