[PhlypSide]

Originally Posted by Elanlover

I give up because you just don't listen to anything other than what you want to hear.

This can't be proven more wrong. If you go back and read all the excerps from the book I quoted, direct from lotus staff, you'd see how wrong you are.

What I think is my opinion and cannot be proven wrong, it's my opinion

Originally Posted by Elanlover

Uhm, excuse me but has the definition of a sportscar just been expanded to include only profitable cars? Forget the Veyron then. Only cars that weren't mistakes? Forget a lot of other cars that some considered mistakes (including the Veyron). What has that statement to do with FWD cars being sportcars?

Nothing.

You forgot to mention I said and/or, these are not the same thing, but in the case of the M100 Elan, I think it was a mistake which resulted in an unprofitable outcome which in turn resulted in your car being turned into a Kia.

Originally Posted by Elanlover

LOGIC LEAP DETECTED!
If a car doesn't sell mass volume is it a mistake? How many Esprits, Elises or Exiges have been sold............hmmm.........

Hey how many FWD Lotus cars are made today? How many are slated for the future? I'm going to maintain my position that the M100 was a mistake, if not purely on a business level alone. FWD "sportscar" that no one wanted to buy = mistake to me. How is it not a mistake to you?

Profitability and marketability are two separate things. Everyone wants an XBOX360 or a PS3 or a Wii, but Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo all take hits (at least initially) on these console sales, the money comes in licensing and first-party games

Just because a Veyron doesn't make a profit doesn't mean people don't want to buy it. I'm proposing that evidently not enough people wanted to buy the Lotus Elan M100 because it was an overpriced FWD attempt at a sportscar.

Originally Posted by Elanlover

Excuse me again but I QUOTED DIRECTLY FROM LOTUS STAFF (something you have never done) from Mark Hughes' book. I think you should go back ad re-read those excerps, the Lotus designers and engineers that made them, being sure to pay extra, extra, extra special attenton to the parts where they talk about the M100 being a SPORTSCAR and why then rethink your statements.

How fresh is your information? How much of a decision to pull the car from the market did these engineering and design folks have?

To me it seems like a supreme conflict of interest to listen to what these folks have to say and take it as "gospel" as to why the M100 failed.

The higher ups are the folks that pulled the plug on the M100, not the designers and engineers. I fully expect them to have passion for the very car they built. A big "NO DUH" there. What's your point?

My point is the higher ups could see that strategically the M100 and FWD didn't work out so well, so unplugged it and licensed the idea to the Koreans. (Thus the Kia Elan, which I'm thinking was more well received since it was considerably cheaper.)

Originally Posted by Elanlover

I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth from Lotus. You, though, seem to be when you're saying its a failed car, an aberration, a mistake, not a sportscar, etc. They clearly haven't said that. Quite the opposite in fact. I had no idea you were more knowldegable than all the Lotus engineers combined. You missed your calling. Perhaps lotus will hire you so they can ammend their misdirected thinking?

Anyone who truly understands car design knows INSTINCTIVELY that drivetrain has NOTHING to do with determining if a car can be ruled a real sportscar or not.

Now THAT statement is a leap of logic. And you're calling the majority of the respondents in the poll "dumb" or at least ignorant of car design? What are you a professional car designer? A suspension or chassis engineer? Screw car design how about seat time in actual sportscars?

Originally Posted by Elanlover

What's done with that platform does.

This is retarded logic at it's best. You're telling me intentions define identity. I've said it before and I'll say it again, "you can use a wrench as a hammer, but it's not recommended, and it certainly doesn't make a wrench into a hammer."

Originally Posted by Elanlover

Quite frankly, anyone who cannot see this AND repeatedly denies it without any suppoorting facts in the face of facts contrary to this position is truly an idiot. And, over the years, I've learned this when dealing with them:

Never argue with an idiot. They'll just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. Here's as close a nut kick as I can give you.

Your "facts" are merely people playing semantics. Here's an example, while many in the know, knew that technically the new millenium didn't start until January 1, 2001, it was a hard sell on December 31, 1999 to explain to the average person that it wasn't January 1, 2000.

You're trying to make a really hard sell to sportscar enthusiasts that generally believe that sportscars aren't FWD. BTW, are you calling the majority of the respondents in this poll idiots?

BTW, if you're just calling me an idiot, I'll cry. No really, I'm hurt. But then again I don't have a failed Lotus/prototype Kia in the garage either

I feel better already.