Aura7541 said:
However, this poll that I provided showed a larger disparity between the people who opposed the removal and those who supported it. In addition, the poll I cited specializes on reporting F1 news while Sky Sports has a more general sports focus. As a result, the respondents in the F1i poll are more likely to be fans of F1 and therefore, part of F1's target audience. Since the Sky Sports audience is less specifically focused, the proportion of respondents in the pool who are fans of F1 is likely smaller than that in the F1i poll. The respondents who are part of F1's target audience are more relevant than those who are not since they are the ones who will actually watch the tournaments and/or pay money to attend these events. You can assert that that the group was "sufficiently large" and that's an objective statement, but as I showed above, there are some flaws in representing the Sky Sports poll as evidence and as a result, there is still contradicting evidence. |
I don't claim that the Sky Sports poll is gospel. Any internet poll like that (both yours and mine. BTW your link gives me a 404 error) will have flaws in demographic, and can vary wildly in sample size. It was just to show that it's not clear cut that the group in favour of grid girls is substantially larger. I also doubt the people who read at a specialized F1 site are representative of the average F1 fan, just like you and I probably aren't representative of the average gamer. So skewed demographics goes both ways.
Good that we agree that my statement was objective.
Aura7541 said:
So WEC has not made any statements about how the financial contributions from grid girls were declining and therefore, they decided to scrap the practice? |
Once again - I haven't said that grid girls don't provide any financial benefit. (I also never claimed that WEC scrapped grid girls due to declining revenue - I never said anything to suggest that). They probably do provide some financial benefit (though neither of us has any data on that). But I have shown that the possible financial benefit of having grid girls is not a necessity. It's an option, but not absolutely necessary. Wether financial contributions from grid girls were declining or increasing doesn't change that fact.
| Aura7541 said: In addition, a more accurate conclusion is "grid girls aren't necessary to have in a WEC racing tournament". As you stated already, Formula E still uses grid girls, so that contradicts your original conclusion. |
Okay, I'll concede this for now, because I can't be bothered to find which Formula racing tournaments have grid girls and which don't. We'll know for sure within a year though, you know, since F1 themselves are removing grid girls. If everything goes to hell with F1 now, that would support your argument.
By the way, how does Formula E still having grid girls in some of their ePrixes contradict my conclusion? I'm merely stating that it's possibly to make do without grid girls.
Aura7541 said:
And you also demonstrated that there exists tournaments that do have grid girls, so that contradicts what you have concluded. For your statement to be true, then all racing tournaments would not have grid girls whatsoever. |
Once again - there existing tournaments with grid girls does not contradict that you can have tournaments without them. Why would my statement require all racing tournaments to not have grid girls? When did I ever imply anything in that regard?
I have only said that grid girls aren't necessary. Plenty of things exist that aren't necessary. That's not a contradiction. A phone isn't necessary to communicate. That isn't contradicted by the fact that a lot of people use phoens to communicate. You don't have to add sugar to coffee. That isn't contradicted by the fact that some people add sugar to their coffee. And last but not least, you don't have to have grid girls to have a formula racing tournament. That isn't contradicted by the fact that many formula racing tournaments have grid girls.
Right?
