You are about to report the comment below to the Crash.Net moderators as being abusive. An abusive comment may contain profanity, personal attacks or commercial SPAM.
Please do not report this comment as being abusive if you simply disagree with the comment posted. If this is the case then you can click on the "disagree" icon () in the upper right of the comment's post to show your dissatisfaction.
Crash.Net moderators will view all reported comments and will act as they deem necessary. This may be editing the comment or total deletion.
To reply to you in a bullet point manner:
1. The manufacturers were allowed to develope the spend, spend, spend rules and that put Motogp where it is, Kawasaki were just crap and always have been. Suzuki are just Suzuki and have been told that unless you do it properley then don't come back.
2. CRT did exactly what it was meant to, show the factories there is an alternative. CRT will carry on as the chassis manufacturers will have plenty of data for factory engines when they arrive, from the start they had nothing. (KR Honda example). Or are you one of them who believe anybody can stick a chassis and engine together and be within the second of a mighty factory after a couple of thousand miles?
Nakamoto said that the Honda CRT will be a proper one, taking a swipe at the ART which showed just how weak the factory Aprilia WSB engine is. When looking from trackside you could clearly see what the problem was with the Avintia, the Motec electronics, they just didn't work.