Originally Posted by DogBoy
Suzuki put bikes on the grid for decades until Dorna mismanagement (several expensive rule changes) drove costs high enough to kill any ROI for them and Kawasaki and very likely kept others from entering MotoGP. Suzuki isn't the bad guy and labeling them as such doesn't help MotoGP. Even with limited grid size, Suzuki adds more value to the series than the lowest performing CRT effort? Suzuki sure as hell has contributed more over your "last ten years" time span than any CRT? However the lowest performing CRT effort is getting more love from Dorna than Suzuki.
I'm not anti-CRT and I'm not a Suzuki fanboy. I'm just saying the arguments in support of Ezpeleta don't hold up.
Honda demanded, and got all those rule changes you cite, with the exception of the spec tire. The mismanagement on Dorna's part was prior to 2002, when they agreed to hand the rulebook over to the factories. The factories have been pushing the series into a dead-end ever since. Dorna's only mistake was to believe the factories when they promised full grids.
How does Suzuki add more value? You think they would be running anywhere other than where Aspar is already running with the Aprilias?