Talk:RESQ

Sarah Fisher Racing saga
Agreed, none of this makes sense, but the addition by a poster that "no signed agreement was in place" flies in the face of logic and evidence. Sarah's been around the racing game long enough to understand that you don't have anything until the lawyers have drawn up the papers and everyone has signed.

The announcement of the sponsorship was made weeks ago. If SFR didn't have an agreement in place, then why hasn't RESQ made that fact public long before now, especially in the face of huge negative publicity? Why hasn't RESQ's lawyers gotten involved in the steady drumbeat of negative publicity, not to mention the fact that Sarah's lawyers are now handling this issue? Why does RESQ keep telling SFR that the wire transfer has been made (Yes, I've got inside sources)? Twohlford (talk) 12:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Obviously RESQ is using Wiki as a sort of press release, and keeps reverting the changes. Finally I put a "disputed" tag on the whole thing until it can be clarified. Twohlford (talk) 16:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Apparently RESQ is not much more than a website (as stated in several bloggs) and I sure do not know anyone inside that company (in fact, I have never heard of them before) but it seems to me that the entire case is nothing more than an artificial media hoax coming from the INDYSTAR. Nobodoy at RESQ seemed to have come forward yet with a statement and "they" have not confirmed or denied anything (apparently because there is not even anybody existing there). But also Sarah Fisher Racing has not been able to produce any documentation on her behalf either. The entire thing is pretty questionable, does not make sense at all and it seems to me there is neither a RESQ nor a contract out there. ### (Racingfanq) 17:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Sarah is not a stupid person, and lawyers don't work if there's no case. AT the very least I assume that there was an initial check as well as a signed contract before the press statement. As I understand things... from the SFR team... representations have been made that the check is in the mail (or more precisely, the money has been wired to her bank account). The lawyers are now involved.

If you're not an employee, then why have you done most of this site? Why the name? Why are you making assertions of fact that there is no contract? Why are you talking about the phone lines being jammed, etc? Now your posts certainly don't make sense in the face of the facts at hand. Twohlford (talk) 17:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

My dear friend. I have nothing to do with the racing team nor with RESQ. But I am a Sarah Fisher fan AND WHEN SHE announced her affiliation with an unknown product named RESQ (and I think the brand name sounded ineresting) I wanted to be the first one to write an article about it and did some research on it (The INDYSTAR published an article about jamming their phonelines - I did not!!! and I haven't seen anyone at RESQ making a statement either. All we saw in the news was INDYSTAR-made and the quality of that paper is pretty questionable when it comes to these 2 articles. I would say it is all hear-say and nothing more. SFR apparently wants to make it in the NEWS with whatever is going on there - it all does not make sense to me. If there is a "RESQ" they apparently avoid the news ... that atleast should tell you something!!! BUT I sure as h. called up RESQ's phone number and nobody was answering my phone call. And I would like to see somebody making an official statement about all these allegations ### (Racingfanq) 18:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)



Can we all agree on the basics? SFR claims an agreement with RESQ. No racing team would enter the Indy 500 without some form of agreement (even if misunderstood). With the last week approaching SFR has no sponsorship on her car. If we leave out unverifiable claims of things (lawyer activity without court documents to prove it, "inside sources", ect) we can just put the basic facts. Since it is ongoing we should assume the least we can. SFR claims sponsorship from RESQ and has no payment from anyone. At this point, newspapers and press releases are the only verification we can get. Quit squabbling over pointless info that will be removed later anyway, and just put the minimum. NeuGye (talk) 18:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Disputed Tag
I removed the disputed tag. The info about press releases and announcments are all factual. SFR has announced the sponsorship agreement. She is now claiming she has not recieved payment. That is all undisputed. Whether she has recieved it or not might be disputed, but not her claiming it to be so. The disputed tag should remain removed unless someone edits this article to take one side over another. While the content of the evidence might be disputed, the evidence itself it not. NeuGye (talk) 18:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Moot point?
SFR announced IUPUI as sponsors now. Is the ResQ/SFR discussion a moot point? NeuGye (talk) 17:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

+++ Now, would you explain to me what that IUPUI press statement has to do with RESQ??? This info should be on the SARAH FISHER RACING websites. The info does not affect any disputed information, because SFR can name and sign contracts with 100 other companies, I believe, ... but that would not affect anything that had to do with RESQ and SFR. And nowhere does it read that IUPUI would be a major sponsor! ### (Racingfanq) 18:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

+++ I agree w/ RacingFanQ here... IUPUI is an associate sponsor, and doesn't begin to cover the missing revenue from RESQ. Even if it did, it wouldn't be topical, and should be removed from this Wiki. Likewise, I don't think that any coverage on Sarah's success in Indy car racing should be documented here unless it impacts the company (ie, her winning the Indy 500 causes massive new orders for products). I do think that ongoing litigation in this case will be appropriate, and look forward to covering that on Wiki.Twohlford (talk) 21:50, 21 May 2008 (UTC)