text:
Twists and turns of breakaway row emerge
As the British Grand Prix weekend has developed, more and more details of the behind-the-scenes political shenanigans have come out, and they make interesting reading.
The Mole's sources say that on Wednesday last week, the teams' umbrella group Fota had agreed a compromise with FIA president Max Mosley that would have seen everyone sign up for F1 in 2010.
It appears, though, that when Mosley sent through the documentation the following morning, he had changed the date until which the teams had to commit to F1 from 2012 to 2014.
For Fota, it seems this was the final straw - one more piece of evidence of what they see as Mosley's autocratic and arbitrary decision-making.
Later that day, the Fota teams had the meeting at the Renault factory in Enstone in Oxfordshire that culminated in them putting out their statement that they would be racing elsewhere in 2010.
The mood on Friday and even into Saturday morning was one of lightness borne of a decision finally taken. Sort of: "Well, we've done it then. That's it."
But over the weekend the sands have continued to shift.
Both sides continue to pursue contrasting ends. Fota talk about their breakaway championship, which they have started to organise. But at the same time McLaren team principal Martin Whitmarsh was on Saturday afternoon openly talking of "finding a solution if we can".
Mosley and the FIA have continued discussions with potential new teams - as of now, there are only five entries for the FIA F1 world championship in 2010, and even some of them are plagued by uncertainty.
But at the same time, Mosley's aide Alan Donnelly met with Red Bull's Christian Horner, Ross Brawn, Stefano Domenicali of Ferrari and Toyota's John Howett on Sunday morning to pursue common ground.
But there are serious issues still to address. Mosley's style of governance remains a major issue with the teams, who have not been impressed by the flood of press releases put out by the FIA last week.
Inevitably, these painted a pro-FIA picture, but the teams feel that they misrepresented - at best - what was actually going on.
Mosley made a number of major compromises in the course of the week, but faced with no guarantees that he would do what he said he would, Fota teams felt they had no option but not to sign up for next year.
And there were problems even with some of the promises he had given.
As an example, the 2010 technical regulations as published enshrine a two-tier system which gives a performance advantage to those teams who choose to operate within a cost cap.
Among these is the ability for the Cosworth engine used by the budget-cap teams to run without a rev limit, while any team not operating within the cost cap would be restricted to 18,000rpm, as they are this year.
Mosley has promised to remove the two-tier system but wants to retain the engine disparity.
Mosley claimed in a letter on 17 June that "any engineer will confirm that this will not give the relevant teams any competitive advantage whatsoever".
The problem is, no engineer will confirm that. One senior engine technician told the Mole this week that Mosley's claim was "total rubbish". Except he wasn't as polite as that.
Another engineer explained that Cosworth cars would be slower in the early laps of a race because their higher-revving engine would need to start the race with more fuel following the banning of refuelling next year.
But because they had more power - by around 10%, or more than 70bhp - they would be faster in qualifying. Overtaking is very difficult in F1, so they would be able to hold up the rev-limited cars in the early laps and would anyway be faster again at the end of the race once the fuel had burnt off.
There is a meeting of the FIA World Council on Wednesday - effectively the organisation's cabinet and legislature rolled into one - and there are rumours that Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo, who is expected to attend as the company's representative, may try to undermine Mosley in some way there.
Certainly, if there is one thing that has not changed it is the sense that if Mosley left office, the problem would rapidly go away.
(Even if there are other issues surrounding the amount of money the venture capital group that owns F1's commercial rights, CVC, takes out of the sport and the effect that has in such things as the places F1 boss Bernie Ecclestone chooses to hold races ).
But persuading a man who appears to live for power and influence to give it up is perhaps the most intractable of the many problems facing F1's powerbrokers right now.
- Previous
- Next
- 1. At 1:45pm on 21 Jun 2009, camaan wrote:
Good work, Mole.
- 2. At 2:09pm on 21 Jun 2009, Malt Loaf wrote:
I wasn't aware of the date change from 2012 to 2014 being the final straw in FOTA wanting to breakaway. None of that was made clear in any press releases this past week. It does very much sound like the action of a man who wants complete control over F1, which is in nobody's interests in the long term. Good work Mole in letting us know. http://www.loserscomesecond.com/2009/06/formula-1-in-crisis-again.html
- 3. At 2:37pm on 21 Jun 2009, Pompey_Canuck wrote:
Is there any truth to the rumour that if Mosley agrees to step down the breakaway teams will return to F1?
- 4. At 2:46pm on 21 Jun 2009, wrinkly25 wrote:
Keep up the good work mole. Keep pursuing a new championship FOTA teams. We the fans want a championhip with the best teams, at European tracks we love, with reduced ticket prices for fans as each venue doesn't have to "cough up" an enormouse fee for Bernie. As for Max, there is no F1 without Ferrari, Mc Laren, Renault and others but nobody cares if there is F1 without "YOU".
- 5. At 2:53pm on 21 Jun 2009, IleBizardfan wrote:
So the plot thickens M M still being the dictator. Hopefully Wednesdays meeting will clean out the system and remove the blockage. If FOTA go their own way then CVC have the rights to nothing for another 95 years. No one will want a second class F1. Most fans will support the FOTA teams and of the current 5 in F1 2010 series two or three teams want out to join FOTA I think the Winds of Change are coming and hopefully we will have what we need. Good work Mole. Maybe F1 Fans will have something to be proud of soon. and something to smile about. May the real F1 come back ?
- 6. At 3:07pm on 21 Jun 2009, Ronin57 wrote:
Nice bit of digging Mr Mole . It's over for the dictator and his little ceaser , the court of public opinion suggest a majority of racing fans will go with the FOTA championship . One HD here in Australia did a quick phone poll prior to the race and 67% said they would follow the breakaway series . Bernie must be shaking in his little boots , all that TV revenue vanishing . You reap what you sow !
- 7. At 3:42pm on 21 Jun 2009, 70sMiniRacer wrote:
It's all very well this 'breakaway' series. But where do they expect to race. None of the current circuits will dare to go against Bernie. Now Silverstone has the carrot of possibly standing in next year for Donington (one n please note!) they won't dare either. So any 'new' series will have nowhere to go. This all happened before years back and who won then. Get real folks, Bernie has done more for Formula 1 and motorsport than anyone else. Max is sensibly minded and forward thinking. Nothing will change and this Ferrari-led revolution will crumble.
- 8. At 3:43pm on 21 Jun 2009, Franky wrote:
Good digging Mr Mole.
Changing contracts without prior discussion that just demonstrates that Mr Mosely is not on honourable man and there is simply no place for him at the top of F1. Its ckear the Mr Mosely isn't quite on planet earth.
But It does make me wonder how did he get re-elected just a few months ago? If the F1 teams have a vote they have clearly shot them selves in the foot.
FOTA have to stick by their guns, I'd hate to se F1 split but if thats what it takes to get this mess sorted out so be it.
- 9. At 3:49pm on 21 Jun 2009, Icecream-Man wrote:
The change from 2012 to 2014 doesn't come as any surprise to me, it's typical of the sort of underhand tactics Mosley employs, and to then claim it was the FOTA teams that backed down on something that had already been agreed.... enough said.
Frankly, claiming that top figures are loonies in a BBC interview will achieve nother other than to irritate and bolster FOTA's determination to set up the breakaway so that they're rid of him once and for all.
"One HD here in Australia did a quick phone poll prior to the race and 67% said they would follow the breakaway series"
Online polls have shown that figure to be closer to 90%
Go for it FOTA, contrary to Mosley's wildly inaccurate claims, you most definitely do have the support.
- 10. At 3:50pm on 21 Jun 2009, Icecream-Man wrote:
typo - I obviously meant "nothing other"
- 11. At 3:57pm on 21 Jun 2009, cordas wrote:
A very interesting read, personally I think Max has lost his marbles. The statements that he has made that supposedly show himself and the FIA in a good light make him look like an incompetent power mad boss who hasn't got a clue what is really going on.
On the other hand the issues that FOTA have put into the public arena seem well reasoned and logical, then to find out more of Max's madness in this blog just makes him look even worse, nevermind his childish interview with Jake Humphrey and his "loony" accusations.
- 12. At 4:02pm on 21 Jun 2009, 2 of 3 wrote:
What happens to the tv-rights package that the BBC has bought if the split happens? BBC gets to cover Formula One . . . when all the good teams are competing elsewhere?
- 13. At 4:10pm on 21 Jun 2009, Dhekelian wrote:
It reeks of desperation, Max changed the date from 2021 to 2014 probably so he could make changes later on.
Not sure if F1 would survive a breakaway but you can bet it will be dominated by Ferrari. What it needs is Max to go and to renegotiate.
- 14. At 4:19pm on 21 Jun 2009, down2margate wrote:
frustrating to see mm conduct his buisness using fear and scare tactics.motor racing should be led by enthusiasm and a pioneering spirit.
- 15. At 4:41pm on 21 Jun 2009, ben collins wrote:
Go fota! Whip him into shape.
- 16. At 4:43pm on 21 Jun 2009, Czar-Orac wrote:
Flav's the problem
- 17. At 4:53pm on 21 Jun 2009, Andrew Benson wrote:
Hi all,
As you know, I edit the Mole's blog, and I have been out in the F1 paddock chasing more information.
It turns out that the meeting between Alan Donnelly and the Fota representatives did not happen today, although meetings between various parties involved in the dispute did.
Red Bull boss Christian Horner said: "Its actually been quite quiet since Friday morning. Just trying to focus on the Grand Prix weekend at the moment and in the week no doubt the politics will come to the fore.
I asked him if more meetings were planned between the two sides, and he said: "Inevitably."
- 18. At 5:02pm on 21 Jun 2009, brgf1nutter wrote:
Good work Mole - this would be high farce if it wasn't so serious - all we need now is for someone to lose his trousers - Max or Bernie? Or perhaps Flav ... I still feel we need an arbitrator or three to make people see sense - how about some of The Legends of UK F1 - Jackie, Wattie, Damon, Stirling and Murray?! I heard some chat on the BBC1 coverage of the race that the circuits most likely to feature in any breakaway would include Silverstone, Spa, Imola, Adelaide, Montreal and Indianapolis - perhaps we might add Magny Cours, Kyalami, Barcelona, Suzuka, Buenos Aires, Long Beach and Zandvoort - now that might make an interesting 12-race championship ....
- 19. At 5:11pm on 21 Jun 2009, AreYouRob'n wrote:
Re: Comment 7. Loads of circuits are available, mostly those dumped by wee Bernie because the owners wouldn't stump up millions for the privilege of hosting. Indianapolis, Spa, Magny Cours, Budapest, Adelaide, Silverstone (don't agree they won't take a gamble because no guarantees Bernie will give it back anyway). They can go to Jerez in Spain, Montreal? South America - maybe Argentina or another Brazilian circuit. Basically there are plenty of circuits available around the planet, more than there should be because Bernie has taken the cash and sent F1 to places like Turkey and Dubai where there is neither a tradition nor much support. If FOTA are serious and keep their nerve they can shred both the FIA and Bernie. Good ridance.
- 20. At 5:25pm on 21 Jun 2009, Pete Mathias wrote:
In any one else's family all this indecisiveness and changing of minds, or just simply forgetting their previous statements, and indeed making some strange comments, the not so young Messrs Ecclestone and Mosley might been seen as suffering from a touch of senility and be packed off to the funny farm. Fair and even racing is what we all want at the end of the day. (8 out of 10 cats can't be wrong).
- 21. At 5:41pm on 21 Jun 2009, j4ydh_f1 wrote:
Car manufacturers - Don't give up your day job!!
The arrogance of Renault CEO Carlos Ghosn last week was typical of the arrogance that haunts these power hungry fools.
Tax payers money has just purchased the rights to show formula 1 and what do these teams do?
Leave the series in favour of more money, more power and more control.. Typical - Never mind the out of pocket audience!!
We buy their cars we buy the right to watch them on a Sunday and we bail them out when they have run out of money! and they want us to accept that they want more control.
Look at the realities.. Max Mosley has been dragged through organised scandals, had personal tragedies and all the time fought to maintain safety and long term stability within F1..
On the other hand Car manufacturers have been bailed out and ran when the going got tough.
Good job FIA on principle you have already one.
- 22. At 5:57pm on 21 Jun 2009, I'm not Paranoid, they ARE all out to get me!!! wrote:
brgf1nutter (#18): "this would be high farce if it wasn't so serious "
It's NOT serious at all; it's just a question of which bully gets to boss the playground.
Is it going to be British Mosley or Italian di Montezemolo?
As for everyone saying that a breakaway would kill the sport, all you need to do is look at English (and Scottish) league football, Professional darts or even US motorsport.
In each case, the breakaway (which gave greater rewards directly to the competitors) flourished and prospered, leaving an impotent rump bleating that life wasn't fair....
- 23. At 6:41pm on 21 Jun 2009, Pwhen-23 wrote:
At 3:42pm on 21 Jun 2009, 70sMiniRacer wrote:
Max is sensibly minded and forward thinking.
Since when; this is the same Max who sat in a BBC interview hruling personal insults at the other parties.
This man has taken an autocratic "Do as I say for I am the law" stance throughout. He has stopped short of saying the teams are naughty boys who need to be spanked, but only just.
The biggest issue was aired by Bernie Eclestone on another BBC interview when he said, "No one can make Max go he is there as long as he wants to be"
In this I understand the teams irritation as this is not a Presidency, this is a Dictatorship a Kingdom and Empire. At this point the Emperor really has no clothes.
The power of being in an unassailable position for so long has gone to his head.
In a way Max is right there are looneys involved, well one anyway.
- 24. At 6:58pm on 21 Jun 2009, virginman wrote:
- 25. At 7:02pm on 21 Jun 2009, lucabiason wrote:
"The biggest issue was aired by Bernie Eclestone on another BBC interview when he said, "No one can make Max go he is there as long as he wants to be"
Correct. As I mentioned elsewhere, it's also how he gets there that is highly debatable and certainly it's not through a democratic and transparent process. I don't think it's that unfair to believe that there is a big hidden political and financial agenda in the behind-the-curtains negotiations between Mosley and the representatives of the FIA member states. It's the whole FIA system that must be heavily revised. It reminds a lot of the IOC: "Beijing? Human rights? Where's the problem?" Ditto...
- 26. At 7:25pm on 21 Jun 2009, bazf11 wrote:
Max Mosley/FIA said on Friday that if the teams did not enter unconditional entries by close of play friday then they would be removed and the other applicants would be considered.The list of entrants would then be confirmed on Saturday as it was not fair to the new teams to keep them waiting.
Well the teams didn't submit their entries and no list of entrants appeared to be forthcoming on Saturday. Surely those new teams who have made a genuine attempt to join and put an application in in good faith desrve better thans this, and does it not point to Mosely making it up as he goes along?
- 27. At 7:25pm on 21 Jun 2009, fastlane99 wrote:
Mosley and Bernie will be included in next year "Biggest Loser" TV series.
Mosley and Bernie have too much power in Formula One sport. It time to change now. I'm very happy about Fota decided they will race in their own championship series. This idea was initiated by Mosley. So thank you very much Mosley for given Fota good idea. I know Bernie will dearly want to chock Mosley's throat for all these problems.
Mosley and Bernie tried to divide Fota in the past a few days but now it backfires to them. The main problem is Fota or F1's fan do not trust what Mosley promise to compromise for 2010 and after. So breakaway Fotas organize championship is inevitable to happen.
I think its best way for motor sport because most of teams and drivers are not happy with the way they were treated by FIA and FOM. Fota divorce from FIA & FOM is most important step for Motor sport future. Now time to say Good Bye to Mosley and Bernie.
- 28. At 7:29pm on 21 Jun 2009, 70sMiniRacer wrote:
As far as I know, the FIA is the governing body of world motor sport, which includes Formula 1, and Max is the duly elected president of such. The FIA, so far as I know is also therefore in charge of licensing the international spec. race circuits throughout the world. Think on that, friends of the 'breakaway' series. Do those manufacturers really want to risk it all?
- 29. At 7:29pm on 21 Jun 2009, oldloads wrote:
All I read is that Bernie can do this and that. Bernie is an employee of FOM (he sold it to a venture capitalist company, CVC Capital Partners). I think that maybe this breakaway might suit Bernie (and therefore Max), forgive me being a conspiracy theorist but is this all a scam to retain "ownership" of the F1 series under a new name? I agree with wrinkly25, I am fed up with new tracks in far away places, with no atmosphere and empty grandstands. Silverstone today showed what a GP should be about (OK the race was boring) but I bet the people there had a ball?
- 30. At 7:33pm on 21 Jun 2009, virginman wrote:
I have done some checking on the web and the cost of running indy car is about a third as much as the proposed lower limit for F1 msn.foxsports.com/nascar/story/3489526 .
- 31. At 7:33pm on 21 Jun 2009, lucabiason wrote:
@ oldloads
You are spot on and you know what? I don't even think the race was that boring.
But the crowd was just amazing. As a foreigner, I take my hat off to the incredible passion and sportsmanship displayed by the public. A lesson for a few people along the pitlane, maybe?
- 32. At 7:34pm on 21 Jun 2009, 21shergar wrote:
MM is sixty-nine years old, has suffered ignominy and ongoing ostracism as a result of revelations that would floor most people and has recently lost a son (something that would cause me more grief than I can imagine). No wonder his judgement has deteriorated to such an extent that he has become the main problem. Use of the word "loonies" is symptomatic of MM's loss of reason. Someone (a friend, if he has anyone close enough to him) needs to put a hand on his shoulder and spell it out, but the truth is that MM's stubbornness is unlikely to let any sense of stepping aside for the common good surface.
Methinks that Christian Horner was being disingenuous when he said that FOTA had no problem with Max personally. It is clear that MM's removal from the equation would be likely to result promptly in a resolution.
- 33. At 7:43pm on 21 Jun 2009, oldloads wrote:
70sminiracer - we are talking self regulation here, you can run a race without FIA consent. Changing the subject, do we think that in a weeks time Bernie and Max will still be making "nice comments" about Silverstone and a British GP in 2010 come what may?
- 34. At 7:45pm on 21 Jun 2009, LRD wrote:
post 23
This man has taken an autocratic "Do as I say for I am the law" stance throughout. He has stopped short of saying the teams are naughty boys who need to be spanked, but only just.
i think he wants that though....
but on a serious note, people who follow the sport do it for the teams. it wouldn't be the same without mclaren,ferrari etc.
FOTA would win
- 35. At 7:57pm on 21 Jun 2009, 70sMiniRacer wrote:
oldloads, I don't think so, not at such a high level. Self regulation of what exactly? True, there are circuits around the world that no longer host F1 and might want to 'get their own back' but it won't happen and it could not be set up in time for next year. And, for certain, they would be challenged if they tried to use the name Formula 1 or anything like that in the title - without Bernie's approval.
By the way Silverstone looked sensational, the crowd was amazing and it would indeed be a sad loss to the show!
- 36. At 8:05pm on 21 Jun 2009, cbblog wrote:
I find it curious that Max should want to keep the Cosworth engine in the equasion, is it because he's made some sort of commitment or is he on commission? Next will there be a standard chassis from Lola?
This is Formula One where the competition is as much building about premier machinery as it is a driver's championship. There are lots of other Formula that have identical machinery and they are very dull.
KERS is an impractical device to put into a F1 car, it is heavy, bulky, expensive and seems to have been a waste of money. Hardly the way to save money. The people making the rules are loonies and should leave the design work to the engineers.
- 37. At 8:13pm on 21 Jun 2009, 70sMiniRacer wrote:
The rules are agreed (eventually) and signed by the team representatives.
- 38. At 8:18pm on 21 Jun 2009, ellie2011 wrote:
Whatever you say about Bernie, you can't deny that he has turned F1 into one of the best TV sports events around the world. He's negotiated TV contracts, which benefit not only himself, but also, more importantly, the Teams. Yes, he asks the Teams to pay a retainer. Yes, he asks the circuits to pay a retainer, and make sure that their circuits are safe for drivers AND spectators. If they aren't, they are out. It might be harsh on Silverstone and Spa, 2 of the best circuits for drivers, but what he's asked of both is just better facilities and transport links. They make enough from the F1 weekends, and other non-F1 events to pay for them.
Bernie has made drivers, teams & owners rich. He's brought advertisement in, he's made the sport professional, much like Sky did with Football in England (Sorry MOTD and The Big Match, but Sky turned football into a business).
As for Max, I agree with just about every comment here. He's trying to become a dictator, something that his father tried in the 30's and 40's with a little Austrian guy :-) To change the wording of a contract, without confirming the changes is ... something I can't print. In a "normal" business environment he would lose his job.
Personally I think we should get rid of Max, and get Jackie Stewart in (If he's interested). Jackie fought against the orgainsers in the 60's & 70's and made the sport safe. He is a business man, and has the interests of the sport at heart. He can also fight toe-to-toe with Bernie (They are the same height !!)
- 39. At 8:19pm on 21 Jun 2009, RacingNeal wrote:
Basically I am beginning to loose interest in F1. I also dont like F1 just going after money and abandoning traditional racing circuits like Canada.
You can run a race in a new stadium with hardly any spectators or bring it to a place like Montreal where the stands are full and the whole weekend is a party time.
Bring on the new championship and bring it to Canada. Maybe well call it World Super Cars or something like that.
- 40. At 8:26pm on 21 Jun 2009, littlepammie wrote:
What I have observed over the past couple of days is:
First, the FIA were saying that the 2010 F1 race would be at Donington Park, or nowhere.
Just before midnight on Thursday, FOTA declared their intention to launch a rival series.
The reaction among fans commenting on internet fora on Friday included posts along the lines of, "Good news: this means we could see a FOTA race at Silverstone. We want to have races in places we can reach, not places we could not possibly visit! Go FOTA!"
Suddenly, there is talk of the 2010 F1 race returning to Silverstone, if Donington Park is not completed to standard on time.
Coincidence ... or not?
- 41. At 8:28pm on 21 Jun 2009, 70sMiniRacer wrote:
ellie2011 - I think you're right about Bernie, sensible comments, glad someone else sees it the way it is. I too have reservations about Max but he is in the middle of it all. Anyway enough for me today, I'm missing Hope Springs!
- 42. At 8:35pm on 21 Jun 2009, virginman wrote:
Until today I was totally with FOTA but since learning that Branson is pulling out from Braun next year I realise that it may be just a little too expensive for some. I have today done some checking on the web to see how much it cost to run a 2 car Indy team and the difference is quite staggering, check it out yourself on msn.foxsports.com/nascar/story/3489526 . OK we are not talking like for like here but if they could get the cost down by some margin the ticket prices may become more affordable, but don't hold your breath. I would also like to see more cars on the grid. As far as "best drivers" are concerned like Alonso saying he would go to Indy car or Le Mans rather than drive in a lesser F1 formula, well Indy car can't be that bad then can it. How do we quantify "best drivers" anyway, we all thought that Lewis was the new messiah last year and Jenson was a no hoper. As long as the brits, spaniards germans, brazilians etc has someone to root for they are just drivers and their ability will shine through as long as they have the car under them. The other thing I learnt from our blessed and hopefully reliably informed Mole is the new proposal for the lesser funded new teams running cosworth engines to be allowed to use unlimited revs whilst the higher funded teams would have to stick to the current 18000rpm limit. The Mole also tells us that engineers from the unlimited funded teams are saying that would give them an advatage because they would have 70 bhp more power than them so THEY would then become the disadvantaged, but what the engineer didn't say is their reliability would be reduced because of the extra revs, jesus, I am starting to think that FOTA does want it all their own way. Also if the lesser teams are going to possilly have more power how does that make the proposed new format a lesser formula one. I,m sorry but this is confusing the hell out of me.
- 43. At 8:57pm on 21 Jun 2009, ellie2011 wrote:
Last comment before I get back to watching Brazil thrash Italy.. There will be no split. As someone posted earlier, there are tracks around that can take the "new" championship, but, although still in use, will not be up to the standards for safety or logistics than the current circuits (Adelaide, Vegas/Detroit, Estoril, Mexico, Jerez, Kyalami, Buenos Aires, etc). They may host A1GP, but how many people turn up, compared to how many would turn up for F1.
Bernie has worldwide TV contracts, contracts with circuits, etc. He will NOT let everything he has built up be torn down. Max will go before the end of the season .. and probably with a very large payoff. .. And when that happens, and everyone is back on speaking terms, don't be surprised if Bernie sells all of his stake in F1. I thinks he's as miffed as all the owners are.. But he needs to keep his investment safe, for the time being, before selling off.
- 44. At 9:19pm on 21 Jun 2009, WrekinWatcher wrote:
None of this is about engines, circuits or regulations it's about money and sponsorship.
Ferrari want to retain their $1bn deal with Philip Morris (tobacco); Renault also have deals which wouldn't live in the budget cap, Flavio Briatore thinks he knows as much as Bernie (pigs might fly) and yes, Bernie (or rather CVC) is taking too much out....
Max heads an organisation which is not just about F1.
The whole thing has become a complete mess - if it weren't for the fact that the lawyers would be the beneficiaries they should frankly burn the entire set of contracts in an oil drum on the finish line - and start again.
- 45. At 9:58pm on 21 Jun 2009, GlassHouse wrote:
Is it not brilliant to be talking about the possibility of 2 British Grand Prix next year? I'm excited by this fresh start.
- 46. At 10:36pm on 21 Jun 2009, rainbowincadave wrote:
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
- 47. At 10:37pm on 21 Jun 2009, MadOldFool wrote:
Is it no wonder the general retirement age is consider to be 65. This sport seems to be run by 2 mad old fools. Bernie, just makes the rules as he goes from tv reporter to tv reporter ( aka, next years british gp ) and Max want's to impose a £40 million pound budget cap, i.e. reducing the tops teams budgets by 80%. Could you imagine him saying that to Premier league football teams. Man UTD just sold Ronaldo for £80 million! Max & Bernie do us all favour and hang up your boots, it's finally time!
PS. At least MotoGP have got it right, especially last weeks race which was superb!
- 48. At 10:58pm on 21 Jun 2009, dyrewolfe wrote:
As the Toyota chairman said today, the main disagreement is not on the subject of finances or technical issues, but on governance.
What most upsets the FOTA teams is the fact that the FIA can and have made unilateral decisions, changing the regulations, without any real understanding (apparently) of how it will affect the teams.
New aero regulations? Fine
New tyre and refuelling rules? No problem
But when you attempt to enforce a budget cap, one fifth or even one tenth of what some teams currently operate on, the very next season, then it is going to have a very detrimental effect on the larger teams. The FIA didn't even want to listen to FOTA's proposal for a phased reduction in spending.
It seems to me what FOTA want most of all, is for the FIA to commit to a set of rules and regulations, which the teams can live with, for a set period of time.
- 49. At 11:37pm on 21 Jun 2009, actualrelic wrote:
Is it just me or is the FIA (and Mosley in particular) living in a world of its own? They seem to not understand the sport that they are governing. F1 has always been about the engineering and that is what the FOTA members are all about. If the FIA want to govern a sport where technological innovation is not important then maybe they should move into athletics or darts. Good luck attracting 300,000 spectators to a British GP without Ferrari, McLaren and the rest. The FIA and Bernie Ecclestone need to wake-up to the realisation that the biggest asset in F1 is the collection of established big teams. As for the argument that the FOTA championship cannot go ahead because the circuits are contracted to the FIA F1 championship, I would say you need to look beyond the current venues. Imagine a return to Adelaide, Imola, Mexico City or Montreal.
- 50. At 11:45pm on 21 Jun 2009, paulie85 wrote:
Out of everything said this weekend one thing stood out as in interviews Bernie kept referring to F1 as a business. Fans are not watching a business, they're watching a sport. Bernie is forgetting that as the years go by. Each GP I go to gets more sterile, more expensive and ultimately more boring as he strives for the next million.
This saga has sucked the life out of F1 and i feel it needs a fresh start away from Mosley's power trip to get back in touch with what makes it great. The sport IS Ferrari, McLaren, Renault, Williams etc, and no amount of off-track politics and posturing by the FIA can hide the passion the drivers have for their SPORT once the flag drops. Bernie can keep his 'business', and the fans can follow FOTA to a championship run on the best tracks, with the best teams, that your average F1 fan can afford to go and see.
- 51. At 00:42am on 22 Jun 2009, encarteys wrote:
What I fear most is that after threats and counter-threats, litigation and counter litigation we'll end up at the end of summer with the same despot in the palace. Plus ça change....
But hey, maybe we can bring on yet another new race, The Grand Prix of Nauru? Notably known for its Guano (bird poo) which previously - maybe still - owns choice bits of real estate in Melbourne, London and elsewhere. And I think they bankrolled West End and/or Broadway musicals. So...an ideal Bernie candidate!
F1 belongs utmost in Europe, then all the Americas and not least the Asian car-manufaturing countries. But the 'desert' races are a total sell-out. The Great Ringmaster must find some moral gumption, if he can (I doubt it), and bring the sport back to where it really is appreciated and from where it isn't just another political showcase.
Otherwise let's go to Myanmar, quickly!
As for the President of the FIA, maybe there are some palaces in various far flung corners previously unvisted, with a national automobile association looking for an advisor for the next 10 years. Guano anyone?
- 52. At 01:03am on 22 Jun 2009, Jessica Auckland wrote:
Had a great time at Silverstone today. Talked about lots of things to do with the sport including this. We decided that the whole thing is brinkmanship between Mosley and Ferrari, with Mosley thinking he can break Ferrari's power within the sport without really realising the true power of the brand Ferrari around the globe. The fans, the money and any other self respecting F1 team (along with their fans and money) will go where Ferrari goes.
The other thing that is very apparent when you go to a Grand Prix is the vast numbers of people who work in the sport of F1. You see them everywhere around the ground. The budget cap isn't a vanity cap on a bunch of multi-millionaires. It will directly affect 1000's of incredibly talented British employees (in an industry already beleaguered by the collapse of the private car industry).
If the McLarens, Ferraris, Renaults, Toyotas and Red Bulls of this world have the money to employ all these people, they should be allowed to do so. If the FIA want new teams to come into the sport they could easily set up an F1 nursery fund which said new teams can draw from initially (maybe containing technical knowhow as well as money). This fund could reduce each year - if a team is any good, it will show results and get sponsors etc. And where would this money come from. Well there are a number of places I can think of straight away!
- 53. At 02:07am on 22 Jun 2009, Tykesabroad wrote:
I hope FOTA set up a new championship separated from the likes of Ecclestone or Moseley. F1 has managed to make a complete mess of the sport, is inept at governance and quite why the FI teams have stuck with it this long is beyond most peoples comprehension.
- 54. At 02:23am on 22 Jun 2009, TexasRaider wrote:
Just my 2 cents from America, here. When CART and the IRL (Indy Racing League) split in 1996, sure it was ugly and sure it lasted too long.
But, when they reunified in 2008 many fans argue it came back stronger and better than ever before. Sometimes you just don't have a choice - do you want F1 ruined by MM's political tyranny that strips the series of any real meaning and turns fans away because of hokey 'tricks' he thinks will make it more competitive, or do you want F1 to split and cause both series to suffer until they can reunify under a sensible regime?
In other words, do you want to be shot in the foot or the hand?
In my opinion, at least if you're shot in the hand you can still run.
They should split. It might rough for a year or two, but it wins a BIG battle. Ferrari et al. will win in the end as they have the fans on their side. MM will eventually be ousted and any future big shots will take sharp notice that the teams will only take so much.
Look, there is tons of cash to be made here and most folks want to see the big teams do well because they bring in the TV ratings.
MM should blink big time and thank the Lord he has such a sweet gig, instead of trying to split the goose open to get even more golden eggs. Really, how greedy/power mad/slef centered can one dude be?
- 55. At 04:34am on 22 Jun 2009, Geijo lets go wrote:
If the split can keep the eight teams onside and get an in principle deal from a terrestrial TV provider (even Five), I don't see how the FIA can win.
I heard on the grapevine that the reason F1 has swiftly backtracked on Silverstone was a sacrifice Bernie was willing to make to scupper the rival series; if Donington isn't ready and Silverstone is tied to F1, the new series will struggle to find a track.
- 56. At 06:27am on 22 Jun 2009, chetan_rao wrote:
Some people would just go as far as they can to rub it in....
Unlimited revs won't give a performance advantage? And any engineer would confirm that?
Yeah maybe, the engineers from Mosley Institute of Automobile Engineering!!!
Just goes to show that Max would probably struggle to tell you what RPM stands for... He probably thinks its the no. of times the engine thinks about changing its mind whether to fire or not to fire!!
Utterly disgusting ignorance...
- 57. At 07:07am on 22 Jun 2009, LoneStarCelt wrote:
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
- 58. At 07:28am on 22 Jun 2009, summitpoint wrote:
The FIA changes the rules too often. How can the teams adapt to the rule changes and save money in the process? Isn't there a cost to implement the changes the FIA makes?
For those who say look to how the IRL and Cart seperation affected the popularity of the sport. The IRL had been in deep decline in popularity way before the split happened (I know I am from US and followed the sport).
Remember the Fans follow the Manufacturers and not the governing body. Most people can relate to Toyota or BMW or MERC because we buy these cars. The FIA is trying to cater to these ad hoc teams who are entering the sport to be racers with the big boys.
Why is there such an emphasis with the FIA to have a GREEN philosophy to racing? Next thing you will see are emmission controls like EGR and SCR.
In my humble opinion, print a set of rules and let the teams abide for those rules for a long period of time.... say 5 years or so.
Why does f1 host events in far away places like Turkey where people could care less for the sport (and probably couldn't afford to go to one of these expensive races)? I mean a chinese grand prix where vast majority of the population rides bikes and rickshaws? I can't believe there are no more races in N. America. Only one F1 race in the Western Hemisphere. If you were to poll the teams, they would agree that the North American market is very important market. Probably the single biggest in the world. More Ferrari's are sold in the US than any other market.
I know it seems like I'm ranting and raving...I just don't get the F1 business model.
- 59. At 07:34am on 22 Jun 2009, tenniseveryone37 wrote:
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
- 60. At 07:59am on 22 Jun 2009, rennya wrote:
@70sMiniRacer post 35
Formula 1 is a generic trademark, and can be used by anyone who wanted to use it (kinda like Xerox - same also applies to phrases like 'Grand Prix' and 'Formula'). This has already been proven in the courts. The new breakaway series can use the a title like 'FOTA Formula 1 Grand Prix series' as the name and there is nothing Bernie and Max can do anything to prevent that.
Plus, FIA will still have to sanction the new breakaway series or else Nellie Kroes will want to take a look at them for anti-trust issues (if FOTA reported them to EU). The new series may not be able to use FIA F1 tracks like Istanbul or Sepang or Bahrain *snicker*, but there are many replacements like Spa (love this track), Monza, Indianapolis and even Silverstone (?) which will attract more spectators that will not dress up as empty plastic seats.
- 61. At 08:12am on 22 Jun 2009, littlepammie wrote:
Responding to comment no. 42:
You mention the difference in cost between Indy Car and F1. Part of this must be down to the cost of transporting the team, including race cars, spare cars and spare parts, around the world.
You also refer say: "As long as the brits, spaniards germans, brazilians etc has someone to root for they are just drivers and their ability will shine through as long as they have the car under them." Your final phrase makes a very important point. Watching this year's Silverstone Grand Prix, I did not feel that I was watching cars that were technically the best in the world. Is this a consequence of the major rule changes brought in this year, and the fact that last year some teams were concentrating their efforts on developing a car for 2009 while others were concentrating on winning in 2008?
The answers for the future of the sport lie with those negotiating behind closed doors. Let's hope they can come to a resolution that everyone can live with.
- 62. At 08:43am on 22 Jun 2009, racingreens wrote:
I don't know who you are Mole (and long may your identity remain secret) but you sure have dug out the dirt on Max! You can imagine the utter astonishment of FOTA when they read the date change!
This piece of info needs to be really 'out there' so that everyone is in the picture as to Max's mindset. I watched the interview with Jake on the BBC over the weekend and it's clear to me that Max can't be trusted any further than I could throw an MP4-24!!
It's a real pity that Williams and Force India felt the need to to sign up and get suspended from FOTA as the FIA's only strength seems to be that they have a least a couple of teams that people have heard of. Can anyone imagine Max and Bernie rocking up at next years season opener with Campos F1 (or whatever) as the lead team trying to talk the championship up? No, me neither. Lets have the 'FOTA World GP1 Championship' at all the best circuits....Silverstone included!
FOTA MUST stick together, no matter what, the future of the sport utterly depends on it!
- 63. At 08:44am on 22 Jun 2009, The_Oncoming_Storm wrote:
Good work Mole!
So it seems that a compromise can be reached if Max would just stick to what's been agreed and stop trying to dominate everything. Regarding TV rights to any breakaway Championship, is the F1 World Championship on the government's list of "protected events" like the FA Cup final, World Cup and Grand national which must always be available on free to air TV? If a split happened then wouldn't the TV rights for the breakaway series not be covered by this and could end up on pay per view?
- 64. At 09:03am on 22 Jun 2009, Jez wrote:
I support FOTA in their battle to get a fairer set of rules (than 2 tier) and a fairer share of the money, but lets also remember the underlying problem with F1 that the racing is processional and boring.
Most people who are not really into F1 view it as boring and processional. Compare that to how outsiders view Cricket 20-20 vs test cricket - it has moved the game forwards hugely (I am sure some will disagree but...).
F1s biggest real problem is to make it less boring. And what MM wants to do is more likely to make it less boring, even without the big teams.
FOTA need to bring out some sort of manifesto on how they will make F1 more interesting - after all, the money will ultimately chase what the people are going to watch - sponsors, circuits and even the FIA.
So, re cbblog KERS comment - ditching KERS would be the worst thing, as KERS is one of the few things that could make F1 races interesting, IF IT WAS DONE RIGHT.
We need more overtaking. Real overtakes happen once every 5-6 laps (depending on how you count) - that is truly dreadful, compared to pre big aero racing.
Instead of dropping KERS, it needs to be unleashed. Get rid of the 6.5 second and max HP limits and let it be used as often as they can and as powerfully as possible.
Given the speed and nature of the circuits, with current aero, overtaking will just not happen unless either the cars or divers have huge disparity. You simply cannot overtake when your performance advantage is at most a tenth or 2 on any given strait/bend.
But removing aero would make it a lot slower, and hence not F1, so something else is needed.
KERS _IS_ the answer.
Imagine 2 cars with KERS, but one car is a second a lap quicker than the other. At the moment, there is no way to overtake unless one of them makes a mistake, so most real place changes rely on pit stops - how sad is that...
So imagine a properly implemented KERS.
If KERS can be used at every corner, then both cars will use it, but the slower car in front will have to use it all, just to maintain its place.
But the car behind will be able to save a bit each corner, so it builds up some extra power, and when it gets to a suitable place, it uses that extra power to blast past.
Its all about energy, and spare energy - if someone is a second a lap quicker, it means they have spare energy - they just need to be able to apply it at the right time.
At the moment, the weight of KERS is a big penalty, but that is because the cars simply cannot use it to the full, because of regulation.
KERS done right would let cars run with a lot less fuel, to offset the weight of the batteries.
I don't know if KERS would make enough difference, unless there was an additional regulation, limiting total fuel use for the race, but I think that should be done anyway, to focus F1 development onto efficiency, rather than simply speed.
And ultimately the only regulations (apart from safety) should be overall car dimensions, and fuel allowed for the race. If you can make a ten wheeled brick sucked to the ground go round quicker, then so be it, if you can do it with less fuel and stick to the track and drive it safely.
- 65. At 09:38am on 22 Jun 2009, Pwhen-23 wrote:
lucabiason wrote:
Correct. As I mentioned elsewhere, it's also how he gets there that is highly debatable and certainly it's not through a democratic and transparent process. I don't think it's that unfair to believe that there is a big hidden political and financial agenda in the behind-the-curtains negotiations between Mosley and the representatives of the FIA member states. It's the whole FIA system that must be heavily revised. It reminds a lot of the IOC: "Beijing? Human rights? Where's the problem?" Ditto...
Fully agree.
As very clearly demonstrated during last year's Spank-gate scandle.
The FIA president is unlikely to be opposed directly, those voting are by now either cronies of or afraid to rock the budget boat.
It's a bit like those F1 magazines who will not publish damning letters about the FIA & it's president as they fear their press credentials will be withdrawn.
A different structure is badly needed at the FIA and the notion, looney as it may be, that the president should have a fixed term of office and perhaps even more looney that he should be limited to two terms, US style.
Some will remember how nutty the edicts and antics of Jean Marie-Ballestre were before he was ousted from office. You would think someone would have learned from that.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
- 66. At 09:46am on 22 Jun 2009, collie21 wrote:
Increasingly disilluioned as season after season the rules are different and the amounts of money spent are obscene, I have now decided just not to bother any more.
Fans are not stupid. Rules are meant to be rules. How is possible to compare one champion to another when in reality the sport has changed beyond recognition. Refeulling added such drama..... qualification is a joke. Mosely and Eccelstone are old doddery has been men with too much power, money and no grip on reality. The beast it seems has thrown itself off a mountain and dashed itself on the rocks below. Hang out the black flags for Formula 1 is no more.
- 67. At 10:14am on 22 Jun 2009, mrspinach wrote:
The FOTA teams need to bite the bullet, and get on with it. It is ridiculous for Bernie and Max to talk about helping the teams survive with the 40m budget cap when the present CVC deal takes 1 billion dollars out of the sport to pay off their debt for buying the rights from Bernie. Imagine if FOTA could make even half that profit and share it among the teams instead. Think of all the UK jobs that will go with teams forced to slash budgets to 40m. Think of all the jobs that will be saved if they can retain those staff and have a windfall of extra cash from owning the championship.
The FOTA series might have a difficult job in the first year due to lawsuits and lack of time to organize everything. But FOTA would bring racing back to the fans in Europe and America instead of to the image conscious dictators in countries where no one turns up to watch. If it is a bit rough around the edges for a year or two, we will forgive them. But at least racing will be safe in the hands of the guys who make it what it is, instead of in the hands of a couple of business people who seem primarily interested in taking the best teams and the best circuits out of F1, and moving races away from where the true fans are.
Come on FOTA, stop talking to the FIA and spend your time making your new series a success. The fans are with you by a big majority. There won't be a split because the F1 championship would be dead in the water. Even those who did sign up like Williams and Force India must be scrutinizing their contracts like crazy for a get out clause.
- 68. At 10:27am on 22 Jun 2009, HarleyRedMan wrote:
Good article - well proved and writ!! As always in F1 it's all about POWER - not so much of the engines but of those in charge.
'Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely'.
The sport should be about the technology and the paying-fans NOT those pocket-lining power-hungry ego-maniacs who lust for control and treating the sport as their own play-thing.
- 69. At 10:32am on 22 Jun 2009, simonzebu wrote:
So, Max and Bernie are getting on a bit and Luca & Flavio are eying up the succession.
Luca is put out that Ferrari's behind-the-scenes rules approval has backfired so badly this season. If he becomes president of FIA, it can return to its normal role of Ferrari International Assistance.
Perhaps Flav is feeling like the poor relation in the partnership of ownership of Queens Park Rangers and feels that his billions should be up there like Bernie's billions.
It all smells like a fist fight over the stabling of the cash cow. Wherever there are large amounts of money sloshing about, the most aggressive will be there fighting over ownership of it.
- 70. At 10:37am on 22 Jun 2009, robmadeley wrote:
as far as we know there are just 5 teams for next years f1. max moseley wants a 26 car grid. so if the fota teams do break away where are the other teams going to come from because frankly the other teams who put in entries havent even built their cars. and they arnt ready. it was said the teams need 18 months to fully develop a car at least 10 to design and build it. there are now what 8 months to go till next years championship. the fota teams will win otherwise there will be no f1 next year. maybe the non fota teams will decide to join fota leaving the fia no teams for next year.
- 71. At 11:01am on 22 Jun 2009, vin1963 wrote:
This change of date demanded by Mosley was never confirmed in any interview over the weekend. Good work mole. Both the FIA and Bernie wanted the major car manufacturers to enter F1, as a result Toyota,Renault and BMW joined Mercedes and Ferrari. They now want to tell these multi-national companies how to spend their investment in the sport by having a GP2+ series. F1 has always been the pinicle of motorsport. Even Bernie stated in an on air interview that costs should be up to the teams own decisions. If F1 is too expensive for lesser teams to cope with, thats not a bad thing. I remember in the 70's and 80's, the pre-qualifing to reduce the field enterents, that was very poor. If the FIA are demanding cost savings why have they pushed for Kerrs. This has cost the teams millions, BMW who were the most positive team about the system have given up on the technology.
There have been too many rule changes over the last 5-6 years, leave the sport alone FIA.
- 72. At 11:10am on 22 Jun 2009, G_K___ wrote:
Mosley is a joke - possibly the biggest joke in world sport.
Anyone with any shred of self-respect would have retired gracefully, in light of events over the past two years.
He knows everyone is laughing at him behind his back, and this, in my view, has led directly to increasingly erratic and incomprehensible behaviour.
Problem is, from being a laughing-stock himself, he is now turning the entire sport into a laughing-stock.
This must be put an end to. Mosley has to go.
- 73. At 11:10am on 22 Jun 2009, hackerjack wrote:
Sounds fishy to me. Why would Mosely go to the trouble of agreeing a deal with the teams only to go and do somethign as obvious as add two years onto the contract and hope that they would not notice? Surely the teams would have all taken notes. This sounds like yet more posturing from the teams to me.
I really dont like Mosely, I thik he is draconian and he is no longer the right person to be running the sport. His stepping down should be fundamental to any agreement along with any idea of a two tier championship. However he is right not to allow the big teams to steamroller the plans that have been put in place.
The sensible compromise would be to keep the optional budget cap, but change the penalty for exceeding it. Instead a staged penalty system should be introduced.
In 2010: A soft budget cap of £40m - Any team exceeding this will pay a penalty as folows:
£40-60m - The team must pay an additional 50% tax on whatever they spend in this range into a special FIA fund.
£60m+ - The team must pay an additional 100% tax on whatever they spend in this range into a special FIA fund.
In 2011: A hard budget cap of £60m, no team to exceed this. A soft budget cap of £40m - Any team exceeding this will pay a penalty as folows:
£40-50m - The team must pay an additional 50% tax on whatever they spend in this range into a special FIA fund.
£50m-60m - The team must pay an additional 100% tax on whatever they spend in this range into a special FIA fund.
In 2012: A hard budget cap of £40m, no team to exceed this.
The fund will be distributed amoungst the teams from the 2011 season onwards for up to 3 seasons in the form of grants which will be largely geared towards teams who wish to set up and fund driver development programs, junior teams or engineering educational programs.
This would allow the teams to spend whatever they want next year, but would at least reward those who choose to spend less. It would give them all 12 months to sort out their operations into leaner outfits before having to worry about a hard cap at all. Any tax collected will be funnelled back into the sport at a more root level, helping to support it's future.
- 74. At 11:21am on 22 Jun 2009, G_K___ wrote:
But it could honestly be a lot worse for F1.
Imagine for example if - instead of Max Mosley - the FIA was being run by the Roman Emperor Caligula.
* Power-crazed
* Paranoid
* Penchant for bizarre sex activities
* Erratic, unpredictable, known for seemingly arbitrary decision-making
* Attained his public standing courtesy of well-known father with militaristic tendencies
* Steadily-increasing signs of mental instability
See? It could be... ermm... worse...
- 75. At 11:33am on 22 Jun 2009, mikey37mike wrote:
So Mclaren have a disk with Ferrari stuff on it. No one can prove Mclaren even opened it! Yet Mosley says your guilty and here is a £100M fine! Yet half the top teams give the lower teams gearboxes and other stuff to use as a test bed (STR Ferrari) What's more laughable is Ecclestone back pedalling about the British GP. If I remember correctly this is the man who said that the country of the last years winner will have two GP the next year. He did for Alonso! Why not for Hamilton? He hates the BRDC and must be be hoping donnington can pull it off instead of going back to Silverstone. He did the same thing with Brands Hatch. The fact is that the circuits in the UK have to be commercial enterprises and pay for themsleves not wait around in case he fancies staging a race there. Roll on a world without Ecclestone and Mosley1
- 76. At 11:38am on 22 Jun 2009, delminister wrote:
FOTA is guilty of bringing the sport into disrepute and should be charged with the same.
ripping the sport apart for their own political ends is saddening but also shows they have no respect for the common fan.
F1 has been at the upper edge of motor sport for years and shouldnt be so badly miss treated by its competitors, its a circle the sport makes teams famous but once their fame reaches a peek they believe they dont need the sport but they do in reality.
any breakaway group will be lesser than the original and in my humble opinion it will not be sport it will be racing with the winning teams pre planned by committee of team managers, thus their will be no sport and new upcoming teams will have to que behind established teams.
developement will be stifled and fans will become bored.
F1 deserves to be backed by its teams and rules designed to enhance the sport brought in.
- 77. At 11:43am on 22 Jun 2009, cynicalyorkie1 wrote:
Of course barking Bernie has to find a solution...he has worldwide TV contracts to deliver "F1", which presumably means more than the 4 or 6 cars already committed to next season.
Remember the US GP fiasco of a few years ago?
- 78. At 11:57am on 22 Jun 2009, Chad Secksington wrote:
It's all a bit he said, she said isn't it? with successive interviews each presenting one side of the argument as fact.
It's clear that FOTA are winning the PR war, but I can't help feeling that the sports ultimate health would be better served in the long term by Max's plan rather than FOTA's. The uncomfortable truth is probably were FOTA up against a more popular FIA President that they may have run into sterner fan opposition.
It's certainly bewildering to see posters who I've previously read lambasting Briatore and Montezemelo as charlatans now hailing them as saviours of the sport. For all the posturing about how bad Ecclestone is for the sport (I believe he is ultimately but for far different reasons to most on here) the fact of the matter is that if it weren't for Bernie Ecclestone F1 wouldn't be the champagne soaked, sponsor friendly, marketing jamboree that the manufacturers currently find so attractive.
Of the breakaqay teams only Ferrari and McLaren can lay any claim to historic involvement, Renault's involvement may have stretched 30 years on paper but they've been involved when the moods taken them rather than 30 years of dedication to the sport. Red Bull, Toyota, Brawn, BMW and Toro Rosso have about 20 years in the sport combined, the idea that any of them are vital for the future of Formula 1 is an utter fallacy.
Would Formula 1 have been better or worse if Ross Brawn hadn't taken on Honda's team and been replaced by a completely new starter for this year. Yes we would have been denied the spectacle of Button enjoying a stellar season but would the racing have been markedly worse?
I can think of no other sport where an attempt to undermine the rule making body would be so eagerly received, where the fans would openly celebrate the idea that teams should be allowed to spend hundreds of millions of pounds, it's not a lot to do with car racing any more is it.
- 79. At 12:00pm on 22 Jun 2009, smifffies wrote:
I fully support FOTA in their breakaway series as i think it will definitely be good for the sport as if nothing else it will encourage more innovation and development in the sport.
Secondly i do not like Max Moseley's dictatorial attitude and never have. I think Max has been more affected by his sons death than he would like to admit and i think the pressure has got to him, when he appeared on TV at the British GP he appeared to be containing his emotions just.. not a cool calm and collected man, his comments on the Loonies within FOTA points to his ability to control his emotions is slipping. Comparing previous interview he seemed now to be on the edge of reason and i would suggest for his own sanity he attends some phsycotherapy sessions before he has a mental breakdown. I am not making this comment in an abusive way but seriously believe he is mentally unstable at the moment and is making the situation much worse than it already is, i would invite any qualified psychotherapist's to examine televised interviews in the past and compare to the more recent one's and make a qualified comment.
- 80. At 12:00pm on 22 Jun 2009, Whothecupfits2000 wrote:
If the saying that 'Behind the Throne lies the head that wears the crown' is anything to go by then, my assessment of the situation is; there are people within the FIA organisation who either for self interest or otherwise keep voting to retain Mosely at the helm of things.
Why else would anyone want a guy who has been so unpopular in recent times to continue in that role when, the premier series that gives the organisation the status it has enjoyed and taken for granted for so long is being unilatterally thrown into termoil by 'SMS Mo'?
- 81. At 12:02pm on 22 Jun 2009, rasczak101 wrote:
@ vin1963, Comment 71.
We didn't hear anything directly referencing 2014 as a year, however in MM's interview with Jake, he mentioned getting the teams to sign up for 5 years, 2010 to 2014 inclusive would be 5 years. John Howett said on Sunday to Jake, DC and EJ that Toyota were committed to 2012. FOTA statements have said they wish a new Concorde Agreement to cover until 2012.
I'll admit I didn't pick up on it really at the time, but now after this Blog, there definitely seems to be something.
- 82. At 12:21pm on 22 Jun 2009, EvilMole wrote:
It was notable that when asked about Mosley at the weekend, Bernie didn't exactly give him much backing. I believe he was asked if he believed Mosley should stay or go, and basically said it was a matter for the FIA.
My gut feeling is that no matter what happens, Bernie will come out smelling and roses and rolling in the cash - he usually does end up on the winning side! :)
- 83. At 12:30pm on 22 Jun 2009, F1Swiss wrote:
70sMiniRacer wrote:
It's all very well this 'breakaway' series. But where do they expect to race. None of the current circuits will dare to go against Bernie.
Important Point
Monaco is the crown jewel on the F1 racing calendar; but the Principality is free to leave the F1 calendar at any time... In a recent interview, Prince Albert stated that he couldn't image a race taking place in Monaco without Ferrari being present... Food for thought Bernie and Max?
- 84. At 12:32pm on 22 Jun 2009, Sbasstraveller wrote:
Rock on FOTA. A shake up of F1 is loooong overdue! I am hungry for it.
BE & MM have dug F1 into this hole and (typically) now act as if 'there is nothing wrong' with what they are doing. Sounds familiar doesn't it, like the MP's who are blatantly guilty of fraud. How naive and absolutely galling.
BE has pushed the financial level of this sport up into the stratosphere and MM+FIA keeps on moving the technical goalposts every season - never ever getting it right. It has got to the point where something has to crack, and at last this looks like it is now happening, hopefully.
F1 enjoys unprecedented levels of technology and finance, and should therefore be one of the most exciting sports to watch yet is in fact the most boring? Pathetic that we depend on the mechanics in the pit lane to provide some sort of excitement! Hardly surprising Valentino Rossi turned up his nose.
Perhaps the problem is with us: money is the only language that talks so we should stop paying in and boycot it until it deserves our money!
- 85. At 12:35pm on 22 Jun 2009, tuatara wrote:
Max & Bernie would do well to look at the support banners that were plastered round Silverstone yesterday - all for drivers and/or teams. I looked hard but I couldn't see anything in support of FIA or FOTA. I love to watch cars being raced around a track, so if my chosen team leaves F1 to race in another championship then I'll be watching that instead.
I have a remote and I'm not afraid to use it!!!!
- 86. At 1:00pm on 22 Jun 2009, webgraham001 wrote:
Formula 1 needs Ferrari and McLaren and it doesn't need Max Mosley, He's done a great job campaigning for safety on the track and the road that have kept racing drivers alive, but he's gone too far setting arbitrary budget caps. Everyone agrees F1 spends (and wastes) far too much but it's too far too soon to expect teams to lay off hundreds of good people over a 12 month period.On top of that, there's now an issue of trust between him and the teams. If he did unilaterally change the time for which teams had to commit from 3 to 5 seasons, he'll need to explain why.Many fans, leave alone FOTA, will suspect it's because he really doesn't want a deal and hopes to be able to pick off the teams as he has already done with Williams and Force India.His problem is that while the 8 teams are aligned behind Ferrari, which is the cornerstone of F1, there is a danger that Bernie Ecclestone will decide to hang Mosley out to dry.He nearly did it last year over the orgy thing.In the end,Bernie will step in and sort it out.The only question is,will Mosley be humiliated and out of a job or just plain humiliated?
- 87. At 1:04pm on 22 Jun 2009, David Scanlon wrote:
It is high time for Max Mosley to either stand down or be shown the door. He is destroying F1 and a replacement is needed who will cooperate with the teams properly.
- 88. At 1:12pm on 22 Jun 2009, SunnSunn wrote:
Is this not just the soap opera, thats called F1, every year there are 'things' which take more media attention than the racing, what is intresting, and something a previous blogger mentioned, that any breakaway sports organisations have grown substantially, the obvious being the Priemer league for football, and the PDC darts to name just two. It takes a little time, but a breakaway could be just what we need.
One of their priorties was making F1 more affordable to the fan, the current pricing for Silverstone is and was outragous,...example, no parking permit, to park in a field, go to office to obtain one, thats £25 please sir. Yes £25 to park in a field, no choice to pay otherwise it was a £60 fine.
Am I being cynical, in thinking because Bernie is now happy with the racing going back to Silverstone,if Donnington is not ready, the pay off has to made back someway ?
- 89. At 1:34pm on 22 Jun 2009, Antiakos wrote:
Mosley should have gone in 2004
- 90. At 1:53pm on 22 Jun 2009, Chad Secksington wrote:
At #88 the obvious difference between Premier League Football and Formula 1 that football already had TV deals in train and the venues were all in place and owned by the competitors. In the case of Premier League, extra money was guaranteed simply by pulling up the ladder from the lower division for TV rights, and football is Englands national sport, Formula 1 isn't anybody's national sport.
FOTA would be starting from scratch, with no venues, no TV coverage and no guaranteed income, in terms of Britain alone, who would pay the sort of sums Bernie / CVC extracted for Formula 1 for the new series? ITV and Setanta are broke, SKY just don't do major motorsport, certainly not on a Saturday and Sunday afternoon, Four and Five don't have the cash, the BBC is stuck with Formula 1 proper. Eurosport will show it but they won't pay big for it, and that situation is unlikely to be much changed around Europe.
Next we come to circuits, I don't doubt that they can find circuits to hold races, but the races will be at circuits that couldn't afford to pay Bernie what he wanted, in some cases there may be no payment changing hands at all, that's before you start looking at whether the facilities are up to snuff, so there's another budget hit.
The new series certainly isn't a guaranteed failure, but it is far from the cakewalk to a golden future some seem to believe.
- 91. At 1:53pm on 22 Jun 2009, super pig sufc wrote:
whoever wins out here.. can you stop messing around with the rules??..it is a counterintuitive argument but listen up..
basically what happens every year is that the big teams go and spend shed loads of money to get to grips with the new rule changes.. the smaller teams with less money get left behind.. over the season they gradually catch up until at the end of the season the rules are changed again and once again they are behind.. just leave it alone! it is the constant bl88dy rule changes that cost all of the money to implement.. thats why they have to spend so much money..
one other thing.. bernie was dead predictable with his.. 'ooh we might come here after all thing about silverstone'.. he's simply realised that he needs to tie silverstone into some kind of agreement so a break away outfit couldn't use it.. he's done nothing but slag silverstone for years.. if we have a breakaway can we have montreal and spa back plz?
- 92. At 2:26pm on 22 Jun 2009, sackhimnow999 wrote:
As a 30 year FI fanatic I cannot recall a time when one person took it upon themselve to go out "single handedly" and completely ruin a great sporting spectical. A sport that employs tens of thousands of people, that generates billions of pounds in income, is seen as the pinnacle of sporting excellence worldwide. Surely he can see from the way this is heading that he is loosing all credibility and authority and should step down now.
MAX - Please make a ten million fans happy and resign.
- 93. At 3:07pm on 22 Jun 2009, Ronin57 wrote:
I wish Max & Bernie (who remind me more and more of Dick Dastardly and Muttley by the minute) ,would cast their minds back to the heady days of the late 70's when Ferrari flat v12's battled with the Renault twin turbos , it was the days of pure seat of your pants racing !
The constant rule changes over the past few years by the FIA have taken away the manafacturers ability to develope technology that will eventually cross over to their main production line, no wonder they want out . FIA really have to wake up and give FOTA and the drivers alot more say into the rules and this will not happen as long as dear old Max is still there .
As far as dear old Muttley is concerned , he stopped thinking about the fans years ago . I have been living in Melbourne for a while and have only been to the race twice , ticket prices have increased and i have decieded that i was not going to line Bernies pockets anymore, now this is coming from someone who attended the British Grand Prix from 1977-87 and started going to race meetings in the uk in 1963 !
By the way Bernie thanks foe threatening to take it away unless we made it a night race , more additional cost for race that has been losing money for the past three years , attendance has declined every year due to ticket costs .
I really hope FOTA go through with their threat or come to agreement with the FIA that Dick goes and as far as FOM is concerned , cut a large chunk out Muttley's wallet .
Ah the heady days : YOU TUBE :GILLES VILLENEUVE VS RENE ARNOUX BEST ABOUT 1979 F1
- 94. At 3:38pm on 22 Jun 2009, chris4454 wrote:
I look forward with great anticipation to the breakaway series joining the A1 franchise and changing the way that franchise runs, away from national teams. They already have tracks booked up so it would be very easy to use them for a transformed A1 series.
To hell with Mosley and his overwhelming arrogance and need for power. He needs FOTA, FOTA doesn't need him.
Let the FIA leech off the back of some other sport.
Mosley needs to understand that the Fascists lost the war!
- 95. At 3:50pm on 22 Jun 2009, Chad Secksington wrote:
#93 The fact is FOTA want to maintain it as it is now, not take it back to the 70's, Max wants massively lower budgets and more technical freedom, FOTA wants minor cost cutting and fixed regulations, what Max is saying is that fixed regulations favour the big boys who can spend millions for an infinitesimal improvement in aero, whereas looser framed regs that change periodically are necessary along with budget restrictions to level the playing field and encourage genuine innovation.
I think all fans agree on ticket prices but while FOTA might offer movement on that initially, you can bet your bottom dollar that if they do get it off the ground it'll be back to Today's prices quick smart, they'd have to or their rich new world would give them less money than they get now.
- 96. At 4:47pm on 22 Jun 2009, Ronin57 wrote:
#95 I fully understand your point and was for not one minute suggesting going back to the 70's.but with all the new technology they are still unable to replicate this sort of racing was the point i was trying to make, just being nostalgic.
The manufacturers must not have absolute control over the rules and must have a cap on spending but dont you find it strange that Max wants to cut costs but with constant rule changes year after year actually increases the teams expenditure and Bernie seems hell bent on sending them off to more far away places .
I personally would not like to see the end of F1 , I would like Max to step down , FOTA and someone from the Drivers Association have a bigger say in the rule changes proposed by the FIA , Also re FOM, FOTA should have some say in where they race and let FOM put back 25% of the 50% share of tv rights they get back into the catagory and more importantly the smaller teams. Please dont get me going on the deal Max gave Bernie on the TV rights for F1.
The question know one seems to be asking is who is going to be playing Max's role in this new series ? ...Sir Jackie ?
Agree with you on ticket prices ...seen it all before :(
- 97. At 5:16pm on 22 Jun 2009, SunnSunn wrote:
We must not forget how cunning or clever Max is, I think it was about 4/5 years ago, he offered to resign, but no one would take his place, so he was back in, then last year we had the NoTW claims, which went to court, at the time of that, many people in F1 came out and said, they want nothing else to do with him and he should step down immediately, nobody wanted anything to do with him, but has the season continued, Max was back and stronger than ever in all them same circles. Today he wants to make changes most teams are not happy with, now if Max is elected into this position by board members, does not this board have to approve his decissions...?
So who are these people agreeing with him, or is this all Max's doing,
and then who says Max is wrong....Well teams have, is this because. its in their best intrest to dissagree, I have and most fans seemed to think he is wrong, but is that because, its in our best intrest to dissagree....why would Max want to cause so much dissagreement that has led to todays events, Power, Money, surley he has had that power for an awful long time already and still has, Money, I'm sure he is well wealthy, not as much has Bernie, but plenty in the bank,...
So lets think about it a little longer, is Max right?
- 98. At 10:22pm on 22 Jun 2009, JohnnyDratsab wrote:
As things stand the FOTA teams are currently united against a common enemy at the FIA. They are however, competitors first and foremost and are constantly disagreeing with each other on most other issues. Given the huge egos involved I wonder how long this unholy alliance will hold before descending into rancorous confusion and turmoil.
FOTA have grabbed the fans' attention with some nice PR spin but, excuse my cynicism, would I be the only one with a wry smile of irony if someone like Luca di Montezemolo started outlining plans for "transparent governance"?
None of this would have happened if a different administrator heading the FIA had proposed these rules. Despite much (by no means all though) good work in a professional capacity, Max Mosley has very little personal credibility. I think that he has tried to correct what he sees as the pressures affecting F1 but he should now leave his post in October as was his intention originally. Bernie just needs to pay up a bit more to the teams and ensure that they're adquately rewarded for their endeavours.
All the teams like to portray an image of sophistication and excellence so I find it incongruous to see those same teams employing gutter politics and agitating for a damaging fight with the FIA. Yes the FIA needs reform and a change of administration but I don't think is the best way to achieve those aims. Any fan who truly believes the FOTA spin that they would do more for the fans has unrealistic expectations I would suggest. The fans are cash cows to be milked at every opportunity and if it aint Bernie 'n' Max picking your pockets then it will be Flavio/ Luca/ Howett et al.
- 99. At 09:37am on 23 Jun 2009, politicianstink wrote:
Time Moseley went.
- 100. At 12:01pm on 23 Jun 2009, Neil wrote:
I think Max Mosley lost his marbles in a basement flat in Chelsea last year.... Thanks to the mole we have confirmation of where the real problem lies here....
- 101. At 12:39pm on 23 Jun 2009, F1mademesmoke wrote:
I can't see how a rival championship could be organised in time. Forget the venues, what about a governing body? These teams are hard wired to diagree on everything and to believe that they could find enough common ground to see this through is stupid.
I also take issue with the notion of fan's support for manufacturer teams. They are in F1 to promote a product so commerce is the prime motivation and not sport. Over the years these teams have inflated the running costs to such astronomical levels that genuine racing teams have been being marginalised (Williams) or lost (Lotus). Ferrari have flourished in this climate by being equally manufacturer and racing team.
I think Max Mosely is trying to redress this balance in favour of the essentially sporting teams before all the big manufacturers (like Honda) walk away.
- 102. At 2:04pm on 23 Jun 2009, cottonhill wrote:
I do not really understand these comments that F1 can't exist without the likes of Ferrari, Mc Laren, Renault etc - it has and will. a quick look at F1 history the same thing could and possible was said about Alfa, Maserati & lotus to name a few which at various times and periods were the teams to beat.
- 103. At 2:05pm on 23 Jun 2009, Jessica Auckland wrote:
I was just listening to the radio coverage from Friday first practice. Holly Samos tried to get some comments from Bernie and Max. Max just said that a press release would be released later and Bernie treated the whole thing as a joke (to deflect from giving any real substantial answer).
As a fan who has paid a lot of money to watch F1 and invests time and emotion in the sport, I found Bernie's attitude in particular very insulting. All the FOTA bosses that were interviewed didn't take any of it as a joke. Alot is said about how Bernie and Max have made the sport what it is today. However true this may be, the point is that the issue is what the sport will be tomorrow not what it was 20 years ago. It feels like these guys are still the privateers that got into the sport 30-40 years ago and still see it all as a big game in which they are the main players.
The thing is that the very developments that they have put into place have transformed it into a billion dollar industry with millions and millions of fans around the world. On one side, the fans HAVE to be respected. They ultimately pay for everything. On the other side, the industry HAS to be respected.
There is a lot of talk of the money that is spent on F1 from champagne to front nose cones. What is sometimes missed is that all of this money ultimately ends up in the pockets of little people all over the world who provide the services and products on which the money is spent. Yes, a few people have got very very rich but it is also an industry that employs thousands and thousands of people (Directly and more importantly, indirectly) - as I said before, this was blatantly apparent at Silverstone this weekend.
To me, it is iniquitous to have an organisation like FOM pay millions to a venture capitalist like CVC while the FIA tells the teams to stop doing what they do - the business of motorsport. Meanwhile the fans at Silverstone spent a lot of money on their favourite teams - not on the FIA and not on F1. I didn't see anyone walking around in an F1 or FIA t-shirt! The sport is now the teams. I think it is true that there needs to be new or returning classic teams and I think any future development needs to encourage those teams financially - but not through limiting what everyone else can spend but by helping them to have comparable budgets to compete effectively and by ensuring that what the fans (directly and through sponsorship, TV deals etc etc - which are only there because of the fans) pay into the sport goes to the people who work in the sport and it's ancillary industries.
This business model went t-i-ts up some time ago and, of the two competing sides in the argument, I think I know where I stand with FOTA. They want to do business. They are endeavouring to keep the fans on their side - they have even had the simple idea of taking the races back to the places where the fans want to see it.
Max and Bernie (and I do think they operate together) have been insulting to the fans. They claim that the courses where people want to see the sport won't pay for it but then take it to state sponsored courses which line their own pockets or egos but where no one wants to watch the actual race. Everyone talks about the most money coming from the TV rights. Well, then surely it doesn't matter so much if Indianapolis or Silverstone can't afford to pay Bernie's inflated price because the global audience will watch regardless but meanwhile the races will be great, at great courses supported by the loyal fans.
I'm rambling a bit here but what I'm really trying to say is that the status quo has changed. The changes made by Bernie in particular are now enshrined. F1 is global. Ferrari are a huge global brand. Other F1 brand names, be they McLaren or Lotus are synonymous with this new world order whether they are in the sport or not. The genie is out of the bottle. The teams ARE F1. The Fans ARE F1. F1 is nothing without either of these. Bernie and Max are nothing without either of these. The global interest in the teams will lead to continued financial support of those teams.
I think the teams have finally wised up to this fact and the wheeler dealers who think it is all a little power trip game that they can control through secretive and bizzarely unprofessional tactics will soon learn the truth of the matter....
- 104. At 2:16pm on 23 Jun 2009, Jessica Auckland wrote:
I've just been thinking about my last post (!) and making analogies with the premiere league. I mean, whether you like the power of the Football superclubs or not, imagine the FA saying to Man U, we're moving your ground to Trent Bridge Cricket Ground, we don't care about the millions of fans that want to come to see you play or the atmosphere at the ground, you can't buy any player over 1 million, if Liverpool and Chelsea pull out because they can't run their busnesses any more we're still holding you to your contract so that you can play against Wycome Wanderers. I mean, really?
- 105. At 2:43pm on 23 Jun 2009, cottonhill wrote:
small teams = technical innovation
A contraversial thought but:-
Rear mounted engines - Cooper T51 (OK that does ignore Autounion)
monocoque chassis - Lotus (Colin Chapman's Lotus 25)
These two innovations paved the way for modern aerodynamically efficient F1 cars
So I content it is the 'smaller teams' who have historically come up with the genuinely novel developements & in doing so defined the look of modern F1.
Granted that under the rediculously tight regs these days the room for innovation is severly curtailed.
Do we need a more open and less restrictive regs (though not at the cost of safety)?
- 106. At 3:36pm on 23 Jun 2009, Will Hambling wrote:
"It is extraordinary that at a time when all five manufacturers involved are in great financial difficulty and relying on taxpayers money, their Formula 1 teams should threaten a breakaway series in order to avoid reducing their Formula 1 costs."
Spot on Mosley. Spot on. Take heed, greedy F1 teams!
- 107. At 3:45pm on 23 Jun 2009, Cowboy Martin wrote:
I think the best thing to do now is have a breakaway series. You can gurantee once the big boys move the others will follow. This is a game of cat and mouse. Mosely will not stand down as he's too stubborn and you have to remember what blood id in him, he's not likely to want to negotiate too much either,it's just not in him to give an inch. His legacy will be the man who brought F1 to an end but the thing is he won't care one jot as long as he thinks he's right, which he clearly isn't. A power control freak if I ever saw one. But also, let's not forget Bernie Ecclestone in all of this. He's not blameless, still owing teams prize money ! Let the breakaway begin, fresh heads,fresh ideas,cheaper tickets,more fan friendly and let the best car/driver win. This is not about Mosley aand Ecclestone's egos, this is about keeping F1 or whatever it may be called alive and there's plenty of experienced heads around to make a breakaway a success.
- 108. At 3:57pm on 23 Jun 2009, baron924 wrote:
Max is a very naughty boy, he should get a good spanking. Oh, hang on.....
- 109. At 5:04pm on 23 Jun 2009, vertigo_timbo wrote:
it's laughable moseley claims that he now needs to run for re-election as president of the fia because fota are undermining the fia - no fota seek to undermine moseley because he clearly lets the power of fia president get to his head. The FIA should have got rid of him last year when they had the chance.
By the way if the teams move f1 will not exist, surely that's plain to see with any racing without not just the big teams but all the big teams with the medium sized ones all their bar williams too. Does anyone really want to watch two williams and two force indias fight it out to decide who's the best manufacturer in the world while watching a bunch of nobodies (which is what they'll be too the general public) fight over 5th place - no guesses who'll win the f1 world championship next year if this happesn?
- 110. At 5:52pm on 23 Jun 2009, SimonGW6 wrote:
Personally I could live with an F1 without ferrari.....I think an F1 without Williams would be a greater loss.
- 111. At 7:38pm on 23 Jun 2009, Sharknose wrote:
virgin man wrote: "Until today I was totally with FOTA but since learning that Branson is pulling out from Braun next year"
Was Branson ever really "with" Brawn?? My impression was that he gave them tuppence to ride on their media coat-tails. I'm sure Brawn will have a choice of title sponsor for 2010 no matter where they race.
- 112. At 7:50pm on 23 Jun 2009, AntonfromLancs wrote:
With FOTA all the way.
- 113. At 7:52pm on 23 Jun 2009, AntonfromLancs wrote:
To BBC: I'm not a new member, I've been signed up for years, so why are you delaying my post and telling me that new members are pre-moderated for a period?
- 114. At 8:01pm on 23 Jun 2009, rosscoticktock wrote:
I'd prefer to see a sport with 1 championship. I think having a seperate "team" championship would divide the coverage, divide the money and divide the fans. That said, the FIA appear to have been a little draconian in their efforts, surely a staged reduction in costs over a number of years would have been more realistic. Teams could still have joined and ran a car for a couple of years on £40m gaining experience and data for when the playing field was level. Also, excluding the drivers salaries is a terrible idea. If you want to control costs then ALL of the costs need to be included. Rather than worry itself over how much independant teams spend, I would like to see the FIA promote technologies which could benefit road cars one day. I think the movement to remove fuelling during the race is generally sound, I would also consider tyre changes as well. It should be left to the teams to develop a more fuel efficent car or face the penalty of carrying around all that extra weight. Similarly if tyre changes were prohibited, teams would work on ways to either make tyres more durable with the supplier or make their cars less abusive on the tyres. For me the FIA should promote these goals and then let the teams loose to develop their own cars to meet the requirements rather than defining each and every aspect along with how much it can cost. We'll end up with stock cars, not something I want to watch!!
- 115. At 10:21pm on 23 Jun 2009, Fullspizz wrote:
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
- 116. At 11:08pm on 23 Jun 2009, Jingles0609 wrote:
I'm so BORED with F1 at the moment! Don't get me wrong - it's great to see Jensen doing so well after so many duff cars, but a shake-up can't be a bad thing can it?
At the end of the day, I am capable of changing the channel on my TV and if a FOTA spin-off series means that my chosen driver and/or team race elsewhere, then I'm going to follow! In the same way, if my driver/team stopped racing completely, then my interest in the sport would undoubtedly reduce (at least for a period of time - everyone's got their 'second favourites' right?!?)
Get Murray Walker or Sir Stirling Moss in to run the FIA - A bunch of Murray-ism quotes would be comic relief in comparison to all the testosterone posturing going on at the moment!
- 117. At 11:13pm on 23 Jun 2009, jovialStelladave wrote:
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
- 118. At 00:07am on 24 Jun 2009, TJ wrote:
I wonder if the hold on Mad Max's legal action was because he realised that when he said the teams agreed it, the teams hadn't agreed to what he sent them.
- 119. At 06:18am on 24 Jun 2009, Ronin57 wrote:
Virginman : Maybe Branson pulled out of Brawn , not because of sponsership costs but maybe just maybe FOTA have offered him something more substantial on the promotional side of the new championship . Was very interesting to see Sir Richard and Sir Jackie in deep conversation on the grid last Sunday.
- 120. At 07:38am on 24 Jun 2009, conradin wrote:
I think once Max is out everything will be fine.
FOTA will be a better championship. They can have a lot of great circuits to choose. They can even BUY the circuits so that nobody can govern them.
While "F1" is supposedly copyrighted, there is no copyright on Grand Prix, or World Drivers Championship. Why not just name the new championship as Formula Zero, or better yet, Formula Libre (Free Formula, no restrictions!)
We need a new FIA president, who understands the car industry, who understands laws, who had personally involved in motor sports at different levels and different tasks. Someone who understands that the wealth generated by the motor racing industry nees to be spread to everyone, not just the few. Good political and marketing skills.
Circuits that are challenging and loved by drivers. Circuits that are easily reached by spectators. Reasonable ticket prices. Marketing and advertising that benefit the teams in the industry in the long run. TV and other media coverage that is cheap and virtually free so that exposure can be maximized.
Several people will be good candidates as the new President.
Jackie Stewart (racer, team owner, businessman, corporate spokesman, popularity and respect).
Luca di Montezemolo (racer, team manager, World Cup Organizer, automobile manufacturer CEO, lawyer)
Roger Penske (racer, team owner, businessman, automobile industry CEO)
Ron Dennis (mechanic, team owner, businessman, automobile manufacturer CEO)
Dave Richards (racer, team manager, team owner, accountant, businessman)
There are also several people that do not have all these qualities, but can be considered: Lauda, Todt, Stoddart, Berger, Reutemann.
But if there ever were a popularity contest, Mario Andretti would probably win hands down, and would be a great choice between the top five and the bottom five that I suggest, serving a couple of terms, he could at least bring peace to every parties.
The is sad, it makes me miss Balestre.
- 121. At 09:52am on 24 Jun 2009, livingwheelman wrote:
Can anybody tell me how many terms of President has Max served ? I ask this question after looking on the FIA web site and reviewing the FIA's Statues, Article 19 states in October 2005 the statue was ammended allowing a President to serve a max of two years. Article 19 also refers to Article 12.1.
PS I am not a Lawyer.
- 122. At 10:06am on 24 Jun 2009, ManilaMonkey wrote:
What I don't understand is why any circuit currently contracted to host a F1 event would be precluded from also hosting an event for a breakaway series. Every circuit in the world needs to host as many events as possible to be economically viable. And they all do. The FOTA series would just need to host their event at any venue on a different weekend than that of F1. I cannot see any of their contracts with FOM as being exclusive for open wheel racing events.
Also I do not see the FOTA teams having a problem getting along. They will probably create their own constitution, and as equitable members will propose the management of a new governing and rule setting body and then, as equitable members, vote.
The biggest issue I would foresee is which teams get a bigger equity share (i.e. I don't see this as being one team one vote).
I think the biggest time issue for the breakaway will be the governance and equity and revenue/cost sharing. The charter. Things like that.
TV contracts, venue locations, technical rules etc. should be fairly easy. They already have a rule template to follow, which is this years FIA rules, and the teams are all fully versed with these existing and next year's rules, and could simply copy much of this.
They and all potential circuits are familiar with the procedures and terms for hosting events, issuing tickets, transportation logistics and so forth. It might be only a bit more complicated than simply replacing FOM with FOTA on the heads of the contracts.
I think it is easier to clean up the sport by starting from scratch.
BTW another thing I don't know - is the FOM restricted to organizing a FIA sanctioned event? Or can it as an independent business, use its skills and resources to sponsor a breakaway series? That I just don't know, but maybe that is why Bernie is so relaxed these days. Maybe he doesn't care, and has resigned himself to the fact that FOM is going to make a lot less money next year.
Oddly he is sitting pretty isn't he. He sold so much of FOM a few years ago, and got all that wonderful cash, and now his investors are likely going to lose big time.
By the way, I am brand spanking new to this forum, and this is my first post. How am I doing?
- 123. At 10:11am on 24 Jun 2009, Dirty_Frank wrote:
Let us not forget that F1 is not the only sport to be governed by the FIA. Yet it is the only sport to be causing itself problems. The fact is that F1 is the big money spinner. This in turn means money - and lots of it - which in turn means power - and lots of that too. Every sport needs someone in charge, F1 included. However, it would seem that the problem is that everyone involved wants to be that person. FOTA do not have that power. That is the problem. But should they obtain it, i wonder how much in-fighting there would be over the overall leader of that group too? They say money corrupts.
- 124. At 10:20am on 24 Jun 2009, drinksmonitor wrote:
My major concern here is that both Max and Bernie are getting on a bit and they have no real future in F1 long term simply because neither of them have much of a long term left career-wise in any shape or form. Is there a chance they want to sink the ship while saluting on the deck?
The breakaway seems beset with problems don't get me wrong, I would love to see Max done over but I have a horrible feeling that this could all go very pear shaped for everybody concerned. I have faith in Luca, Flav, et al but will Max not destroy everything in order to ensure FOTA fail?
Objectively speaking, it's quite sad watching Mosely implode in public. His life is increasingly tragic, his dignity left some time ago and now he seems to be seeking to destroy that which he has held so dear out of pure arrogance and bloody-mindedness. In F1, the true greats know when their time is over and they walk away because in their heart, they know they are no longer at their best. The competitors that stay beyond that point gradually corrode their legacy race by race. Or Presidency by Presidency.
- 125. At 10:24am on 24 Jun 2009, geezerRaceFan wrote:
Is 'sod-the-fans-I'm-following-the-money' Ecclestone going to come out of this fracas still smiling and ripping off an inordinate percentage of the sports income? It is beginning to look as though he may. All the (deservedly) negative attention from FOTA and the fans is now being focussed on Max while Eddie Jordan seems to be running an on-air PR campaign for Bernie, umbelievably referring to him as a 'White Knight' in Sunday's broadcast. Now I'm reading speculation about 'which way Bernie will jump' and hearing a team boss talking hopefully about Bernie protecting 'what he has made of the sport'. Are FOTA now willing to overlook Ecclestones ruthless commercialism and greed in order to get his support in getting rid of Max?
- 126. At 12:33pm on 24 Jun 2009, drinksmonitor wrote:
Re 125 geezerRaceFan, I reckon you're bang on. I think FOTA feel they have a better chance of getting rid of Max with Bernie aboard. That's why he has escaped any of the mud thus far. He's also the master of diplomacy and as usual, has played himself beautifully into position as the mediator between the two camps by a combo of keeping his mouth shut and telling both sides what they want to hear.
- 127. At 1:09pm on 24 Jun 2009, msadler04 wrote:
Well, peace has broken out. Max will be gone in 4 months. F1 hardcore fans always knew this was the case, despite plenty of people supporting a FOTA series it would NEVER have worked.
It will ALWAYS be the FIA Formula One World Championship
- 128. At 5:42pm on 24 Jun 2009, me wrote:
'Are FOTA now willing to overlook Ecclestones ruthless commercialism and greed'
True, but it is Bernie's efforts that have helped create much of the money in the first place. The sport was worth peanuts before he got behind it, and Ok so he takes a pretty large share for himself but at least he helped make it, which is more than your fat-cat-bankers, directors etc can often say.
It's supply and demand. The grid is (again) full, the tracks are full (well when they race in a country which expects a Grand Prix to feature cars not camels anyway...), the teams have been arguing they want to spend more money not less, and do you really think gate prices would come down if Bernie took less money?!!! The only losers are the FIA, and they were the ones stupid enough to let Max & Bernie stuff them in the first place, and hardly deserve much sympathy. Though they will need to find a few billion to finance Mad Max's pension pot no doubt ;-)
- 129. At 06:59am on 25 Jun 2009, delminister wrote:
from this story is shows that fota are liken to a bunch of kids throwing their toys out of their collective prams to get what they want.
as a long time fan of the sport that was F1 Fota have spoiled it and have lost any respect they may have had.
I still think the sport would be better off without the Fota bunch as new or older teams would be willing to work hard to race and make an enjoyable spectacle.
Also on a naming note Fota = formula one teams association so it they broke away they would have had to change their name, and that would have split them up as their are too many leaders in the group.
- 130. At 07:35am on 25 Jun 2009, delminister wrote:
on comments from some max mosley has to go but i say look at what the sport would become if he had not been elected.
every one knows ferrari wanted out of the sport pre schummaker days becouse they were not winning and again this year becouse they fail to produce a car that can compete, a case of too much money not enough brains.
ferrari has become to big for its own boots and need to be brought back to reality.
through out the history of the sport there have been greater teams, minds and even drivers than todays but we the fan have to suffer todays crop and their attitudes have to change towards the fans and the sport before something comes along and squashes their little empire.
max and bernie have kept the sport together longer than many fans have been watching and thus shouldnt be ridiculed but praised on past achievements and allowed to retire gracefully.
as to some of the names being put forward some would be worse than max and others would be out of their depth, and is it not up to the FIA to choose and elect the next max?.
- 131. At 07:48am on 25 Jun 2009, delminister wrote:
105 you are correct and i for one is in agreement with you on it.
every one knows colin chapman is the man whose creativity boosted the sport and on a small budget too.
the sport needs small inventive teams to keep the mega bucks teams honest.
cosworth created an engine that put ferrari in the shade, lotus had the car that beat the world, tyrrell, williams, brabham, zakspeed, era, autounion to name but a few teams that have brought something to the sport.
let the teams concentrait on racing and the FIA run the sport.
- Previous
- Next