REPORT: FIA will reject teams conditional applications

Michael,I think you are correct, yesterday's statements were not as I read the previous days. I think FOTA is callinng the FIA's bluff, and honestly, if I were the FIA and expected to keep what strength I have at this moment, I can see there is no other choice but to call FOTA's bluff.

Bummer.

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=244988

 

This is Max's/Bernie's way of trying to isolate Ferrari from the group(cutting the head off the snake if you will). I just don't see a scenario here whereby LDM is going to not support FOTA to the absolute fullest. I think this M/B'S last ditch futile attempt to drive any wedge possible into FOTA.

 

Further note: Bernie does not have enough money to really believe he can sue all the teams to make them comply to the existing contract with FOM. It's a joke really, I don't think LDM/Ferrari/FOTA really cares. June 12th is approaching, and if Max / Bernie want the teams in, then they will have to capitulate!

 

A bit off track, but . . . I just thought how interesting June 12th will be - we'll be at Le Mans - that day is the open pit day so thankgoodness for iPhone internet and Saturday Luca is the starter - makes me wonder what type of reception he'll get from the crowd and Alonso will be there also. GO FOTA.

Carol

 

Wow all this intrigue its almost like USAC, CART and INDY cars all over again. Thanks Norm

 

Doubt he'll get cheers if Ferrari sides with the FIA...

 

Wait, Max threatens to throw Ferrari out of F1 for weeks and weeks and now he discovers that they're in until 2012 anyway? How funny is that?

 

Why do you insist on referring to potential new teams in such a derogatory way in virtually every post you make on the subject? Some of those teams are an important part of the history of motor racing and of F1 and could also be an important part of the future given the chance. You don't like the idea of them being admitted? Fine, but why not just say that without resorting to the sort of language you use?

Maybe there's a clue to your attitude here.

 

I wonder if FIA's 'agreement' with Ferrari has the team entering cars or cars requiring the actual nameplate? LDM could circumvent a lawsuit if it's the former by entering a 'B' team with another Fiat nameplate (ie; if BMW entered cars under the 'Mini' banner etc.), thereby keeping the Ferrari brand exclusive with FOTA.

Imagine Smacks and the Ferret if Ferrari entered a 'Jeep' in their F1 ?

 

Alfa, Fiat, Lancia, Maserati, Iveco, Jeep, Dodge, Plymouth, Eagle and Chrysler would all work...if max insists his way or the highway then the highway it is. Bernie would be so f$?!ed. It would be hard to get a new series started but they could at least come back to north america (US, Canada AND Mexico) and in addition to Argentina, South Africa, Imola, etc.
There are plenty of venues out there.....
Bring back 12 cylinders and we will be good to go....

 

I would wager the same as you - there's many in the sporty car world that would love too see Ferrari back. LIVE START means everyone can see Luca wave the flag!!

Here's what shows to be Speed's sked of broadcasting the 24h:
SPEED Live Coverage, 2009 Le Mans 24 Hours (All Times Eastern)

Friday, June 12
9:00 – 11:00 p.m.: Truth in 24

Saturday, June 13
8:00 a.m.: Le Mans Pre-Qualifying* (tape delayed)
8:30 a.m. - Noon: Le Mans 24 Hours (Live – The Start)
11:00 p.m. – Midnight: Le Mans 24 Hours (Live)

Sunday, June 14
Midnight – 10:00 a.m.: Le Mans 24 Hours (Live – The Finish)

Carol

 

And the wild speculation begins
Haven't we seen just this sort of behavior over and over again? Max threatens to take his ball and go home, everyone gets in a dither and eventually sanity (or what passes for sanity in F1) returns.
IMHO this Max's last gasp attempt to maintain viability. The attention has shifted to the FOTA/FOM talks and he is left dangling.
There is no way in heck that the majors can be excluded from F1. If for no other reason than the fact that Bernie's not going to take that risk to his wallet.
The ones I feel worst for are the prospective new teams that are being used the way replacement players were during the last baseball strike here in the states. When the dust settles most of them will be left high and dry by those championing them now.

 

MaXXX will be fine... He just needs to dress up as a NAZI and whip a few waifs in broad stiped worn pajamas and he'll feel better.

He's a disgrace.

 

Now, now...you can't compare his private life to his professional life. That's not fair and he doesn't deserve that. I'm sure he's a great, stand-up guy who has as much character and integrity in his personal life as his professional life. Just look at how much good he's done...is doing...and is planning to do for F1.

I think he's had so many S&M escapades over the years he's now viewing Ferrari and FOTA as poor defenseless waifs who he can beat into submission and have his way with. It appears those escapades are the only place he has any power left.

 

As Max stated, it was Ferrari's court case (attempted injunction to enforce their veto) that established the validity of their contract -- the same contract requiring participation until 2012. Apparently, pushing Ferrari to flex their muscle led to some unintended consequences for them. A dastardly trick, but masterful.

 

Michael, to answer your question, I think to assume that FOM and the FIA will be the ones that totally back down would be using only one's personal opinions about the persons involved and not the cards they hold. FOTA's appearance of being "resolute" is a stature they have to show at this point of the negotiations, or they will be broken. Keep in mind, this is a serious business negotiation. You have to look at it as a business as do the teams and FIA/FOM. Not as a "sport" we as spectators like to watch. Keep in mind, that Brawn, Williams, Force India have already stated their position which is to stay with the FIA. Emotions and our personal opinions of the players is not relevant, except in the analysis of how they will respond to the situation thrown at them during negotiation. Ill funded hacks or not, they are needed for the the survival of F1. I explain that below.

You have to look at the facts, not ones wishful thinking or personal bias(sorry these will be random, busy today):

Most of the current F1 teams are strictly F1 oriented. They do not have the immediate operational ability to jump ship to another series without major restructuring and mucho dinero. Current budget money comes from sponsors, in some cases parent corporate funding, or in at least one case, the personal wealth of the team principal. To make a change to another series, you can most likely assume the sponsor money will be gone, I bring that up a few paragraphs down. So other than Ferrari and Toyota, and maybe McLaren, whose got the corporate backing to pay for this massive change in operations and philosphy? It would take at least a year to develop a competitive car under existing regulations for another series, so what do you do with everything in place that is F1 oriented? Another RM auction? And as for LeMans, last I looked LeMans was in France, Peugeot is French and using a diesel, as is Audi. I doubt if the French club will change its rules just for Ferrari while turning their backs on Peugeot, with Ferrari being a team that turned their back on sports car racing years ago. And does anyone believe that Ferrari, McLaren, would want to consider anything less than an overall win at LeMans? Or in any series? Would the ACO assume Ferrari wll stick around LeMans for many years to come, diss Peugeot and Audi, and change their rules accordingly? I doubt that.

The reality of starting a new series (creating the rules, finding the people to run it, coming up with the money needed for such a series (someone pays for safety cars, medical presence, tech, etc.), finding safe circuits to use, finding circuit owners that will come along while turning their backs on other FIA events at their facility, negotiating a TV contract, hiring a promotional company, the list goes on and on) is next to nill. There are probably contracts with existing circuits that have non-compete clauses, i.e. so you won't see Spa, or Monaco, etc, on the calendar for a breakaway series because as per contract no other F1-like event can be held at those circuits. Most of the teams do not have the extra cash stashed under the team haulers to throw into the pot to start a new series. I have heard estimates of $200-$300 million just to get everything in place, that does not include that ongoing operations budget. Who pays for this? If Toyota, Renault, and Mercedes leave, can the other's take up this financial slack? What's to say that Bernie has not already signed representation contracts with many other race circuits? I do not believe any of the existing circuits will chance law suits, abandon their exisiting FOM/FIA contracts, and follow a break away series. Why? They all realize they would be tied up in court for months if not years. As for TV contracts and TV revenue, I have to believe that Bernie has himself coverered. Seriously, the only one with the organization in place to run a race series, and the lack of concern of pissing off FOM or the FIA is Tony George. And since IRL is 99% USA, that route is not going to happen.

None of the F1 teams are in the race series business. An international race series that would attract sponsors and spectators, will take at least one year minimum to be ready and not look like CART did their very first race. Please, I would love to know how it could be done faster, and cheaper. Who pays for the revenue losses and the law suits due to this one year haitus?

All of the teams have sponsor contracts. I seriously doubt that most of these contracts have clauses that forgive or allow for future payments if the team is not in F1. Could there be payback clauses that a team must also return monies if the contract is not fulfilled? Ouch, who can afford that? And how many sponsors in this economic climate with continue to believe in F1? How many sponsors may suggest they sit it out for a couple of years? What demographics do you offer sponsors the first few years of a breakway series?? And what gurantee do you have that a breakaway series will actually happen and then be successful? Its a business, gotta make a profit, I can't imagine any team that wants to add a line item to their operations to make up for any loss in bankrolling a breakaway series.

Some of the teams actually care about their employees, leaving F1 would mean massive lay-offs. Who can really afford keeping a staff during the time that it would take to either develop a car for another series, or while a breakaway series was formulated? I think William's reasoning for their action last week will ultimately apply to most of the teams.

Most of the teams, with the exception of Ferrari and probably Toyota, maybe McLaren, depend on the TV revenue. That would suddenly disappear. If there is a breakaway series, consider the time lapse in the loss of this revenue. Add a year possibly two to whenever a new series would start. Read this Michael: You lose previous income for some period, new sponsors may want to wait and see and not give you immediate cash, now you have to operate with less money, damn, looks like you now have to have a budget!!!! Built in budget caps!! Cost control! Let's see, its 2011, let me remember, wasn't the FIA's proposal that FOTA rejected relating to budget caps? Holy crap!!! Looks like we are adapting the FIA's proposals.

Contracts with FOM or the FIA exist with Ferrari, possibly other teams, any violation, means law suits and potential injunctions, not to mention the cost.

All I have mentioned so far could place the business of F1 into the International court system for years, injuctions likely preventing any team or circuit with a contract with the FIA or FOM from participating in anything remotely appearing like F1. Consider what this damage will do to affect potential new sponsors.

FOTA has admitted they need to find ways for new teams to come along, and to reduce budgets. Their recent letter to the FIA, the specifics we do not know yet, appears to not have addressed these items in a way that truly answers the problems. From what I hear, it was a really stupid letter that forces the FIA to take a rigid position, instead of offering a more intelligent comprimise.

To Ferrari fans, F1 and Ferrari are one in the same. But are they really? I am not so sure. It might take years, but F1 will survive without Ferrari, and start a regrowth like the current IRL. It may never be the 1980's and 1990's again, but it will survive. And I would bet that if Ferrari left, they will return to the FIA/FOM within three years.

FOTA at this moment in time, have the names Ferrari and McLaren as their two most valuable assets. At the end of the day, Ferrari will do what is good for Ferrari, not what is good for FOTA. And where would McLaren go? When was the last time they built a true sports racer, and I don't mean a street car with a longer tail?? Doesn't McLaren's silence and their work at trying to find solutions tell you something?

FOTA is showing some unity EXTERNALLY, but when push comes to shove, Brawn, Force India, Williams, and I would bet Briatore, McLaren, and BMW, will stay with the FIA/FOM. For the reasons I state above, and the fact that they all recognize cost control is necessary for their own survival. If Briatore buys the Renault team, you think he will magically come up with a budget that Renault could afford? Will Falvio use all of his own money? I doubt both, and I believe that Flavio has the Aristotle Onassis philosophy of business: always use other people's money, and always have a tan. Flav baby will want budget caps.

Bernie Ecclestone and Max Mosley, each for different reasons, need for F1 to continue. Even if it means letting go of Ferrari. There are contracts with sponsors and the circuits that stipulate a 20 car miminmun grid. Knowing that two, maybe three teams are probably leaving in 2010 (Renault, Toyota, possibly Mercedes) putting you under the two car minimum, what would you do if you were Bernie Ecclestone? Would you 1) desire to keep the rules "as is", no budget caps that would entice teams to join F1, and NOT fulfill that 20 car grid and lose revenue for not fulfilling the 20 car requirement with potential law suits, and when even more teams leave in the next few years for other reasons you possibly let F1 die; or 2) would you insist that there are budget caps that entice new teams to F1, even if you lose Ferrari, you still have a 20 car grid per contract, and you start building the series from the first floor up, AND you know all of the above and you know not even Ferrari wants to go to court because they violated their agreement. You also know that the economy, lifestyle changes, the death of a principal, could also eliminate additional existing teams in the next five years, so you really do need to bring in more new teams.

Geez Michael, the choice from a business perspective it rather clear. You take #2.

Everyone involved knows eveything I have just mentioned above, and there is probably a lot more none of us know. From this, I don't think FOTA holds the winning cards, quite the opposite.

If I were a betting man, as the FIA, I would do what is stated in the article you quoted, reject the single FOTA application, and offer no rules or budget changes for 2010, and SPECIFIC budget reductions starting 2011.

And then tell FOTA to take it or leave it.

And Michael, FOTA will take it, maybe another whimper or two, but they will take it. 'Cause they got no place else viable to go and can't afford not to. Somehow, everyone will look happy as if they came out on top, or they will make the appearance of one big happy family. Personally I don't care as long as there is an interesting F1 series in the next two years. And having the new teams will help make it interesting.

Once more I suggest that in order to see this clearly as a business negotiation, one forgets their assumptive personal opinion of Ecclestone and Mosley, their personal habits are irrelevant. I do not condone or criticize Bernie or Max, because I do not know them personally, nor have I been made privy to their contracts, or personal situations as stated in the press. But I do understand business negotiation. And I do think that Mosley has been around to run the FIA long enough, and a new outlook and perspective are needed, so I hope he is retired this fall. There is a good reason why only two terms are now the FIA internal policy. Also, I will not minimize the ability of the new teams, you don't know, I don't know, what they might be capable of doing. Michael, you don't want to be victim of an "eating crow" thread about these new teams. I don't believe for one spilt second there is not another one or two Ross Brawns out there just waiting for a chance to show their stuff.

But Michael, I am just guessing, my friend you know about has not returned my phone call. I hope this answers your question as to how I think this will play out.

 

I doubt that, as the venue pays F1 for the "privilege" of holding the race, not the other way 'round. As the party putting up the money (guaranteed by the local government in many cases), why would you accept a non-compete clause? Also, what does the FIA care if another large event is held there? It doesn't dilute F1.

Just a minor disagreement with your thoughts, not to take away from your other points.

I do agree, there is no way the teams can form a breakaway series, even if all of them were united.

 

Please, I welcome disagreement, that's how you see things from another perspective. My opinions are a conglomerate of many other's opinions, or in some cases, actual knowledge.

To answer, you accept a non-compete clause because you want to hold an F1 race. Bernie insists. When these contracts were created, I doubt if anyone on the circuit side would imagine what is going on today. So at the time there is no other F1 style series, why not sign such a clause?

From Bernie's perspective, I understand such clauses began to be added when the old CART started leaving North America for places like Germany. Remember Bernie was upset with CART, really could not control it as the FIA could not ban them from going to Europe or Japan, so the way to fight it is to keep CART from racing on the same circuits as F1. So non-compete clauses, open wheeled race cars.

As for FIA caring about other events at a track, F1 is the FIA's primary purpose for existence. F1 leaving the FIA would not be done on pleasant terms, so the politics could begin. As in ''oh, so you want to allow the new breakaway series at your circuit, OK, well looks like next years DTM schedule, or FIA sports cars schedule is full, no time for your facility after the current contrac expires, so sorry."

 

Michael, if I remember correctly, yes Ferrari has the right to veto, but there was some sort of time frame attached to that right. Apparently in this case, Ferrari was not within that time frame.