updated: I've been up down over around on this METF thing. The law very clearly says Texas must be the sole sight selected for an "event". And the "event" can only happen once a year. They're not going to get off so easy by just changing the name in NJ to "GP of America". ->The law defines "event" as "a formula 1 automobile race". Word is if they keep both on the 2013 list, there will be another lawsuit filed... and then this Formula 1 chiefs to discuss 2012 calendar amid concerns over some races http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/95834 Has anyone commented on this: "But with Ecclestone having already pulled off a deal for New Jersey to hold a grand prix in 2013, he said that it would not be too much a blow if Austin's arrival on the calendar was delayed. "We can have it next year or the year after," he said. "It is not the end of the world."
Texas must be the sole site for the event, OR the event occurs only once per year in texas, and any state adjoining texas. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CV/htm/CV.83.10.htm#5190.14
We may need an english major / lawyer to decipher that legalese,... I can read it many different ways. That said, I'm not sure you are interpreting it as intended. By your logic there could be an unlimited number of Super Bowls each year and they would qualify, as long as the were not in adjoining states. I doubt that is the intent. I think the intent was that if the olympics come to dallas, but some events spill over to OK / AR, that's not a deal breaker. I think the better argument is whether he austin GP / NJ GP are sufficiently different... and that I don't know. I do find it interesting that austin "won" a competitive process agains NY / NJ,... but then NJ gets a GP anyway. If I were the filing attorney, I would certainly investigate that line of thought... I would wager it's certain that a lawsuit will be filed after COTA re-applies for METF funds. (this does not mean I believe they will win,... I think it's more likely than not, that the lawsuit will fail - maybe 60 / 40 in favor of the lawsuit failing)
True. The whole thing is quite vague. The last time this guy filed a lawsuit, it got thrown out pretty quickly. They amended the law several years back specifically to mention a formula 1 race. I'm basing my conclusion on the assumption, that if they're going to amend it for a particular event, they are also going to make sure that it fits all the parameters for receiving the funds. Time will tell. you notice the pics? started putting up the pit building, and since I'm wearing shorts today, i think its still 'summer'
Yup. Speed showed them during the indian GP coverage. But, did you see the facility for the indian GP? That's the finish line. Progress is better than no progress, but like it or not it's November. They (COTA) have now consumed 18 months since the project was announced... 9 or 12 months to go depending on what you believe about the inspection period (seems pretty wobbly!). By contract (90 days ahead...),... they've consumed 67% of the schedule time. That's sobering! IMO these repeated announcements from COTA that they are on schedule makes me even more skeptical. When Bernie Ecclestone and Jackie Stewart start speaking negatively of COTA / Austin GP,... that's a pretty big message to someone...
----Tony George, who was CEO of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway while the Formula 1 United States Grand Prix was held there from 2000-07, said that apart from the legal issues, he believed there was room for two American F1 races. Even so, George said waning attendance is what eventually forced Indy to drop F1 racing. "At the end of the day, it was about selling tickets and race-related spectator revenue streams," George said.---- Texas is not NY/NJ and this is going to be very tough for Austin. I can fly on one flight to NY and attend a race. Texas is a bridge too far in comparison and cost plus lack of hotel rooms. Wait until you see the teams/entourages take over Austin. They will need to expand their hotel base to accomodate a surge of fans. The revenue stream point above is very very serious. Marketing alone can eat up any profit after paying Bernie. Subtle indications are telling about what race he favors. NY/NJ is an easy call for me as a Euro based fan.
That's actually the law for the Olympic Games. You have to read further to find: (a-1) An event included in Subsection (a)(4) of this section is eligible for funding under this section only if: (1) a site selection organization selects a site located in this state for the event after considering, through a highly competitive selection process, one or more sites that are not located in this state; (2) a site selection organization selects a site in this state as the sole site for the event; and (3) the event is held not more than one time in any year. (a-4) is where "event" is defined as a Formula 1 automobile race.
If you saw/heard SPEED report about this, then you also heard them report that Bernie considered canceling the Indian GP as little as 2 weeks prior to the event. That tells me that all inspection dates, timelines, etc. are pretty much meaningless. No? As long as you can make Bernie happy at the last minute (and have his $$), you are in. Granted I would like to see more progress as well and the repeated announcements that say nothing are certainly not encouraging. But put me down as one of the people that would much prefer gonig to Austin for a natural terrain road course race than NJ/NY for a concrete barriered, I can't see squat street-race. Promoted properly, and with almost 6 months between the scheduled events, I do believe the US can support two races. Keeping my fingers crossed...
Guess I wasn't clear, by "wobbly" I was referring to the flexibility of the inspection deadline! No disagreement. I too would prefer to see a race at the proposed course in texas, but I'd rather go to NYC with the family, so for me,... it'll be NYC. I'd also rather go to montreal vs austin... just me... If the F1 race is the most important thing, none of the 3 NA races get my pick,... I'm going to Spa, Monza, or Monaco.
From section 5c, on the event trust fund. What you reference is from the Major events trust fund. (5a) Not too sure which one their applying under. They could actually apply under either one.
Bernie is taking away Korea GP which will leave Korean taxpayers holding the bag, with the NYC GP expect the same fate with Austin. Bernie indicated today that 2012 may not happen for Austin. I am guessing that as we get closer more and more rats will jump ship and Texas taxpayers will be left holding the bag just like Korea.
Bernie actually said that at the moment he cannot guarantee the race will take place in 2012 and to ask him nearer the time of the race (from: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/95834) : The situation in Austin appears more complicated, with Ecclestone suggesting that, while construction work is ongoing, there are issues inside the company that is putting the event together. "I don't think they are struggling [with building the track] at all," he explained. "I think there has been a disagreement inside the company." When asked if he was certain the race would take place in 2012, Ecclestone said: "If you had said to me a month ago, is this [the Indian GP] 100 per cent going to happen then I would have said, 'I don't know'. So ask me a month before the race is due to happen." But with Ecclestone having already pulled off a deal for New Jersey to hold a grand prix in 2013, he said that it would not be too much a blow if Austin's arrival on the calendar was delayed. "We can have it next year or the year after," he said. "It is not the end of the world."
It would be pretty interesting to re-do the poll again now with 1 year to go. The previous pole was 159/41, 80% in favor of the race occurring in 2012. I'm curious what sentiments are today.
260 more days to go......They'll get it built. If only the Bernie politics stuff gets sorted out. Maybe Tavo is getting pushed out by the other partners? A little more current than the last one i found. Check out pgs 103 to 117 http://www.gahcc.org/fileadmin/files/BP_70_-_Final.pdf
True, but they have two more months between the planned end of construction and the 90 day inspection window.
Tilke says it's all on schedule. From Autosport; Cheers, Ian http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/95892
Sorry for the OT rant, but why does Bernie keep Tilke as the only track designer? The guy is an idiot. I don't know how Tilke does it, but if you asked someone to take a blank sheet of paper and say design the worst pit exits possible, you couldn't come up with designs worse than Tilke's (Korea and India). Even worse, after ALL of the tracks he's designed, he still can't design one that has any real overtaking possibilities (his only solution is to have a 4000 ft long straight coupled with DRS).
Try asking the drivers what they think of Tilke's tracks!. With the exception of some of the pitlane exits (not all of them), the drivers love the vast majority of his tracks. Yeah!, it's simple to design a modern F1 track isn't it! , here's some light reading on the regulations involved: http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations/circuitregs.html (Check out the regs: 2011 Appendix O - Procedures for the Recognition of Motor Racing Circuits - published on: 06.01.2011 for the latest information required and then have fun designing your circuit!). (BTW, Tilke has nothing to do with DRS zones, they are organised by the FIA).
Tilke sucks as a track designer. He must have some comprimising photos of Bernie, no other explantion.
Yeah I saw that last night. I was surprised and a bit confused on why he would speak up. I guess if the race doesn't occur until 2013 as Bernie suggested they may be on schedule...
