Ferrari deserve more money than other teams -Todt

I can't say that I disagree.

There are many who watch F1 solely because Ferrari is involved with it.

 

This position was obvious, when they split apart from OWRS earlier........

Bernie has a real problem now..........or else OWRS does!

 

Working here in Hollywood I can tell you one thing. A star without a stage to show his stuff will quickly become a nobody. It's also a very poor misguided analogy.

This statement is arrogance beyond measure. Ferrari alone cannot keep F1 alive on it's own. If I were the other manufacturers I'd be even more determined to break-away after something like this.

It also goes to show the favoritism Ferrari receives from F1.

I love Ferrari dearly... But, statements like this make me question why I follow them. It seems Mr. Todt has forgotten that Ferrari weren't the always the best team on the grid. Hubris is often a fault that leads to downfall.

Let's hope this isn't the case.

 

I couldn't agree with you more...what's up with Ferrari??? Don't get me wrong I am a fan but I detest arrogance. That's why they are recognized as champions and get good share of constructors money when and if they do win. I am just baffled at the arrogance. F1 is the vehicle for them to make lots of money on their marketing and sponsorships. Without F1 they’d be broke...As much as MS is humble and down to earth the management is the 7th sky dreaming...I wonder just how long they'd be able to keep this championship up. The law of averages is against them.

 

Not that I'm an expert on the subject, haven't followed F1 for over a decade now, but even when Ferrari weren't winning, they were immensley popular. People have long held the conection between Ferrari and F1. Many admire Ferrari for the racing spirit and passion alone, regardless of the success.
Unfortunately the statement by Todt, in itself, is arrogance personified and does nothing to help the image of Ferrari in front of fans and detrators alike. This just adds fuel to the fire.

 

Unfortunately the statement by Todt seems very arrogant on the surface, but I believe that the marketing of F1 has in part has some reliance on Ferrari. The appeal of any sport has some brand appeal or star recognition that elevates the excitement around the sport and thus generating more money. It is simply a fact that all sports have personalities that boost the appeal of them. I think the better approach would be to create a secondary contract and monies around this fact, without ties directly to the Scuderia, but the marketing department. This would relieve the “preferred status” of the team by F1 and reduce the animosity among competitors.

 

Where Ferrari need to be careful is in their ever-growing image as an out-of-control ego-maniacal juggernaut. People loved them when they sucked because they still tied into the passion and history so well. And in those days they were still historically closer to the successful years. Now, it's almost as if they're a leviathon on the loose, throwing their leverage around as much as possible to get their way. It's one thing to look out for your interest, but it's another to overstate your place. I said it before and still believe it that way too many people, Ferrari included, are over-estimating Ferrari's position in F1 and under-estimating the impact a breakaway series would have on them. Ferrari needs to sell all the merchandise to help subsidize the budget. After next season, Ferrari are going to be in what's known around the shed as a re-building year. I don't think they'll experience a free-fall, but if you think losing Schumacher, Todt and Brawn all at once won't affect them negatively at all, then you live in Fantifosi Land.

 

wow thats friggin arogent. they are basically declairing that they think they are better than everyone else....dicks. nobodies special, let them get paid the same as everyone else.

 

Are we sure JT is not an American? He has our attitude Someone should tell Jean TOAD "There but by the grace of God go I"

Well if they are looking for something more special, how about 200' sqft more in the F1 museum, not bigger payouts and a free handjob from Bernie because they are 'special' to the sport. That is like saying lift the salary cap just for the Yankees alone because of how much they have done for baseball.

 

THE F IN F1 DOES NOT STAND FOR FORMULA, IT STANDS FOR FERRARI!!!

F1 = Ferrari 1!

It is absolutely true... F1 would not exist without Ferrari today.

 

They don't think they are, they know they are. The fact that they are is perfectly obvious. Your's sounds like some kind of pc rant.

OK, "nobodies (sic) special" .......right. looking back on the history of F1 would you say that Larrousse = Ferrari, AGS = Mclaren, Pacific = Lotus?

Let's all us Fchatters hold hands and tell each other "were all special".

 

When Ferrari started out they were just another 'Larrousse' ... but as they have now been playing the came for over 50 years, they have heritege.

They actually have not played the game anywhere as well as Lotus, who were far more successful over a shorter time, infact Lotus is still one the top 4 race winners (I believe)!

Thus Ferrari (and any other team) are requesting money because they add substance to the series, they add longevity and heritege. Take that away and you have a hollow series, and hence why the break away series was never going to work.

IMO all the teams should be paid on their length (and success) in F1 ... heck for all I know that might be how it is?

Pete

 

Ferrari won a championship 2 years into the F1 championship. Where is the Larousse comparison?

 

Well how about their first year ... what I am saying is they were just another race team, just like Larousse.

You know what I meant .

BTW: Ferrari only won 2 years after the start of F1 'cause the opposition was weak. Alfa Romeo had retired and there was no Mercedes (they came back in '54) and Maserati, Talbot, BRM, Cisitillia (sp?), etc. were well, weak. I guess we could say that was the only reason Alfa Romeo were winning too. Once Mercedes came back they walked it, and then when they retired (again), Ferrari definitely were not the top team (in the late 50's even though Fangio managed the '56 WC in a Ferrari, but he would have won in just about any make that year) ... technically Lancia were the leaders, followed by Maserati and then Ferrari. Ferrari benefited greatly from the Lancia's been given to his team ... but his engineers soon ruined those cars. A lean period followed for Ferrari until Hill in the mid 60's.

Then along came the English teams in the 60's ... and the rest is history.

So please do not tell me that Ferrari have a wonderfully successful record in F1 ... 'cause they don't, not until recently. Lotus, McLaren and Williams have far, far better records and dominated Ferrari for years. Remember Ferrari won a WC before MS in 1979 ... a very long time ago, and before MS they were in single figures for WC wins!

Anyway I got off track ... every team starts at exactly the same place, ie. as a new team, thus Ferrari was equivalent to Larousse at atleast one point in time of their history.

Pete

 

I have no problem with the current Concorde Agreement because all the times agreed to it. However, it is rumored that Bernie is offering them 50M pounds just for staying in F1 (supposedly completely independent of the previous year's championship results). That's just paying for a red car with an F. How can any of the other teams support something like that?