a subject beaten to death - something has to give for sure Carol * * * * autosport Formula 1 teams believe the future shape of the calendar must be high on the list of subjects that needs sorting out with Bernie Ecclestone, amid fresh doubts about the prospects for traditional races. With the German Grand Prix the latest event to be in danger, after the Nurburgring said it will not host next year's race unless fees are reduced, there is an increasing uncertainty about the fate for a number of historic events. And with these including major markets for leading car manufacturers, including Britain, Japan, China and Germany, teams have admitted some concern about future schedules. BMW motorsport director Mario Theissen thinks it inevitable that the matter will be brought up the next time the teams meet with Ecclestone. "That is something we will certainly discuss with Bernie," Theissen told AUTOSPORT. "We have to make sure that we are in the important markets." Theissen pointed out that concerns for his company were heightened by the fact that the three biggest markets for BMW - the United States, Germany and Britain all could be absent from the calendar in the next few years. "Obviously we have to discuss this situation, and Bernie understands it," said Theissen. "It is always a matter of finding what the right balance is between what we can earn, what Bernie can earn, and what is important for the market." When asked if a new Concorde Agreement would allow a specific veto on the calendar, Theissen said: "There is nothing explicit, but I would expect a much closer cooperation between the commercial rights holder and the teams if it comes to such decisions in the future."
This will figure strongly in the battle over FIA presidency too, I believe. There's a lot of corrupt third world money going to those at the top and their actions are diametrically opposed to the interest of motorsport in general and FOTA. Mike Lawrence is scalding in his summation - http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_feature_item.php
Steve - I think this is the one David is referring to: http://pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_feature_item.php?fes_art_id=38477 a very good article indeed... Carol
Thanks Carol, yes a damn good read I'm clenching my teeth now, those two bastard cockroaches have ripped us off for to long. I have always wondered why Bernie supported Max! this confirms it. Mosley should be in prison. Todt must not get the job, if only for the fact Mosley wants him to have it.
Let's hope that all this FOTA/FIA angst that we've all been through yields some real benefits. Now is the time for FOTA to exercise their new-found influence for the good of the sport.
+1 It's been Bernie's plan all along to get rid of the traditional venues. He constantly refers to Europe as a "third world economy" and says F1's survival depends on tracks like Turkey! What a joke. Now would appear to be their only chance to stop him.
The nice thing about Bernie is that he's never been committed to consistency of position or opinion. When the prevailing wind changes Bernie will too.
This links directly to the Makers versus Garagistas issue. Bernie (and Max) seem convinced that car manufacturers come and go as the economy dictates, and pin their plans on small indie teams that build mostly spec machines. The manufacturers want to showcase their technologies to their markets. (And tend to throw big budgets at it.) Spec rules are anti-makers. Budget caps are pro-garistas / anti-makers. Moving the racing away from the car-buying markets is also anti-makers. This is a key issue between car makers like Ferrari, Renault, Toyota, BMW, etc., and the F1 "powers that be". Whether the "manufacturers' championship" will be accessible (or worthwhile) to actual car manufacturers. The more they make F1 racing useless to manufacturers, the more likely the car makers will have to go find another venue ---- or go make one. (e.g. break-away series).
Agreed. WRC and Touring cars have the same objections to FIA governance it will not change with Todt at the helm.
I think that you're on to something here. My only question would be if Ferrari can be lumped with the "manufacturers"? While they do produce road cars in number they also have the longest record and strongest commitment in the sport.
I hate the loss of talent from what's supposed to be the cutting edge of motorsport. Mario Illien, formerly the designer of Mercedes-Benz's championship winning Formula One engines, insists the current rules do not inspire him to consider a return to the sport. http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/090722134729.shtml Now, as Ross B and others, have suggested a cap on resources such as liters of fuel per GP is so much better than a limit on engine numbers. We already see the cutting edge in this field has moved away from F1 towards LeMans prototypes with diesel engine development. F1 dies when all the interesting cars are somewhere else racing on tracks we care about. Jean T already has a job as tourism ambassador for Malaysia and I won't care about a WDC decided by who wins the Nth Korean or Burma GP. So, Ari V for pres! Yes, a unique case indeed. They've plenty of examples for what happens to those who rest on their racing laurels, Jaguar etc, to keep Enzo's approach central in the future too. That that's so well accepted is reflected in the idea Ferrari's presence is core to any series being recognised as premier.
