The truth about Ferrari's power in F1

Thanks for the welcoming words everyone. Pitpass is run by a guy called Chris Balfe who kindly covers a lot of pieces I write. I know there are big plans in store for the website so it is worth watching out for.

Although there is no Concorde at the moment, the commercial side of the teams' relationships with Bernie is covered in separate agreements with them all (except for Marussia because, until recently. it was in talks about merging with Caterham). The tech regs are ratified by the Concorde so this is why the teams want that contract in place (they want visibility of the regs for the duration of the agreement) whereas Bernie does not need it.

Out of interest, if you could ask Bernie any question, what would it be?!

 

Really?
Surprising.

A drink manufacturer winning the most coveted prize in motorsports is about as much out of place as Ferrari selling perfumes with its name. Yes they can do it, but should they?

Last year I read a funny quote: You know this world is upside down when the Pope is a German and Europe's banker an Italian.

Obviously anybody with lots of $ and organizing talent can set up a F1 team and even win the races. But as a car enthusiast it just rubs me totally the wrong way when a brand wins with which I have zero identification from a driving perspective (mind you I like Red Bull as an energy drink and have bought it many times, but not because they're in F1).

I realize that Lotus isn't really Lotus and Caterham isn't really Caterham and that the technologies, which are in a McLaren or a Ferrari only get into the road cars in a very watered down version. Yet still I can buy and drive a Ferrari and identify with the team. I can buy and drink a Red Bull and there is zero connection to the team.

I'm glad there are sponsors/investors who put their money into F1 and keep this hugely expensive sport alive. In that way I'm actually grateful for what Mateschitz is doing (particularly what he is doing with STR and the talent drive). But I really, really don't want them to win. Occasionally yes, but not dominate the sport.

 

+1 Welcome and thank you for sharing your thoughts on the sport we love Christian!

 

Many would say the same about Ferrari or Mclaren. No one in general wants 1 team to take over the sport in such a manner. I think its great that Red Bull have taken resources to be part of F1.
The actual manufacturers are scared or unwilling to commit in great numbers. Red Bull in F1 is a good thing. I dont care if they build a car. Clearly road car and racing have not alot in common at this level since there does not exist a common platform on which an F1 car is built that one can buy and enjoy in public roads.

 

True and to some degree I don't even mind an anomaly where a drink manufacturer wins the World Championship. Once. But now it is getting more stale than a Red Bull can left open for a day.

I didn't like it when McLaren won every championship in the late eighties or Ferrari in the early zeros but at least the prize went to a car manufacturer. Somebody I can identify with (friend or foe, doesn't matter).

I do. Hugely actually.
I would be equally unhappy if Force India would be dominating. It wouldn't bother me as much if Sauber or Williams would win because they have a tradition in motor racing and racing is why they exist.

For me it is all about "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday."

I didn't specialize in Marketing back in college, but I'm sure somebody like Kotler has a name for this issue: When the link between your actions and your product is broken. When all you do is just promote the brand for its recognition and it has lost its roots to a product the consumer can actually buy.

Any car manufacturer and proud car owner who gives a damn about racing would beg to differ. And there are the trickle-down effects of technology. The manettino at the wheel of a Ferrari is the end-product of the Scuderia's F1 efforts. Just as much as a Porsche has its ignition key hole on the left of the steering wheel (an oddity which reminds me of Le Mans every time I get in the car).

You have none of that with Red Bull or any other non car manufacturer.

 

Christian, thanks for your articles and now your posts.
It's the nature of professional sports these days that often the business is often more interesting than the competition.

Bernie initially came to stand up for the teams negotiating with the FIA and the organizers and has succeeded wildly beyond anyone's expectations. As a business its been a huge success, making more than a few people extraordinarily wealthy. What it has done to F1 as a sport is another matter entirely.

 

My question to Bernie would be, given how much you've taken from the sport do you feel a responsibility for its well being as a sport or is your responsibility primarily to it as a business?

 

I'd ask Bernie if he felt F1 was close to crossing the line from sport to show with all the massive restrictions on innovation. If he said no, I'd know he's completely off his rocker.



Mark

 

Close?

 

I have an adopted cat, Ian - and she intensely dislikes you.

 

Only a cat could dislike Ian.

 

She is also afraid of the engine in my Aston Martin DB9.

 

You may need a new cat.

 

Ooh! There's a good question! So good that I slept on it last night.

Narrowed it down to just three! Hopefully that's OK....

1. Given that you, and many others involved, have become insanely wealthy, why do you still need to be so greedy? Specifically, while we know there continues to be a line of countries willing to pay your fees we've already lost many and more are in critical condition; Would it really hurt so bad to throw the promoters a bone or two? Let them have the trackside advertising and/or hospitality revenue for example - May allow them to make a solid business case for a race versus relying on (increasingly scarce) tax revenues. And your much valued "tradition" may just survive.

2. Can I have the exclusive, worldwide, Internet distribution rights? I'll even split my membership revenues with you!........

3. Did you benefit finanacially in any way at all from the Great Train Robbery?

Cheers,
Ian

 

I suspect that for anyone outside of Bernie that would be a complete & utter disaster!

There's a little snippet I for one certainly didn't know - Thanks. Assuming said talks are now dead they'll presumably sign on soon and the individual agreements become moot?

Cheers,
Ian

 

+1

There's currently almost as much coverage of the financial mess European football has gotten itself into as coverage of the events themselves - Some fascinating stuff if you're into it.

I continue to have a problem with this line of thinking; A "show" is, by definition, scripted (OK, there's a very few exceptions). I do not believe that to be the case in F1.

That they're all running so close makes for good racing does it not? Is there something wrong with that? I could argue either way on the "validity" of DRS, but it is what the fans asked for after all for example.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Define "good racing".
If you mean entertaining, perhaps. Even then, entertaining to those who are easily amused and don't think too hard about what they're watching,
If you mean where the quickest, luckiest and the smartest prevail notsomuch.
While sport requires a level playing field to begin with, "adjusting" outcomes by handicapping the successful competitors is anathema.

BTW No thanks for taking your side against the cat?

 

For me anyway;

- Close. I've said many times that the fact that most of the grid is within a second or so is stunning. And these are not spec cars; You've still got to be a true manufacturer.
- Varying strategies.
- Different winners.
- No "BOP" rules. You build a better car & pop a better jockey in it, you win.

I could take offense at that!

I still think the "quickest, luckiest and smartest" DO prevail over the course of a season though. Sure, the tires are a curve ball right now, but the cream will again rise as it always does.

+1 Couldn't agree more.

Happens with sports car racng all the time - BOP rulings is the main reason I really don't follow it - You go too quick, you get hobbled. Doesn't happen in F1.

Which races have had their outcomes adjusted since the Lunatic went to the asylum?

Meant to say "thanks for that!".... Was still thinking of a suitable response TBH....

Cheers,
Ian

 

Well, in F1 they do that indirectly, banning this or that, and reshuffling the rules when neccessary.

Although I agree that BOP rules like in example GT3 are too much.

 

As the Bishop said to the Dowager.
"So now madam we're just haggling over price"

 

Ya see, this is where I disagree - And I believe the evidence supports my position if we look back......

Sure, 'twas bad at times when the Lunatic was running the asylum, but since he's been gone please provide examples of "rule reshuffling".......

- Renault's mass damper? *Maybe*, but I've made the argument against that before.
- Brawns DDRS? Was legal.
- Mclaren's F-duct? Was legal.
- Merc's passive DRS? Was legal.
- The Cans flexi-wing? Remains legal.

While Charlie issues many "technical clarifications" the underlying rules DO NOT ever change during the season.

Cheers,
Ian

 

The real managing is not of specific outcomes. Neither races nor championships, but the structure of the entire enterprise.

 

OK. But doesn't any successful enterprise depend upon diligent/careful management?

Certainly, any CEO is looking to maximise said enterprises assets - Isn't that all that Bernie is trying to do?



Cheers,
Ian

 

We all agree that F1 the business has been hugly successful ( for how much longer is an other question). What his stewardship of the sport has brought is rather more dismal.

I have no financial interest in the sport but I am a long time fan. Guess which area is more important to me?

 

+1

However, & I'm sure you've got a much more apropos quote , "rumors of it's death have been heard forever"......

Understood.

But I find your negative view of his stewardship somewhat, I dunno, "sad" maybe?

I know you too remember the "pre-Bernie" days, and I know we don't want that again. (Do we? )

I'd *really* like to hear his response to my Q#1....

I'm hoping (but not betting!) he's got one more "stunt" up his sleeve for after he's gone - He'll give the whole thing to the RSPCA or something!

Cheers,
Ian