Discussion
I read Sid Watkins' superb books again the other day.
Like the last time I read them, it made me see Bernie in a different light. Maybe it's just the way that he gave Watkins carte blanche to get the medical side of the sport in order, or whether it's the way that Watkins wrote the book, I'm not sure.
I almost came to like him...and Balestre...and Piquet...
How many sides does Bernie have? And how many do we see?
Like the last time I read them, it made me see Bernie in a different light. Maybe it's just the way that he gave Watkins carte blanche to get the medical side of the sport in order, or whether it's the way that Watkins wrote the book, I'm not sure.
I almost came to like him...and Balestre...and Piquet...
How many sides does Bernie have? And how many do we see?
StevieBee said:
You'll struggle to find anyone within motor sport and particularly F1 that has anything but good to say about Bernie.
I think the guy is a misunderstood genius who's only principal fault is his failure to fully explain his reasoning on certain things.
That's kind of the conclusion that I've been coming to over the years.I think the guy is a misunderstood genius who's only principal fault is his failure to fully explain his reasoning on certain things.
I never worked in F1, but the people that I know that have like him.
Lots of little gestures here and there that make a difference.
One anecdote in Watkin's book that stood out for me was Bernie and Balestre being very hands on in lugging equipment around to kit out the med centre in Brazil one year.
another was ripping the rear seats etc out of his helicopter at Silverstone one year so it could be used as a medicopter.
Life Saab Itch said:
I almost came to like him...and Balestre...and Piquet...
Really?!?!Have you read No Angel? Its a good read and it made me see Bernie in a different light. A very clever man who was just ruthless in getting to where he wanted to be. He talks a bit about Balestre and I just don't think I could ever like him or the way he did things to be honest.
sirtyro said:
Really?!?!Have you read No Angel? Its a good read and it made me see Bernie in a different light. A very clever man who was just ruthless in getting to where he wanted to be. He talks a bit about Balestre and I just don't think I could ever like him or the way he did things to be honest.
Have you read Watkins' book?
He writes about the people, not the politics.
StevieBee said:
You'll struggle to find anyone within motor sport and particularly F1 that has anything but good to say about Bernie.
I think the guy is a misunderstood genius who's only principal fault is his failure to fully explain his reasoning on certain things.
Everyone wants him, He can't please everyone all the time, he does seem to be a hard business man but a man of his word (so I read) where would F1 be now without him!I think the guy is a misunderstood genius who's only principal fault is his failure to fully explain his reasoning on certain things.
I read 'Life at the Limit' a few years ago, I wanted to read about what state Sid found Ayrton in after his Imola crash. Great read!
ve read both of Prof Watkins' books and also Bernie's Game by Terry Lovell. Both show the guy in different lights. Certainly his destruction of Class 1 DTM, Group C and FIA GT left me slightly shocked - and not to say a little angry. However, there is plenty of evidence to suggest he is actually a very compassionate human being; albeit one who is totally ruthless in business. By coincidence, my dad's currently reading Susan Watkins' Bernie biography. Apparently he absolutely nailed Gordon Murray over the sale of Brabham. Not one for sentimentality for the most part...and yet his collection of racing cars is stunning. He's nothing if not a paradox.
I expect in reality everybody in this world has different sides. Your wife sees a different side to that your mother, best friends or colleagues see. Not to mention time which can cause people to change from learned experiences.
The expectation that everybody has one, predictable and readable side for all scenarios life throws at you is pretty unrealistic.
The expectation that everybody has one, predictable and readable side for all scenarios life throws at you is pretty unrealistic.
StevieBee said:
You'll struggle to find anyone within motor sport and particularly F1 that has anything but good to say about Bernie.
First thing thing usually said is that BCE always keeps to his verbal agreements.EJ often said that BCE loaned him money to keep Jordan going.
StevieBee said:
I think the guy is a misunderstood genius who's only principal fault is his failure to fully explain his reasoning on certain things.
He likes to keep his cards close to his chest but I remember Brundle saying that with BCE's quotes there are clues to the business deals.Good old loveable Bernie
Bernie Ecclestone, that loveable little imp, has been a fixture in motorsport since he bought the Brabham team in 1972. He formed a strong partnership with Piquet, the elder, and won two world driver championships, before selling the team and running the teams’ association. He became everyone’s friend.
F1 moved from a bunch of amateur managers battling against the manufacturers to where professional teams like Brabham, Williams and McLaren ruled the results. He was part of this process and not the originator. His claim to fame was to turn the sport into a global business. Everyone loves him for that.
Mind you, Ron Dennis is not mates with him despite working as a mechanic for Brabham for a short time when our Bernie was in charge. It didn’t help that Ron left to set up his own team, McLaren Project 4, in the early 80s, trouncing Brabham in 1987 and pinching his designer, Murray. A strained friendship there.
Balestre, then in charge of the FIA and hence F1, got on well with Bernie, supporting him with his organising and such of the teams. This dedication was returned of course, Bernie being virtually his campaign manager when up against Mosley for one of the F1 posts. Bernie was, evidently, surprised and gutted when Balestre was beaten in the elections by Berie's mate, Mosley. Who was not? Apart from Balestre maybe.
One wonders if Bernie and Balestre chatted about old times. Perhaps their relationship was a little strained.
Mosley and Bernie were, perhaps, not that close initially and the former charged him as much as $300 million for the TV rights, eventually for 100 years. Bernie, given his business acumen, struggled with the pressure of this debt and was only just able to earn the money back in a few months. The rights were later sold for a sum reputed to be between $1.4 and $1.75bn. They were recently valued at $7bn. 100 years eh. That's like forever.
Mosley and Bernie were mates, even though they had the occasional spat during the ‘difficult’ times with the News of the World. Bernie helpfully told Max that he should consider going.
Another buddy of Bernie’s, Gribkowsky, gave him around $50 million, including a reputed $22 million for his family trust, for some help with a transaction. What this was is unclear at this time but one feels it might come crystal when the court case against Grib, apparently no longer friendly given the accusation of blackmail against him by Bernie, for corruption, tax evasion and breach of trust, is resolved.
Bernie at the moment owns little. CVC employ him on a stipend of a reputed £2.5m annually to administer their ownership of the commercial rights. Murdoch’s empire suggested in April this year that they might be interested in buying the rights. Bernie said that it would be the death of F1 to go pay per view. So he became everyone’s friend when he brokered the deal, keeping other terrestrial TV channels in this country out of the ‘loop’ it has been suggested.
Bernie was in on the negotiations, some say controlling them, between Sky and the BBC for the British television rights, which went pay per view for half the season. He promised the team managers lots of money so is their friend. Hundreds of thousands of fans have written to the BBC, on blogs and on petitions, criticising the move. Not everyone’s friend then.
If BSkyB does buy the commercial rights from CVC they will, in effect, own F1. Some suggest the rug will be pulled from under – or should that be over – Bernie. But we all love the huggable little imp with or without the rugs.
Everyone loves Bernie. It is, it would appear, the best option.
I’ve followed F1 since before Bernie bought Brabham. The conclusion I’ve come to in that time is that Bernie does what Bernie does for Bernie. He shows little interest in the welfare of F1 beyond remaining a cash cow.
He’s a very clever man, of that there could be absolutely no doubt. The only thing he lacked is couth. But he got that firstly with Balestre and later with Mosley. Since he’s moved back a little he’s been his own mouthpiece, hardly creating a ripple when he likened women to white goods and praised Hitler for his ability to get things done, like ruin Germany, Europe, etc.
Bernie did not professionalise the sport. That got under way well before he got involved. He pushed it along, of that there is not doubt, but one wonders who benefited the most, him or the teams. Certainly not the spectators.
However, it is very easy to underestimate the man. He is remarkably clever and has a superb business brain. The only question is whether his influence on the sport has been good, benign or bad. The suggestion that he has developed the sport, rather than the money side, has never been proved to my satisfaction. Not even nearly. Perhaps one has to be a mate of Bernie’s to do so.
Maxwell, one of the biggest crooks of all time in financial terms, was also well liked by many most of whom remain his apologist. I’m not suggesting Ecclestone is a crook. What I am saying is that just because people like him and say nice things about him does not mean he was/is good for the sport. Every time you see a Tilke circuit, or have the cameras pan onto empty stands in the middle of what is a motorsport desert, ask yourself if Bernie has been good for the sport. The next time you don’t see Spa on the calendar ask the same question.
The sport has gone global in a way that it was never before. Does the improve the spectacle? F1 was a European series in the main, that was its strength. But where’s the French GP? Where are the others?
F1 was great before Bernie got involved. He made a fortune making fortunes for others. But from a spectator’s point of view I reckon we could have done at least as well, and maybe better, without him.
It is Monty Python in reverse: apart from what? is the question.
Bernie Ecclestone, that loveable little imp, has been a fixture in motorsport since he bought the Brabham team in 1972. He formed a strong partnership with Piquet, the elder, and won two world driver championships, before selling the team and running the teams’ association. He became everyone’s friend.
F1 moved from a bunch of amateur managers battling against the manufacturers to where professional teams like Brabham, Williams and McLaren ruled the results. He was part of this process and not the originator. His claim to fame was to turn the sport into a global business. Everyone loves him for that.
Mind you, Ron Dennis is not mates with him despite working as a mechanic for Brabham for a short time when our Bernie was in charge. It didn’t help that Ron left to set up his own team, McLaren Project 4, in the early 80s, trouncing Brabham in 1987 and pinching his designer, Murray. A strained friendship there.
Balestre, then in charge of the FIA and hence F1, got on well with Bernie, supporting him with his organising and such of the teams. This dedication was returned of course, Bernie being virtually his campaign manager when up against Mosley for one of the F1 posts. Bernie was, evidently, surprised and gutted when Balestre was beaten in the elections by Berie's mate, Mosley. Who was not? Apart from Balestre maybe.
One wonders if Bernie and Balestre chatted about old times. Perhaps their relationship was a little strained.
Mosley and Bernie were, perhaps, not that close initially and the former charged him as much as $300 million for the TV rights, eventually for 100 years. Bernie, given his business acumen, struggled with the pressure of this debt and was only just able to earn the money back in a few months. The rights were later sold for a sum reputed to be between $1.4 and $1.75bn. They were recently valued at $7bn. 100 years eh. That's like forever.
Mosley and Bernie were mates, even though they had the occasional spat during the ‘difficult’ times with the News of the World. Bernie helpfully told Max that he should consider going.
Another buddy of Bernie’s, Gribkowsky, gave him around $50 million, including a reputed $22 million for his family trust, for some help with a transaction. What this was is unclear at this time but one feels it might come crystal when the court case against Grib, apparently no longer friendly given the accusation of blackmail against him by Bernie, for corruption, tax evasion and breach of trust, is resolved.
Bernie at the moment owns little. CVC employ him on a stipend of a reputed £2.5m annually to administer their ownership of the commercial rights. Murdoch’s empire suggested in April this year that they might be interested in buying the rights. Bernie said that it would be the death of F1 to go pay per view. So he became everyone’s friend when he brokered the deal, keeping other terrestrial TV channels in this country out of the ‘loop’ it has been suggested.
Bernie was in on the negotiations, some say controlling them, between Sky and the BBC for the British television rights, which went pay per view for half the season. He promised the team managers lots of money so is their friend. Hundreds of thousands of fans have written to the BBC, on blogs and on petitions, criticising the move. Not everyone’s friend then.
If BSkyB does buy the commercial rights from CVC they will, in effect, own F1. Some suggest the rug will be pulled from under – or should that be over – Bernie. But we all love the huggable little imp with or without the rugs.
Everyone loves Bernie. It is, it would appear, the best option.
I’ve followed F1 since before Bernie bought Brabham. The conclusion I’ve come to in that time is that Bernie does what Bernie does for Bernie. He shows little interest in the welfare of F1 beyond remaining a cash cow.
He’s a very clever man, of that there could be absolutely no doubt. The only thing he lacked is couth. But he got that firstly with Balestre and later with Mosley. Since he’s moved back a little he’s been his own mouthpiece, hardly creating a ripple when he likened women to white goods and praised Hitler for his ability to get things done, like ruin Germany, Europe, etc.
Bernie did not professionalise the sport. That got under way well before he got involved. He pushed it along, of that there is not doubt, but one wonders who benefited the most, him or the teams. Certainly not the spectators.
However, it is very easy to underestimate the man. He is remarkably clever and has a superb business brain. The only question is whether his influence on the sport has been good, benign or bad. The suggestion that he has developed the sport, rather than the money side, has never been proved to my satisfaction. Not even nearly. Perhaps one has to be a mate of Bernie’s to do so.
Maxwell, one of the biggest crooks of all time in financial terms, was also well liked by many most of whom remain his apologist. I’m not suggesting Ecclestone is a crook. What I am saying is that just because people like him and say nice things about him does not mean he was/is good for the sport. Every time you see a Tilke circuit, or have the cameras pan onto empty stands in the middle of what is a motorsport desert, ask yourself if Bernie has been good for the sport. The next time you don’t see Spa on the calendar ask the same question.
The sport has gone global in a way that it was never before. Does the improve the spectacle? F1 was a European series in the main, that was its strength. But where’s the French GP? Where are the others?
F1 was great before Bernie got involved. He made a fortune making fortunes for others. But from a spectator’s point of view I reckon we could have done at least as well, and maybe better, without him.
It is Monty Python in reverse: apart from what? is the question.
Derek Smith said:
Good old loveable Bernie
Bernie Ecclestone, that loveable little imp, has been a fixture in motorsport since he bought the Brabham team in 1972. He formed a strong partnership with Piquet, the elder, and won two world driver championships, before selling the team and running the teams’ association. He became everyone’s friend.
F1 moved from a bunch of amateur managers battling against the manufacturers to where professional teams like Brabham, Williams and McLaren ruled the results. He was part of this process and not the originator. His claim to fame was to turn the sport into a global business. Everyone loves him for that.
Mind you, Ron Dennis is not mates with him despite working as a mechanic for Brabham for a short time when our Bernie was in charge. It didn’t help that Ron left to set up his own team, McLaren Project 4, in the early 80s, trouncing Brabham in 1987 and pinching his designer, Murray. A strained friendship there.
Balestre, then in charge of the FIA and hence F1, got on well with Bernie, supporting him with his organising and such of the teams. This dedication was returned of course, Bernie being virtually his campaign manager when up against Mosley for one of the F1 posts. Bernie was, evidently, surprised and gutted when Balestre was beaten in the elections by Berie's mate, Mosley. Who was not? Apart from Balestre maybe.
One wonders if Bernie and Balestre chatted about old times. Perhaps their relationship was a little strained.
Mosley and Bernie were, perhaps, not that close initially and the former charged him as much as $300 million for the TV rights, eventually for 100 years. Bernie, given his business acumen, struggled with the pressure of this debt and was only just able to earn the money back in a few months. The rights were later sold for a sum reputed to be between $1.4 and $1.75bn. They were recently valued at $7bn. 100 years eh. That's like forever.
Mosley and Bernie were mates, even though they had the occasional spat during the ‘difficult’ times with the News of the World. Bernie helpfully told Max that he should consider going.
Another buddy of Bernie’s, Gribkowsky, gave him around $50 million, including a reputed $22 million for his family trust, for some help with a transaction. What this was is unclear at this time but one feels it might come crystal when the court case against Grib, apparently no longer friendly given the accusation of blackmail against him by Bernie, for corruption, tax evasion and breach of trust, is resolved.
Bernie at the moment owns little. CVC employ him on a stipend of a reputed £2.5m annually to administer their ownership of the commercial rights. Murdoch’s empire suggested in April this year that they might be interested in buying the rights. Bernie said that it would be the death of F1 to go pay per view. So he became everyone’s friend when he brokered the deal, keeping other terrestrial TV channels in this country out of the ‘loop’ it has been suggested.
Bernie was in on the negotiations, some say controlling them, between Sky and the BBC for the British television rights, which went pay per view for half the season. He promised the team managers lots of money so is their friend. Hundreds of thousands of fans have written to the BBC, on blogs and on petitions, criticising the move. Not everyone’s friend then.
If BSkyB does buy the commercial rights from CVC they will, in effect, own F1. Some suggest the rug will be pulled from under – or should that be over – Bernie. But we all love the huggable little imp with or without the rugs.
Everyone loves Bernie. It is, it would appear, the best option.
I’ve followed F1 since before Bernie bought Brabham. The conclusion I’ve come to in that time is that Bernie does what Bernie does for Bernie. He shows little interest in the welfare of F1 beyond remaining a cash cow.
He’s a very clever man, of that there could be absolutely no doubt. The only thing he lacked is couth. But he got that firstly with Balestre and later with Mosley. Since he’s moved back a little he’s been his own mouthpiece, hardly creating a ripple when he likened women to white goods and praised Hitler for his ability to get things done, like ruin Germany, Europe, etc.
Bernie did not professionalise the sport. That got under way well before he got involved. He pushed it along, of that there is not doubt, but one wonders who benefited the most, him or the teams. Certainly not the spectators.
However, it is very easy to underestimate the man. He is remarkably clever and has a superb business brain. The only question is whether his influence on the sport has been good, benign or bad. The suggestion that he has developed the sport, rather than the money side, has never been proved to my satisfaction. Not even nearly. Perhaps one has to be a mate of Bernie’s to do so.
Maxwell, one of the biggest crooks of all time in financial terms, was also well liked by many most of whom remain his apologist. I’m not suggesting Ecclestone is a crook. What I am saying is that just because people like him and say nice things about him does not mean he was/is good for the sport. Every time you see a Tilke circuit, or have the cameras pan onto empty stands in the middle of what is a motorsport desert, ask yourself if Bernie has been good for the sport. The next time you don’t see Spa on the calendar ask the same question.
The sport has gone global in a way that it was never before. Does the improve the spectacle? F1 was a European series in the main, that was its strength. But where’s the French GP? Where are the others?
F1 was great before Bernie got involved. He made a fortune making fortunes for others. But from a spectator’s point of view I reckon we could have done at least as well, and maybe better, without him.
It is Monty Python in reverse: apart from what? is the question.
Derek , did you write that? or is it C&P? Bernie Ecclestone, that loveable little imp, has been a fixture in motorsport since he bought the Brabham team in 1972. He formed a strong partnership with Piquet, the elder, and won two world driver championships, before selling the team and running the teams’ association. He became everyone’s friend.
F1 moved from a bunch of amateur managers battling against the manufacturers to where professional teams like Brabham, Williams and McLaren ruled the results. He was part of this process and not the originator. His claim to fame was to turn the sport into a global business. Everyone loves him for that.
Mind you, Ron Dennis is not mates with him despite working as a mechanic for Brabham for a short time when our Bernie was in charge. It didn’t help that Ron left to set up his own team, McLaren Project 4, in the early 80s, trouncing Brabham in 1987 and pinching his designer, Murray. A strained friendship there.
Balestre, then in charge of the FIA and hence F1, got on well with Bernie, supporting him with his organising and such of the teams. This dedication was returned of course, Bernie being virtually his campaign manager when up against Mosley for one of the F1 posts. Bernie was, evidently, surprised and gutted when Balestre was beaten in the elections by Berie's mate, Mosley. Who was not? Apart from Balestre maybe.
One wonders if Bernie and Balestre chatted about old times. Perhaps their relationship was a little strained.
Mosley and Bernie were, perhaps, not that close initially and the former charged him as much as $300 million for the TV rights, eventually for 100 years. Bernie, given his business acumen, struggled with the pressure of this debt and was only just able to earn the money back in a few months. The rights were later sold for a sum reputed to be between $1.4 and $1.75bn. They were recently valued at $7bn. 100 years eh. That's like forever.
Mosley and Bernie were mates, even though they had the occasional spat during the ‘difficult’ times with the News of the World. Bernie helpfully told Max that he should consider going.
Another buddy of Bernie’s, Gribkowsky, gave him around $50 million, including a reputed $22 million for his family trust, for some help with a transaction. What this was is unclear at this time but one feels it might come crystal when the court case against Grib, apparently no longer friendly given the accusation of blackmail against him by Bernie, for corruption, tax evasion and breach of trust, is resolved.
Bernie at the moment owns little. CVC employ him on a stipend of a reputed £2.5m annually to administer their ownership of the commercial rights. Murdoch’s empire suggested in April this year that they might be interested in buying the rights. Bernie said that it would be the death of F1 to go pay per view. So he became everyone’s friend when he brokered the deal, keeping other terrestrial TV channels in this country out of the ‘loop’ it has been suggested.
Bernie was in on the negotiations, some say controlling them, between Sky and the BBC for the British television rights, which went pay per view for half the season. He promised the team managers lots of money so is their friend. Hundreds of thousands of fans have written to the BBC, on blogs and on petitions, criticising the move. Not everyone’s friend then.
If BSkyB does buy the commercial rights from CVC they will, in effect, own F1. Some suggest the rug will be pulled from under – or should that be over – Bernie. But we all love the huggable little imp with or without the rugs.
Everyone loves Bernie. It is, it would appear, the best option.
I’ve followed F1 since before Bernie bought Brabham. The conclusion I’ve come to in that time is that Bernie does what Bernie does for Bernie. He shows little interest in the welfare of F1 beyond remaining a cash cow.
He’s a very clever man, of that there could be absolutely no doubt. The only thing he lacked is couth. But he got that firstly with Balestre and later with Mosley. Since he’s moved back a little he’s been his own mouthpiece, hardly creating a ripple when he likened women to white goods and praised Hitler for his ability to get things done, like ruin Germany, Europe, etc.
Bernie did not professionalise the sport. That got under way well before he got involved. He pushed it along, of that there is not doubt, but one wonders who benefited the most, him or the teams. Certainly not the spectators.
However, it is very easy to underestimate the man. He is remarkably clever and has a superb business brain. The only question is whether his influence on the sport has been good, benign or bad. The suggestion that he has developed the sport, rather than the money side, has never been proved to my satisfaction. Not even nearly. Perhaps one has to be a mate of Bernie’s to do so.
Maxwell, one of the biggest crooks of all time in financial terms, was also well liked by many most of whom remain his apologist. I’m not suggesting Ecclestone is a crook. What I am saying is that just because people like him and say nice things about him does not mean he was/is good for the sport. Every time you see a Tilke circuit, or have the cameras pan onto empty stands in the middle of what is a motorsport desert, ask yourself if Bernie has been good for the sport. The next time you don’t see Spa on the calendar ask the same question.
The sport has gone global in a way that it was never before. Does the improve the spectacle? F1 was a European series in the main, that was its strength. But where’s the French GP? Where are the others?
F1 was great before Bernie got involved. He made a fortune making fortunes for others. But from a spectator’s point of view I reckon we could have done at least as well, and maybe better, without him.
It is Monty Python in reverse: apart from what? is the question.
bebee said:
Derek , did you write that? or is it C&P?
I write for a living. I was asked for 800 negative words on Bernie, with full references as to source, etc. Which I provided. The bloke refused to take them. I've sat on it but there's no point in keeping it now. I've only taken bits from the original and extended it.I'm still not sure why he didn't take them. The sources were mainly also available on line and those that were in books and articles I sent photocopies with the copy.
The original was a bit harsher in places. One bit he objected to. If you are interested I could PM it to you. It is a bit near the knuckle for PH I think, although I had source.
Derek
Derek Smith said:
bebee said:
Derek , did you write that? or is it C&P?
I write for a living. I was asked for 800 negative words on Bernie, with full references as to source, etc. Which I provided. The bloke refused to take them. I've sat on it but there's no point in keeping it now. I've only taken bits from the original and extended it.I'm still not sure why he didn't take them. The sources were mainly also available on line and those that were in books and articles I sent photocopies with the copy.
The original was a bit harsher in places. One bit he objected to. If you are interested I could PM it to you. It is a bit near the knuckle for PH I think, although I had source.
Derek
After Frank Williams had his accident and things looked pretty bleak various doctors (including Sid Watkins) decided that Frank could be better cared for in the UK. Bernie sent his plane over to bring him back. No qualms, no hassle, it just happened.
Whilst I think the guy is absolutely ruthless in business and has taken advantage of people (Murray for example) he's certainly not the ogre that some make him out to be.
Whilst I think the guy is absolutely ruthless in business and has taken advantage of people (Murray for example) he's certainly not the ogre that some make him out to be.
Derek Smith said:
Mind you, Ron Dennis is not mates with him despite working as a mechanic for Brabham for a short time when our Bernie was in charge. It didn’t help that Ron left to set up his own team, McLaren Project 4, in the early 80s, trouncing Brabham in 1987 and pinching his designer, Murray. A strained friendship there.
Au contraire, Ron and Bernie get on just fine Derek.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff