"Ceasefire is F1's Salvation"
Discussion
"Ceasefire is F1's Salvation" is the title of an excellent column by Mark Hughes in the current Autosport. As the article does not appear to be on the Autosport website, I thought that I would post here excerpts from it:
"...The way in which the teams have laid down their weapons and come out into neutral territory to discuss their mutual futures is unprecedented.
"How has it happened...
"That paranoia (across teams) has always ruled. It's the natural state of any truly competitive being, always looking where the next ambush is coming from. This, of course, has made it extremely easy over the years for Mosley and Ecclestone to steer their chosen course by divide and rule. Because the teams never agreed about anything, because their viewpoint was always coloured by competitive advantage and paranoia, the powers could do whatever they chose. Sometimes it was more difficult than other times, but generally the participants had very little influence in their own destinies. The same little power play has been acted out many, many times over the past couple of decades, with just a few name changes among the players. So either Max or Bernie would identify a problem, real or otherwise, leave the teams to argue over the solution, then, apparently exasperated at the squabbling of the tiresome little children, impose their own. Each altercation tended to leave the position of the teams slightly weakened, those of Max and Bernie slightly stronger, measured respectively by power and money.
"The challenge this time was very real. The depression of the world's economy has made budgets and team structures that were established in the boom decade - when many teams expanded from a couple of hundred people to knocking on a thousand, fuelled by boom-time car manufacturer money - wholly unsustainable and inappropriate. But the difference this time is that the solution has come largely from the teams themselves. This time, Max's preferred solution has been given short shrift.
"The FIA president makes little secret of the fact that his ultimate vision of F1 is as a spec formula, with identical cars and engines liveried up differently, all controlled by a central body. He accepts it may never come to be, but that has long been his blue-sky ideal. For anyone who sees F1 as a competition between constructors, of engineering and design ingenuity as well as driving skill, it's a chillingly bleak vision. But the economic crisis gave that vision its perfect moment. What better way of slashing costs than a spec formula? The spec engine would have just been the beginning of it. Next line of attack would be to cut costly aerodynamic research by way of a spec chassis. And if those pesky manufacturers didn't like it, they could go and do something else more costly - and good luck with trying to get money from their boards for that in this time of financial peril.
"Except, remarkably, that's not what has happened...
So why has it taken over two decades for this to happen? I'd venture three factors:
1) It's only in the past two or three years that Mosley's bleak standardisation vision has been widely known. That marked the first time that the president's idea of what the sport should be has veered so dramatically away from that of the fans and particpants alike;
2) The antipathy that Max had generated through his methods of dealing with the teams over the years has meant that, little by little, the anger and frustration has grown into a critical mass of disenchantment. He, rather than the teams, became the enemy, thereby uniting them;
3) The retirement of Ferrari's Jean Todt has meant that in his place has come Luca di Montezemolo, a much more charismatic man with a much wider perspective. Todt was a fantastic man for the competitive interests of Ferrari. But he was so totally blinkered in that, like a soldier programmed with a task, that he had no interest in the bigger picture, no skills in negotiating a united front and probably the deepest case of competitive paranoia in the paddock. As such, anything he was in favour of tended to be automatically opposed by everyone else and vice versa. Di Montezemolo has been able to assume a much more statesmanlike position, and this in turn has allowed others to lower their defences. The removal of Todt as representative of the sport's most powerful team has taken away a key instrument with which Max and Bernie used to divide and conquer..."
(My emphasis in bold)
"...The way in which the teams have laid down their weapons and come out into neutral territory to discuss their mutual futures is unprecedented.
"How has it happened...
"That paranoia (across teams) has always ruled. It's the natural state of any truly competitive being, always looking where the next ambush is coming from. This, of course, has made it extremely easy over the years for Mosley and Ecclestone to steer their chosen course by divide and rule. Because the teams never agreed about anything, because their viewpoint was always coloured by competitive advantage and paranoia, the powers could do whatever they chose. Sometimes it was more difficult than other times, but generally the participants had very little influence in their own destinies. The same little power play has been acted out many, many times over the past couple of decades, with just a few name changes among the players. So either Max or Bernie would identify a problem, real or otherwise, leave the teams to argue over the solution, then, apparently exasperated at the squabbling of the tiresome little children, impose their own. Each altercation tended to leave the position of the teams slightly weakened, those of Max and Bernie slightly stronger, measured respectively by power and money.
"The challenge this time was very real. The depression of the world's economy has made budgets and team structures that were established in the boom decade - when many teams expanded from a couple of hundred people to knocking on a thousand, fuelled by boom-time car manufacturer money - wholly unsustainable and inappropriate. But the difference this time is that the solution has come largely from the teams themselves. This time, Max's preferred solution has been given short shrift.
"The FIA president makes little secret of the fact that his ultimate vision of F1 is as a spec formula, with identical cars and engines liveried up differently, all controlled by a central body. He accepts it may never come to be, but that has long been his blue-sky ideal. For anyone who sees F1 as a competition between constructors, of engineering and design ingenuity as well as driving skill, it's a chillingly bleak vision. But the economic crisis gave that vision its perfect moment. What better way of slashing costs than a spec formula? The spec engine would have just been the beginning of it. Next line of attack would be to cut costly aerodynamic research by way of a spec chassis. And if those pesky manufacturers didn't like it, they could go and do something else more costly - and good luck with trying to get money from their boards for that in this time of financial peril.
"Except, remarkably, that's not what has happened...
So why has it taken over two decades for this to happen? I'd venture three factors:
1) It's only in the past two or three years that Mosley's bleak standardisation vision has been widely known. That marked the first time that the president's idea of what the sport should be has veered so dramatically away from that of the fans and particpants alike;
2) The antipathy that Max had generated through his methods of dealing with the teams over the years has meant that, little by little, the anger and frustration has grown into a critical mass of disenchantment. He, rather than the teams, became the enemy, thereby uniting them;
3) The retirement of Ferrari's Jean Todt has meant that in his place has come Luca di Montezemolo, a much more charismatic man with a much wider perspective. Todt was a fantastic man for the competitive interests of Ferrari. But he was so totally blinkered in that, like a soldier programmed with a task, that he had no interest in the bigger picture, no skills in negotiating a united front and probably the deepest case of competitive paranoia in the paddock. As such, anything he was in favour of tended to be automatically opposed by everyone else and vice versa. Di Montezemolo has been able to assume a much more statesmanlike position, and this in turn has allowed others to lower their defences. The removal of Todt as representative of the sport's most powerful team has taken away a key instrument with which Max and Bernie used to divide and conquer..."
(My emphasis in bold)
its not rocket science though is it? all the teams burning money by the million by doing the same thing, engine testing, time in wind tunnels etc, in pursuit of the same thing, quicker cars....
as much as f1 has been team against team, there is only a finite amount of money peopel are prepared to throw at the things to make them go quicker. as much as an all spec formula might be a scandal to the memory of the Chapmans who made the sport what it is, it might be the only future?...
as much as f1 has been team against team, there is only a finite amount of money peopel are prepared to throw at the things to make them go quicker. as much as an all spec formula might be a scandal to the memory of the Chapmans who made the sport what it is, it might be the only future?...
pablo said:
its not rocket science though is it? all the teams burning money by the million by doing the same thing, engine testing, time in wind tunnels etc, in pursuit of the same thing, quicker cars....
as much as f1 has been team against team, there is only a finite amount of money peopel are prepared to throw at the things to make them go quicker. as much as an all spec formula might be a scandal to the memory of the Chapmans who made the sport what it is, it might be the only future?...
No way. Think about all the professional racing series around the world. How much collectively is spent to operate and compete in them - to the nearest billion?as much as f1 has been team against team, there is only a finite amount of money peopel are prepared to throw at the things to make them go quicker. as much as an all spec formula might be a scandal to the memory of the Chapmans who made the sport what it is, it might be the only future?...
Motor sport is big business. There is more than enough funding to have a premier series with unique entries. How many professional spec series have been sustained? How many have even captured the public's imagination? The fans want car differentiation, they want rivalry, they want to identify with team X or Y. At the same time, scores of global businesses are looking for attractive platforms on which to market themselves, in a way that makes them seem both exciting and technologically cutting-edge.
You could reduce last year's F1 budget by 2/3, and still each team would have $100M to work with. Surely that is enough for a team to be unique. And that's not including most of the other enormous revenue pool that could be made available to the teams - Bernie's $1B/year.
FourWheelDrift said:
Ceasefire? Are both sides going to play a game of football in no man's land on Christmas day?
The 'ceasefire' is between the teams. What this means is, in fact, that there will be shelling across no man's land all through the Christmas holiday. Indeed, a few exploratory shots have been exchanged between Luca di and Eccs in the last couple of days. The early battle, or perhaps skirmish is a better word, between FOTA and MR has resulted in a victory for FOTA, but I'm sure there will be more before there can be something which can be described as a victory. I can't help thinking that Eccs' exposure of the Ferrari 'arrangement', whilst well known, was not public, at least in essentials.
The article is excellent.
It doesn't say why Max Rufus has suddenly become a fan of a 'spec' formula for F1. My suspicions were first raised during the Indy FiAsco but a little after that MR started to butter-up the manufacturers, at least with soft words. Threw me of the scent. But then there was the threat of a breakaway series and it all changed. I felt that MR saw the manufacturers as a power base which could challenge his control so he sought to remove them. His 'blue sky' ideal seems, in reality, nothing more than a means to an end. He wants F1 to be his, lock, barrel and, of course, stock.
When Max and Bern sang from the same profit and loss ledger their joint enterprise seemed assured. But, for whatever reason, they seemed to fall out and then things became less predicable. All of a sudden Todt, largly tipped to become MR's 2ic when he replaced him as president of the FiA, lost his authority at Ferrari and you have to wonder why. As the article points out, Luca di is a thoroughly different animal. 100% Ferrari of course, but Ferrari need F1 more than it needs Ferrari. So perhaps it is no wonder that the other team members have faith and trust in him.
One thing I would have suggested was that the teams would not be able to form a united front to resist MR. I would have bet against it being led by the Ferrari rep. Still it taught me a lesson: only ever bet on a sure thing.
I bet it came as a surprise to MR.
I can't help thinking it odd that two things occurred more or less at the same time: Todt was kicked out and MR was outed. There is no such thing as coincidence where big money is concerned.
The article is, as pointed out, excellent. What it means, of course, is that F1 is at war and there is no ceasefire between the protagonists.
rubystone said:
For the sake of balance, one should note that MPH also praises Mosley for his vision in driving the teams to form FOTA and thus come to an agreement
That's not the way I read it, rubystone."For the first time, the teams' potential power has not been squandered. Through the body of FOTA they have remained united, agreed a solution that does not make F1 a spec formula, but which should at the same time still lead to drastically reduced costs. Being the supremely intelligent man that he is, Max has understood the implications of team unity, and has accepted their version of low-cost F1 rather than tried to push through his. That's not to say that he deserves no credit for this latest development. He absolutely does. Not only has his vision provided a constant threat to concentrate the minds of the teams to come up with a better solution, but his previous much-repeated method of pushing changes through is what has led to the formation of FOTA. Be in no doubt, FOTA has just rescued F1 from becoming a spec formula - for now...
"Now that the power of unity has been so dramatically demonstrated, the FIA has ostensibly become part of that unity. Just as much as Max congratulates the teams on their positive responses to the cost challenge, so they could be congratulating him on uniting them."
What that says to me is that, according to Hughes, Max overplayed his hand to the point where the teams unified, stood up to him for the first time, and have got a result.
I very much doubt, in fact it is almost inconceivable to me, that Mosley is happy that the teams have harnessed their collective power such that he can no longer dictate terms to them.
If Mosley yearns for a spec formula, and FOTA "has just rescued F1 from becoming a spec formula", then it follows that FOTA is only the result of Mosley's vision in the sense that his vision, as it became known, was what the teams were running away from. In running away from his vision, they found themselves running into each others' arms.
I believe that Hughes was giving Mosley "credit" for FOTA only ironically.
What this bickering does for the image of F1, already bruised by the massive, and manufactured, press coverage of Stepneygate, and battered by the News of the World's revelations on Max Rufus' sexual habits, which include beating women, does not bear thinking about. At a time when boards are looking for reasons to cut costs these 'revelations' by Eccs about the financial arrangements cannot be seen as anything but a gift to those who wish to pull out of F1.
I've always thought that the dissent amongst the teams was a bonus for F1 as competitors should compete and not run the sport. Max Rufus' ability to unite them after 58 years of squabbling amongst themselves smacks, so to speak, of genius. Still, if it comes to a choice between Max Rufus and FOTA then one would only have to look back at the recent history of our sport to know which way the best hope lies. But an all powerful FOTA is not the complete answer to F1's woes.
As Flemke said, Max Rufus has overplayed his hand. He still has his massive power base in the FiA but one does wonder how long this will last, that's the organisation, not the power base. It must be worrying for the European manufacturers the way Max Rufus has been pandering to those in the far east.
The war isn't over yet, and perhaps won't be for a long time. It is easy to read too much into early victory such as FOTA's over Max Rufus, but Ecc's outburst is a sign that the axis might well be worried.
Whilst Eccs has hurt Ferrari to an extent it seems he was aiming at Luca di. The tactic in calling him a PR man must have been considered but one wonders what the intent was. Luca di is vulnerable given the recent sales figures, or should that be in the singular, but FOTA, in placing him at the head has massaged Ferrari's conceit and also given them something to lose. Ferrari being seen as the steady hand of F1 is a massive asset. This despite the fact that to all intents and purposes, it is only the name that has stayed the same. The real old man of F1 is Williams team of Frank and Patrick. If Ferrari do run off and throw themselves at the feet of Max Rufus, as Todt did at the last confrontation, I'm not sure the others will fall into line. And in any case, what could Max and Bernie offer them? $160 million? Hardly after what Eccs has splurged all over the papers.
But the biggest thing going for FOTA is the fact that Max Rufus has been beaten, at least at the moment. The fear he generated was largely down to the image of him being invincible yet now, at the first skirmish he's had to back-pedal. He's shown himself to be a good loser by making the best of it. But wasn't it some Yank who said: show me a good loser and I'll show you a loser. And that is how Max Rufus might well be seen. It’s difficult to strut when you are second out of two.
My feeling is that he is plotting something at this very moment and there will be a Max and Bernie winter of planning. But he'll have to win the next battle.
I've always thought that the dissent amongst the teams was a bonus for F1 as competitors should compete and not run the sport. Max Rufus' ability to unite them after 58 years of squabbling amongst themselves smacks, so to speak, of genius. Still, if it comes to a choice between Max Rufus and FOTA then one would only have to look back at the recent history of our sport to know which way the best hope lies. But an all powerful FOTA is not the complete answer to F1's woes.
As Flemke said, Max Rufus has overplayed his hand. He still has his massive power base in the FiA but one does wonder how long this will last, that's the organisation, not the power base. It must be worrying for the European manufacturers the way Max Rufus has been pandering to those in the far east.
The war isn't over yet, and perhaps won't be for a long time. It is easy to read too much into early victory such as FOTA's over Max Rufus, but Ecc's outburst is a sign that the axis might well be worried.
Whilst Eccs has hurt Ferrari to an extent it seems he was aiming at Luca di. The tactic in calling him a PR man must have been considered but one wonders what the intent was. Luca di is vulnerable given the recent sales figures, or should that be in the singular, but FOTA, in placing him at the head has massaged Ferrari's conceit and also given them something to lose. Ferrari being seen as the steady hand of F1 is a massive asset. This despite the fact that to all intents and purposes, it is only the name that has stayed the same. The real old man of F1 is Williams team of Frank and Patrick. If Ferrari do run off and throw themselves at the feet of Max Rufus, as Todt did at the last confrontation, I'm not sure the others will fall into line. And in any case, what could Max and Bernie offer them? $160 million? Hardly after what Eccs has splurged all over the papers.
But the biggest thing going for FOTA is the fact that Max Rufus has been beaten, at least at the moment. The fear he generated was largely down to the image of him being invincible yet now, at the first skirmish he's had to back-pedal. He's shown himself to be a good loser by making the best of it. But wasn't it some Yank who said: show me a good loser and I'll show you a loser. And that is how Max Rufus might well be seen. It’s difficult to strut when you are second out of two.
My feeling is that he is plotting something at this very moment and there will be a Max and Bernie winter of planning. But he'll have to win the next battle.
Edited by Derek Smith on Sunday 21st December 08:27
A single engine formula is never going to be accepted bvy the manufacturers & Mosley of course knows that. His proposal was nothing more than a politcal device to force the teams into accepting cost reductions elsewhere on the car.
Although Max has often been a long way from a good FIA President I'm bound to say that on this point he is absolutely correct. There is no way that F1 could carry with costs continuing (or escalating) the way they have done in recent years. Of course the credit crunch has played it's part in bringing everyone to the table.
From a racing perspective we don't need a lot of this exotic (hidden) technology. We don't need tyre warmers, barge boards, flappy-paddle gearboxes and the legions of techs with laptops. If it was down to me I'd get rid of all the telemetry and ECU's altogether and put the cars back on carbs. I also think F1 is missing an opportunity to review it's costs by continuing the slow exodus of races out of Europe. With fewer "away" races the costs of F1 could drop dramatically, and since it's a TV sport why do we need to race in Bahrain or (the very poorly attended) China?
Although Max has often been a long way from a good FIA President I'm bound to say that on this point he is absolutely correct. There is no way that F1 could carry with costs continuing (or escalating) the way they have done in recent years. Of course the credit crunch has played it's part in bringing everyone to the table.
From a racing perspective we don't need a lot of this exotic (hidden) technology. We don't need tyre warmers, barge boards, flappy-paddle gearboxes and the legions of techs with laptops. If it was down to me I'd get rid of all the telemetry and ECU's altogether and put the cars back on carbs. I also think F1 is missing an opportunity to review it's costs by continuing the slow exodus of races out of Europe. With fewer "away" races the costs of F1 could drop dramatically, and since it's a TV sport why do we need to race in Bahrain or (the very poorly attended) China?
corozin said:
A single engine formula is never going to be accepted bvy the manufacturers & Mosley of course knows that. His proposal was nothing more than a politcal device to force the teams into accepting cost reductions elsewhere on the car.
Two things: firstly, this is not Max Rufus' way. Never has been. He instructs. He is not a negotiator. Secondly, whilst the teams have not accepted Max Rufus' proposal, it was a fairly close run thing. And the second part of the second bit is that the outing of the manufacaturers has been Max Rufus' plan for some time now, well before there was any hint of a need to cut costs.Max Rufus has not shown himself the least bit intent on cutting costs before. Every change he brought in, especially when ignoring the concord agreement, has cost the teams $miliions.
Max is not political. He is in charge. There has never been a need for him to be political in the past. Something has changed but it's not Max Rufus' methods.
Had FOTA not got off the ground and formed such a strong grouping, we'd be looking at all the manufacturers leaving F1.
Max Rufus has not been beaten. However, he has not got his way. Round two is either next or, going by the Bernie/Luca di spat, has just started.
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff