Ferrari-FIA marriage over?

[Tony 1234]

Slap in the face for Ferrari, looks like they will have to stand up for themselves in future?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formul...

[AlpineWhite]

I think the end of that relationship was signalled when Ferrari sided with FOTA, rather than the FIA.

The introduction of new team principles at McLaren and Ferrari has (in my view) changed the playing field dramatically.

[Wanta996Gotta]

AlpineWhite said:

I think the end of that relationship was signalled when Ferrari sided with FOTA, rather than the FIA.

The introduction of new team principles at McLaren and Ferrari has (in my view) changed the playing field dramatically.

Oh well, Massa & Kimi are tottally F***d now! They may have to actually win fairly. Not sure if Bernie would be too happy about Ferrari struggling though with the amount of Red T-shirts and Ferrari flags that you see in the Grandstands.

[Invisible man]

Mosleys gonna be well hacked off when he discovers this impersonation

Edited by Invisible man on Friday 1st May 14:27

[Duke of Rothesay]

More here: http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/

[Get Karter]

How are they going to police the budget cap?

If I were Ferrari or McMerc I'd cheat.

Easy to have an off balance sheet department working for you, budget coming from another part of the business.

[deadslow]

Get Karter said:

Easy to have an off balance sheet department working for you, budget coming from another part of the business.

Both Fezza and McL road car divisions suddenly showing c.$250m against 'sundries'

[mchammer89]

Wanta996Gotta said:

AlpineWhite said:

I think the end of that relationship was signalled when Ferrari sided with FOTA, rather than the FIA.

The introduction of new team principles at McLaren and Ferrari has (in my view) changed the playing field dramatically.

Oh well, Massa & Kimi are tottally F***d now! They may have to actually win fairly. Not sure if Bernie would be too happy about Ferrari struggling though with the amount of Red T-shirts and Ferrari flags that you see in the Grandstands.

So, now that the FIA are no longer biased towards Ferrari, does that mean the anti-Ferrari bias may ease up around here? It gets pretty tiring and takes away from what is otherwise a great place for F1 chat.

[stuttgartmetal]

End of the story is some Spanish reporter asking Ecclesatone about having a black, Jewish Woman driving.
Big LOL

[StevenJJ]

Mr Schumacher will surely disassociate himself from Ferrari in the near future.

[Derek Smith]

Tony 1234 said:

Slap in the face for Ferrari, looks like they will have to stand up for themselves in future?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formul...

Odd that the Telegraph should suggest Eccs is Jewish. When I was in the police in the City of London the general assumption was that he was. I was under the impression then that he was born in one of the Jewish enclaves that built up between the wars as they fled the pogram in Germany. The feeling was that he was 'unusual' in that he didn't behave like his contemporaries.

The Jewish groups were, and there's nothing to suggest they are no longer, very law abiding, and very helpful to police. I had a couple of tea stops in Petticoat Towers in the 70s. Great bunch with a sense of humour that was tremendous if you could ignore the background of the death camps. That sort of hung over them. I was friendly with a women whose whole extended family had been killed. Many other countries shut their borders to the escaping Jews but Britain increased the 'quota', doubled it I seem to remember. The families in the east end remembered this and were grateful. You wouldn't hear a word against the British way of life. If anyone moaned he was passing through, and more quickly than he'd planned. I remember my time on that gound with great affection.

Mosley changed suddenly, well suddenly for me. It may have been gradual but it all came as a surprise to me. At one time he favoured the manufacturers, working against the smaller teams then, for no apparent reason, he was saying how bad they were for F1. Some have suggested that he realised that he would never gain total control over F1 while there were powerful interests within it. Get rid of the manufacturers and the priveteers whould be maleable. Pretty obvious really. The budget cap is seen as a further attack on the manufacturers.

Ferrari were given the 'special considerations' when they were the team which backed him in one of the many other divisive issues that he organised in the past. Once they had served their purpose . . .

But the Ferrari we have now, since the new regime took over, is very different to the one it replaced. The previous one was bad for F1 and there is a certain irony that the new Ferrari is reaping the whirlwind. As soon as you get a Ferrari team that will consider the interests of the sport, they are dumped by Mossy. Still, if their interests don't coincide what do Ferrari expect?

The present situation, with one man in control of the sport, has come about largely because of the way the old Ferrari went about things. It is a shame that the new one is the one that is suffering.

You can't blame Ferrari for asking for what they were told they would get. It seems pretty reasonable to me.

The FOTA point of view, that having to come up with a reply by return of post is unreasonable, seems pretty reasonable to me. These teams are professional and don't just plan a fortnight ahead but for the long term.

Mossy has drawn the battle lines: it is small teams for F1 in his shape of things to come. The only thing to wonder now is what the manufacturers will do. I would have expected them to await the outcome of the vote for president but if they've got to make their minds up now, one wonders what they will choose to do.

To answer the thread's title: there's been a separation and an acrimonious divorce is expected. I wonder if it will end up in court.

[AlpineWhite]

Derek Smith said:

Odd that the Telegraph should suggest Eccs is Jewish. When I was in the police in the City of London the general assumption was that he was. I was under the impression then that he was born in one of the Jewish enclaves that built up between the wars as they fled the pogram in Germany. The feeling was that he was 'unusual' in that he didn't behave like his contemporaries.

One of today's Telegraph articles states "Ecclestone is not Jewish, as suggested here yesterday" (or words to that effect). Sorry I don't have the link.

Edited by AlpineWhite on Friday 1st May 19:45

[andyps]

Derek Smith said:

The FOTA point of view, that having to come up with a reply by return of post is unreasonable, seems pretty reasonable to me. These teams are professional and don't just plan a fortnight ahead but for the long term.

And ultimately, there in lies the problem. In many ways it was the events of 15 years ago today that made MM realise that he could make sudden decisions and apply them as he wanted. Increasingly, during the 15 years he has made his decisions and put them into the rules as quickly as possible, maybe so that the teams have not had a chance to get themselves together and protest against the changes. Now they have got themselves together MM just ignores them.

The teams, on the other hand, are the ones who have to implement the changes imposed with so little notice by MM. They have to bear the cost of any changes, and they have to plan their long term strategies. It is unlikely that, even if they wanted to, the top teams would currently be in a position to work to even a £40m budget in 2010 as they probably already have commitments from sponsors which would take them beyond this, and plans to use that sponsorship income. It would take a very large organisational change to move from £200m per year to £40m.

[Get Karter]

Derek Smith said:

I was under the impression then that he was born in one of the Jewish enclaves that built up between the wars as they fled the pogram in Germany. The feeling was that he was 'unusual' in that he didn't behave like his contemporaries.

Well he isn't a Jew, so maybe that's why he didn't behave like his 'contemporaries'.

[RYH64E]

andyps said:

It is unlikely that, even if they wanted to, the top teams would currently be in a position to work to even a £40m budget in 2010 as they probably already have commitments from sponsors which would take them beyond this, and plans to use that sponsorship income. It would take a very large organisational change to move from £200m per year to £40m.

I don't think that there is any limit on the income the teams derive from sponsorship, just how much of that income they spend on the racing team. Any surplus can be distributed as dividends, which will be a rare occurence for the teams, I thought that the only person allowed to make money out of F1 was Bernie!

I wonder where redundancy costs will be allocated, the costs of reducing the work force are likely to be enormous, and what are they going to do to use the space at the McLaren Technology Centre etc? There are going to be a lot of empty offices.

[andyps]

RYH64E said:

andyps said:

It is unlikely that, even if they wanted to, the top teams would currently be in a position to work to even a £40m budget in 2010 as they probably already have commitments from sponsors which would take them beyond this, and plans to use that sponsorship income. It would take a very large organisational change to move from £200m per year to £40m.

I don't think that there is any limit on the income the teams derive from sponsorship, just how much of that income they spend on the racing team. Any surplus can be distributed as dividends, which will be a rare occurence for the teams, I thought that the only person allowed to make money out of F1 was Bernie!

I wonder where redundancy costs will be allocated, the costs of reducing the work force are likely to be enormous, and what are they going to do to use the space at the McLaren Technology Centre etc? There are going to be a lot of empty offices.

I am sure you are right, there will not be a cap on income. However, it seems unlikely that sponsors would want to be donating money to the shareholders of the teams directly. They are giving it on the basis it is spent on the race team, although I can't be sure of that having never seen one of the contracts.

[RYH64E]

andyps said:

RYH64E said:

andyps said:

It is unlikely that, even if they wanted to, the top teams would currently be in a position to work to even a £40m budget in 2010 as they probably already have commitments from sponsors which would take them beyond this, and plans to use that sponsorship income. It would take a very large organisational change to move from £200m per year to £40m.

I don't think that there is any limit on the income the teams derive from sponsorship, just how much of that income they spend on the racing team. Any surplus can be distributed as dividends, which will be a rare occurence for the teams, I thought that the only person allowed to make money out of F1 was Bernie!

I wonder where redundancy costs will be allocated, the costs of reducing the work force are likely to be enormous, and what are they going to do to use the space at the McLaren Technology Centre etc? There are going to be a lot of empty offices.

I am sure you are right, there will not be a cap on income. However, it seems unlikely that sponsors would want to be donating money to the shareholders of the teams directly. They are giving it on the basis it is spent on the race team, although I can't be sure of that having never seen one of the contracts.

Sponsors aren't motor racing fans looking to support the teams, they are businesses looking for the tv exposure, prestige and brand awareness that comes from being associated with a glamorous and high profile sport. They would much rather be associated with a successful team than a high spending but unsuccessful team, and the cost of sponsorship will reflect the perceived benefit to the sponsor not the expenditure of the team.

[andyps]

RYH64E said:

Sponsors aren't motor racing fans looking to support the teams, they are businesses looking for the tv exposure, prestige and brand awareness that comes from being associated with a glamorous and high profile sport. They would much rather be associated with a successful team than a high spending but unsuccessful team, and the cost of sponsorship will reflect the perceived benefit to the sponsor not the expenditure of the team.

I agree with you, but negotiating with a sponsor for money over and above the amount that is needed to run the team, with the sponsor knowing that the excess would go to the shareholders rather than to make the team more successful, therefore increasing awareness, exposure etc. would not be easy!

[navier_stokes]

I think the marriage is definitely over:

Mosley: F1 could survive without Ferrari;

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74995

[Derek Smith]

navier_stokes said:

I think the marriage is definitely over:

Mosley: F1 could survive without Ferrari;

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74995

I've tried to find it but can't at the moment but around 2 years ago Mossy reckoned that Ferarri were F1. Indeed, I think he called it: The most important team in F1.

How times change, eh?

Or rather, how spin changes what people say.