F1 '09. Thread 2. ....Singapore Grand Prix

[Noggin1980]

From the letters between max and Ferrari it seems Ferrari have some legal powers over the rules in F1 that they were bribed with in the past .

Seems to me its the case that Max doesn't feel he is able to force Ferrari into a budget cap and hence this 2 tier system is the way around it, but max probably doesn't want a 2 tier system at all so in essence is forceing everyone to take it by making it by far the most attractive option. Therefore he is not infringeing ferraris rights but still makes them take the budget cap.

I've rarely had a positive word to say about max in the past but I think he is playing this brilliantly and with the good and long term future of F1 at heart. He's also managed to split Fota who looked to have real strength and a chance of forming a break away series a month ago straight down the middle. I guess we won't know much more till after the Fota meeting next wed.

[mikeossy]

Not sure what you mean by that, seems your suggesting that Ferrari have some sort of 'stronghold' on the implementation of the rules.

Max Mosley isn't saying that at the min.....in fact hes already thinking of life in F1 with out Ferrari:

"The sport could survive without Ferrari," Mosley told the Financial Times. "It would be very sad to lose Ferrari. It is the Italian national team.

"I hope and think that when a team goes to its board and says, 'I want to go to war with the FIA, because I want to be able to spend £100m more than the FIA want me to spend,' the board will say, 'Why can't you spend £40m if the other teams can do it?'"

Mosley emphasised that the FIA would not back away from the budget cap and that it is vital for the financial health of F1 in both the long and short term.

[Noggin1980]

Originally Posted by mikeossy

Not sure what you mean by that, seems your suggesting that Ferrari have some sort of 'stronghold' on the implementation of the rules.

Max Mosley isn't saying that at the min.....in fact hes already thinking of life in F1 with out Ferrari:

Well thats what Ferrari are saying, I didn't follow back then but it seems the teams wouldn't sign the agreement and were going to break way, in order to stop this they agreed to pay ferrari more than everyone else and give them some sort of power over the rules. So Ferrari agreed to stay and the power the teams had to break away disapeared.

It seems to me max is getting around the power ferrari are saying they have by allowing ferrari to carry on as they are if they wish too. He is being clever by allowing ferrari to carry on as they are but making it far far more attractive to do what he wants with the budget cap.

Ferrari seem to be saying you can't implement a budget cap if we disagree, max says we arn't forcing ferrari into a buget cap so we arn't infingeing your rights.

This is the main passage that makes me belive its the case

Max

"Thus if Ferrari chooses to continue with an unrestricted budget, the new regulations will not deprive Ferrari of any rights…I do not accept that these proposed regulation compromise any commitment that has been given to Ferrari in the past, unless Ferrari would somehow argue that it is entitled to prevent new competitors from emerging at a time when the sport itself is in danger.”"

Yes thats an interesting interview with max that you quoted and I agree with him, while I'm not a fan of Ferrari I would really hate to see them go, whoever you support it's great to have ferrari part of F1, however no one is bigger than the sport and its vital to make sure the sport is viable for enough teams. When you lose people like Honda and there is no real chance of getting new teams then things need to change and I for the most part support maxs plans (as long as we don't actually end up with 2 tiers). I'm excited about haveing 26 cars on the grid again and that just can't happen when you need to spend 100's of millions to compete.

[Brogan]

The only reason the budget cap is "optional" is because it would be against EU law to impose one.

Make no mistake though, all teams will eventually have no choice but to comply with the cap, to the detriment of the sport.

A sad day for F1.

[mikeossy]

Originally Posted by Brofeld

The only reason the budget cap is "optional" is because it would be against EU law to impose one.

Make no mistake though, all teams will eventually have no choice but to comply with the cap, to the detriment of the sport.

A sad day for F1.

Im not sure its a bad day, but given if there rules do go forward and I believe they still have to be supported by a FOTA vote? then i can probably bet my house then the 'top' teams as already stated by Max will opt into a cap, albeit might have to be negotiated. Toyota, Merc, BMW etc will not be able to argue with thier boards that spending £100million plus over £40million will acheive the same results.
The two tier system needs scrapping IMHO how on earth can the same race series have two concurrent running championships for constructors and drivers within the same race? Not thought through!.
Can you imagine that in anyother sport? I know Premiership is now talking about it, but it will just never come together.

[Brogan]

I wrote this on another forum so I'm copying and pasting it here.

My brother was talking with an ex-McLaren employee this morning who is still in regular contact with people who still work at McLaren.
He said McLaren and Ferrari will never be able to work to a budget cap as their organisations aren't set up for it.

They'd have to get rid of say 50% of the workforce but then all the departments/sites, etc. wouldn't be able to function on such a low level of staff.
It would take them years to gradually downsize but of course that's not an option as they'd be competing as a "non budget cap" team during that process and would be seriously disadvantaged reducing staff and facilities whilst complying with the technical restrictions.
So for new/smaller teams it's fine but for the big 2 there is no way they could do it.

The other issue is advertisement.
Apparently Brawn have offered the whole car to Virgin for £30m as far as sponsorship is concerned.
This turns the F1 corporate sponsorship system on its head as there's no way the likes of Ferrari and McLaren can continue to charge £5m for the left corner of the front wing.

It would have been far better to introduce a cap at a higher level and then gradually reduce it each year enabling the big teams to gradually reduce the size of their operations.

In effect the large teams will be forced into the cap for the reasons given above and I don't think that will benefit anyone, least of all the spectators.

As far as a vote is concerned, I don't think the new regulations require approval from FOTA.
I'm pretty sure the FIA/Mosley can push them through without FOTA's approval.

The FIA have been fiddling with the WTCC for years, constantly tweaking the reg's to move lower performing teams up the order and peg back the more succesful teams.
All it does is introduce artificial penalties and unfair advantages.
Do we really want F1 going the same way?

--

[mikeossy]

I tk your probably right from the fact that the Ferrari and McLaren teams would not be able to downsize so quickly, but surely from the aspect of say the fact that McLaren is to design and build a whole range of road cars many of the workforce there that are dispensable could move across to the Road Car development site which is still at Woking?.
As for Ferrari im sorry but they just seem to throw there toys out of the pram at every concievable rule/sporting code change. I feel that maybe a 90million cap would surely be more like what we should start off and move the cap down as you stated, as the teams engine devlopment costs wont be added into the regs for 2010 then surely even McLaren and Ferrari can achieve that?.
For the sport to go forward the rules are heading in right direction with a capping of costs, how long before we end up with another Honda scenario.
I mean come on 40mill is very low, some NASCAR teams running predominently medieval engine blocks (although this is were the money goes!) with a single plan body and aero package are running at costs of this much............Joe Gibbs Racing have been spending $5million a year on 'liquid engineering and devlopment' alone!.
Im in no way saying it cant be done but a stepping stone has to be found before we end up with a split grid.

[Noggin1980]

I think 40 mill is too low too and I'm hopeing Fota will be able to negotiate it up to say 65mill.

Remember though of course its not the case that the big teams are going from 300 mill to 40 mill. It's more like 300 mill to 120 mill. especially in the first year where engine costs arn't counted.

It is of course going to mean lay offs, though 3 new teams with say 300 people would provide somewhere for a significant number of them to go too and it's far less jobs than we would see if formula one were to colapse.

[kBm]

Thread 2 already!

Not even started in Europe yet....

[LFC_SL]

Originally Posted by Noggin1980

I think 40 mill is too low too and I'm hopeing Fota will be able to negotiate it up to say 65mill.

I don't think so. You have to remember concessions such as driver salaries not being included

I do think its stupid they have implemented a half-way house solution

This season we already effectively have 3 types of F1 car due to diffuser-gate and kers, so next season getting that down to 2 is not really an improvement...

[Noggin1980]

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

I don't think so. You have to remember concessions such as driver salaries not being included

...

I do remember that thats why I said in the sentance after you quoted

"Remember though of course its not the case that the big teams are going from 300 mill to 40 mill. It's more like 300 mill to 120 mill. especially in the first year where engine costs arn't counted. "

however I still think they would get alot more support for the idea and make it much easier for those with 1000 staff members to comply by starting at 60mill. If they want to go lower than that then do it over a couple of years to ease the transition.

FOTA met yesturday but the only statement they made was to say they requested urgent talks with the FIA. I would think the sad death of Max Mosleys son yesturday (RIP) would have prevented Fota saying anything imflamatory.

This season we already effectively have 3 types of F1 car due to diffuser-gate and kers, so next season getting that down to 2 is not really an improvement...

Everyone had the option for kers, and the diffuser gate thing happens often with the clever teams finding loop holes, it just happened that it was a bit more serious this year. I don't see either of those compareing in the slightest to the different sets of rules for the 2 tier championship. They are a mile apart.

[The Gooner]

Originally Posted by Noggin1980

Everyone had the option for kers, and the diffuser gate thing happens often with the clever teams finding loop holes, it just happened that it was a bit more serious this year. I don't see either of those compareing in the slightest to the different sets of rules for the 2 tier championship. They are a mile apart.

I agree with this, although at the minute we do have cars with KERS, cars with Diffusers cars without either but they are all fighting for the same trophys under the same rules, its upto the teams how they develop and what they use on the cars. Everyone knew about KERS last year so if you havnt got it or developed it yet then its their choice. The diffusers is slightly different but as said the engineers that have manipulated the diffusers to comply with the rules should be congratulated.
Next year if the cap and uncap system comes into effect, we will have a 2 tier system fighting for the same trophys. This will IMO only demote the sport rather than promote. They should decide one way or another. I agree with the capping especially if it brings in more teams and tightens the racing but 2 run 2 sets of regulations for the same goals is ridiculous. But then so is the trophy system, how they think this will improve the racing I dont know.

[mikeossy]

The Medal systems a little crazy TBH especially with the dual regs and two teir system, if it goes ahead, i read today that the FIA are asking for teams input yet again......i fear rumblings on the side of Ferrari are making Max and his cronies a little uneasy.
As pointed out how on earth two sets of rules running for the same championship can work is beyond me, but in EU law a budget cap has to be voluntary and not forced!.

[Noggin1980]

Originally Posted by mikeossy

i read today that the FIA are asking for teams input yet again.....

Where did you read that? As far as I was aware the last thing that happened was Fota (the teams) demanding an urgent meeting with the fia to discuss what the fia decided without them and that was yesturday afternoon.

would sound kinda weird after the urgent meeting being demanded to say hey can we have your input.

I hope the teams are able to talk the fia out of the medal idea as well as a slightly increased budget cap and to make sure all the teams run under 1 set of rules. While no tyre warmers may be entertaining I'd like to see that changed too.

looks like we are going to be kept in the dark for a bit though, fota's press release said very little other than they were concerned and wanting the meeting.

I don't think max would let ferrari talking about leaving stop him from doing what he thinks is necessary to save the sport but I bet Bernie cares a huge ammount about Ferrari staying. A very significant percentage of his tv audience must be ferrari fans and them leaving would put a huge dent in his income.

[Noggin1980]

Out of interest what is the eu law that prevents a mandatory budget cap? I can understand a salary cap being illegal but I can't for the life of me work out why a budget cap would be.

Is this illegal under eu law something we know for a fact or one of those things that gets passed around as fact when none of us really know? it sounds wrong to me that people can't set the terms of their competition and I'm not sure its true. I think people have heard that a salary cap would be illegal in football and have extrapolated and applied it wrongly to formula one.