Ferrari to take their toys and go home

  • Thread starter Sureboss
  • 252 comments
  • 17,167 views
chrisbroughton
I would not be surprised if Mosely resigned because he's been so firm and direct it would be pretty embarrasing for him if the teams boycott his proposal.

As for the other things I mentioned, I'm just saying I think F1 would collapse if all the teams left, and that is why I expect Bernie and co. to backtrack - not the teams.
Click to expand...

Mosley has always been firm and direct - its how he gets his way, offer something terrible and then deal down to what he really wanted. Why this means he should resign I don't know, he seems to have a better head on him than Bernie does anyway - its just a shame he listens to Bernie too much.

F1 wouldn't collapse if the rest of the manufacturers left - there are plenty of privateer teams willing to spend under £40 million to race.
 
I've been forwarded an article from today's AutoSport, in which the FIA seem to have leaked the fact that Ferrari have had a power of veto on any technical regulation proposed for F1 since 1998.

It would seem that the FIA - like when they leaked that, while all other teams paid entry to the championship, Ferrari were paid a seven figure sum every year to compete - are calling Maranello's bluff...

Edit: Here we go:

Mark Hughes
Ferrari has had veto of F1's technical rules since at least 1998. Let's spell that out: any F1 technical regulation has had to meet Ferrari's specific approval - because that is what the FIA has been contractually bound to do. That's the latest bombshell to emerge in the ongoing fight over the sport's future between the governing body and some of the teams. It's suspected that this little gem was leaked by the FIA, almost certainly in an attempt to cause a rift between the so-far united FOTA teams.

Far from being embarrassed about this being made public, Ferrari is conceding that yes, we do have veto and it is this very fact that we do that disallows the FIA from doing what it is trying to do.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Ardius, Mosley might be still thinking that this is a sort of a poker game. But the (sad for him) truth is that he is holding nothing in his hand.

Bernie is in the same situation. If F1 collapses and next year's line up is made of Brawns, Williams, Force Indias and a bunch of new teams like "Richards-ProdriveGP, "USF1" and so on ... I doubt FOM will get any interest in it from eiter the exotic or the traditional countries , and certainly not any money from it. So, Bernie also is holding nothing in his hand.

Ferrari is indeed the key here. Especially because everyone knows that they won't stop racing. They're not Renault, BMW, Toyota or Mercedes. Like di Montezxemolo says in his message to fans, racing is in Ferrari's DNA.

And I don't know how far will Montezemolo take this, or how much of a humiliation he wants Mosley to suffer, but having got things this far ... I don't think he will settle for litle.

And in the end - if Mosley backs out - it is a shame for F1. Because Mosley did a stupid move by forcing Ferrari to show - and use - all the power they have. No good gambler does that, especially when he holds a weak hand.
 
Ardius
Mosley has always been firm and direct - its how he gets his way, offer something terrible and then deal down to what he really wanted. Why this means he should resign I don't know, he seems to have a better head on him than Bernie does anyway - its just a shame he listens to Bernie too much.

F1 wouldn't collapse if the rest of the manufacturers left - there are plenty of privateer teams willing to spend under £40 million to race.
Click to expand...

Mosely has always been firm and direct, but this time I don't think he will get his way. Thats why I suggested that itis possible he resigns.

I hope he doesn't, because until this proposal, I have agreed with him on the whole, and I think he's made a fantastic sport, I just think he's lost the plot here.
 
As expected, Bernie Ecclestone will attend the FIA/FOTA meeting tomorrow ...

(http://www.f1technical.net/news/12410?sid=c57f267ebc9c843c4e10afc9d5a4a329)


I expect him to line up with FOTA, that's where the gold lies. And ... Eli Wallach must protect the gold ... :D


EDIT: All this talk made me remember a famous line from BE, not a long time ago (when Toyota, Renault and Mclaren menaced not to go to the Australian GP unless FOM paid its due):

"If they come in here with a gun and hold it to my head, they had better be sure they can (MW) pull the trigger."

It seems FOTA listened ... :D
 
Last edited:
Famine
I've been forwarded an article from today's AutoSport, in which the FIA seem to have leaked the fact that Ferrari have had a power of veto on any technical regulation proposed for F1 since 1998.

It would seem that the FIA - like when they leaked that, while all other teams paid entry to the championship, Ferrari were paid a seven figure sum every year to compete - are calling Maranello's bluff...

Edit: Here we go:
Click to expand...

So, to put it bluntly, Ferrari are more powerful than the FIA!
 
Also, have I started a trend for replacing the 🤬 smiley? :D
 
Hun200kmh
Ardius, Mosley might be still thinking that this is a sort of a poker game. But the (sad for him) truth is that he is holding nothing in his hand.

Bernie is in the same situation. If F1 collapses and next year's line up is made of Brawns, Williams, Force Indias and a bunch of new teams like "Richards-ProdriveGP, "USF1" and so on ... I doubt FOM will get any interest in it from eiter the exotic or the traditional countries , and certainly not any money from it. So, Bernie also is holding nothing in his hand.

Ferrari is indeed the key here. Especially because everyone knows that they won't stop racing. They're not Renault, BMW, Toyota or Mercedes. Like di Montezxemolo says in his message to fans, racing is in Ferrari's DNA.

And I don't know how far will Montezemolo take this, or how much of a humiliation he wants Mosley to suffer, but having got things this far ... I don't think he will settle for litle.

And in the end - if Mosley backs out - it is a shame for F1. Because Mosley did a stupid move by forcing Ferrari to show - and use - all the power they have. No good gambler does that, especially when he holds a weak hand.
Click to expand...

The bulk of the money F1 earns is via TV rights. These are multi year contracts so I can't see F1 dropping off the calendar too soon unless the TV companies have got clauses about the likes of Ferrari being involved.
 
So Famine you reckon Ferrari are bluffing?

Wonder what they holding? Sounds like they have two Aces. But even they can be broken...

Only time tells what the flop, turn and (if needed) the river cards hold. Hopefully when everything shakes out Ferrari has the nuts.

The bluff, I can see that... They've said they have had the technical veto so F1 can remain it's prestigeous standing, but they're to quit this lucrative advertising medium? I believe they need each other. Just another way this 'economic crisis' has created choas. I can't help think & wouldn't be surprised that those who have made these regulation changes have some financial incentive to do so...
 
It's all well and good to say they have the power to veto, but maybe they actually like the idea of he budget cap. Their problem is not with the concept of the cap at all, but in the two sets of regulations. If they veto, we keep the same rules for now, which means they may lose ideas they like - such as the unlimited testing or engines without a maximum rev limiter - and be forced to keep playing by these ones. I don't think they have the ability to pick and choose what thy veto; it's everything or nothing.
 
hellnback
So Famine you reckon Ferrari are bluffing?

Wonder what they holding? Sounds like they have two Aces. But even they can be broken...

Only time tells what the flop, turn and (if needed) the river cards hold. Hopefully when everything shakes out Ferrari has the nuts.

The bluff, I can see that... They've said they have had the technical veto so F1 can remain it's prestigeous standing, but they're to quit this lucrative advertising medium? I believe they need each other. Just another way this 'economic crisis' has created choas. I can't help think & wouldn't be surprised that those who have made these regulation changes have some financial incentive to do so...
Click to expand...

I didn't say they were bluffing - but we all remember how this went last time?

Ferrari: *noises about leaving F1, because it's so unfair*
FIA: Err. We pay you £40m a year to compete, but everyone else has to pay to drive...
Ferrari:

This time...

Ferrari: *noises about leaving F1, because it's so unfair*
FIA: Err. You have a power of veto on any technical proposal and have since 1998. No-one else does...
Ferrari:


Seems to be how the game is played.
 
Do you race?
It's all well and good to say they have the power to veto, but maybe they actually like the idea of he budget cap. Their problem is not with the concept of the cap at all, but in the two sets of regulations. If they veto, we keep the same rules for now, which means they may lose ideas they like - such as the unlimited testing or engines without a maximum rev limiter - and be forced to keep playing by these ones. I don't think they have the ability to pick and choose what thy veto; it's everything or nothing.
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8049316.stm

That would suggest otherwise.
 
Say it with me:

Ferrari (that's the red team) is not leaving F1 (the sport with pointy, skinny cars), no matter how much noise they make (that's most of it).

So many concessions are made to the team, never mind actual rule suggestions (way before 1998...see the aborted Ferrari Indy car effort). They get one bad season in 15 years, and their panties are all knotted up.
 
I won't say that with you. First, this time I think that Ferrari will leave F1 unless Max backs off. I think he will do just that, so in the end we agree. Ferrari will not leave F1.


Second, in Ferrari's F1 history you have many, many years of them performing poorly, and that never made them give up. They're not Brabham, Lotus, Maserati, Vanwall, Alfa Romeo, Prost, BRM, Lola, whatever.

And, in fact, they are working hard to get to the front, and are already nearly there, as the 4th grid place of Massa showed.

One other thing. If they indeed have veto power over regulation changes, that makes it clear that the major regulation changes we have this year were not objected by Ferrari.



EDIT - di Montezemolo didn't attend the meeting ... due to the death of his father, or so it's said in the news. Domenicalli will represent Ferrari, and Howett (Toyota) will act as FOTA's chairman.

Maybe it's true, maybe it's just a way of saying to Mosley "I won't even bother going there. You discuss this with my employee and I'll let you know later what's my decision"



RE-EDIT - Ecclestone says "two tier" system is scrapped. Hard to believe, unless the budget cap is also ...

source: http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/090515180455.shtml
 
Last edited:
It's such a mess.


Lets all remember what happened not more than three races ago this season. We had a winner and several podium-sitters which we weren't even sure were legal at the time - and everyone raged about bringing the sport into disrepute. Now, consider a team spending just £1m over the budget, claiming it was an accounting-error. Or a team claiming that research on drag-reducing paint and gloss actually doesn't count as a performance expenditure but as a marketing expenditure (for the sponsors, of course), and then winning a race (perhaps due to unrelated reasons) - how exactly will the public respond when they find out last race's winner was disqualified for spending a bit too much money on it, or that the championship-leading team was just found hiding a second wind-tunnel from it's auditors?
 
Ferrari_Tifoso
The FIA doesn't have any lawmaking powers according to this article. It's role it's to enforce the rules as they stand. All the teams should file injunctions to strip Mosely of powers he's not even supposed to have.

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=37912
Click to expand...

Hence why it doesn't pass laws? It determines rules? The other teams can't file an injunction - Ferrari filed theirs over the FIA ignoring their special "veto" powers.
The FIA makes the rules to race and the teams race under them, its not a law, its just the rules. If the teams don't like the rules, there is no "law" to say they can't leave to race elsewhere, so the point is that the teams want to be in F1, not that they are forced to.
Whether the FIA are responsible enough to determine where the rules go with such a valuable championship is opinion really and this is what is finally being sorted out with FOTA.

I always felt Max and Bernie had a fair point about the manufacturers not being reliable enough to have power to determine where the championship goes, but I can agree that there needs to be a better balance between the FIA and the teams (but not the manufacturers, just teams competing).

But, as the article says, its a large gray area saying whether the FIA should be able to make large rule changes that may affect the commercial side. But really, the sport has to have a gorverning body, if it was run just by the teams it would probably be a mess, seeing as they are the ones competing they would have bias towards themselves.
And I think listening to what Mosley said, that the FIA was within its rights to make such a rule change like the budget cap because he had asked the teams to produce better plans and they never got back to him (he thinks perhaps it was so they could drag it out and avoid it being brought in before the new teams could join, forcing the FIA to back down so they would have a grid).

Quite simply, its a mess and I hope that we finally have some kind of balance of power afterwards. We still want the FIA to exist but we also want the teams to have a bit more say in rule changes.
 
Last edited:
Yes, it's a mess. At this point, however, I'd like to have one of two outcomes for this:

a) Mosley leaves the FIA

b) Ferrari leaves F1

Maybe I would prefer option b). F1 without Ferrari would mean that Bernie was out of business and Mosley had his own days numbered. And Ferrari can always come back, while MM and BE won't.

I fear some kind of compromise that will leave everything in place. And indeed I don't like this FIA/FOM "status quo".
 
Ecclestone says thathe two-tier championship was a stupid idea to begin with:
Ecclestone optimistic after meeting with FOTA

18 May 2009

Bernie Ecclestone has said the FIA and the FOTA are close to an agreement to secure the future of Formula 1 with the current teams involved. The F1 boss furthermore confirmed that the two-tier system won't be introduced.

The most important item on the agenda for the Formula 1 teams was the budget cap the FIA wishes to introduce as of next season. The budget cap would give teams that would use it a number of big advantages, but something that seemed completely fair to most of the current F1 teams. The budget cap could still be introduced next season, but only if the FIA will come to an agreement with the FOTA on the limit of the budget cap.

"The two-tier system is out the window," Ecclestone confirmed to the Daily Mail. "I always thought that was a bit stupid. There has been an agreement in principal. Everyone is happy with a budget cap, it's just a case of working out the amount. I am confident all the teams will still be racing next year."
Click to expand...
Crisis averted? Let's hope so.

EDIT: And, on a similar note, Mosely doesn't think anyone will leave, but doesn't want to increase the budget cap.
Mosley not keen to increase budget cap

18 May 2009

FIA president Max Mosley has said he is not interested to increase the budget cap above £40m as the Briton thinks a higher budget cap could discourage new teams from entering the sport. Mosley furthermore said he doesn't expect any F1 team to leave the sport next season.

"I'd be very surprised in the end if they do leave F1," Mosley told the BBC. The FIA president had a meeting with the FOTA last week to discus the budget cap. He said about the meeting: "We had an interesting meeting and exchange of views but nothing concrete has come out of it. I think there will be further developments. The teams have gone off to see if they can come up with something better than the cost cap and we will be happy to listen to what they have to say.

"But what we have said to them is that it's really not possible, if you are going to dramatically reduce the costs, to do anything better than a cost cut. We think that when they think about it when they consider it properly they will come back and agree.

"There will certainly not be a two-tier championship and almost certainly an exchange of information between the teams, but I'd be very reluctant to increase the budget cap above £40m because I think that would discourage new teams from entering. I think we are clear that everybody wants to race under the same regulations, but we do need to get the costs down - the teams all agree on that - it's a question of how much and how."
Click to expand...
You know, for once I agree with him: if the budget cap is set too high, new teams might lose interest becase they won't be able to make that number.
 
Last edited:
I don't think so. FOTA and Ferrari are in absolute silence since last friday, but Mr. Mosley doesn't shut up as he should. You guys just check F1-live.com and you'll notice that.

I think he is trying to "corner" Ferrari ine every way he can. He wants them out, or humiliated. I guess that means Ferrari will be out, unless they win the court-case (and if that happens, the humiliation will be on Mosley's).

Anyway, the last words I read from Mr. Mosley are worthy of notice:

"Essentially, they walked away by forming FOTA. They were always supposed to be loyal to the FIA, work with us and cooperate," said the FIA President.
Click to expand...

So, joining FOTA means being unloyal to the FIA, means not wanting to work and cooperate with it?

This guy is sick, and I'm not talking about his personal life.
 
I think some of your dislike of him is a hangover from previous events. I'm playing the Devil's Advocate here, but he does make some sense: if a team works with the FIA like Ferrari did, everything goes well because there's that relationship there. They're not divided from the outset; they can work together. And yes, it may be seen as a betrayal when Ferrari join FOTA because they're now on the other side of the fence because the working relationship they had was a good thing. Now, I'm not saying Mosely is universally right, but that doesn't mean he's universally wrong. And just because he's gotten it wrong in the past doesn't mean he's always going to get it that way.

This isn't a defence of Mosely, mind you. I think he's made too many mistakes in the past to justify his position as President of the FIA. But I also think that far too many people are willing to pounce on what he says and twisting it into a justification for his immediate dismissal (which, right now, could be the worst thing for Formula One ... you never, ever change the leadership when you're ushering in new practices on this scale unless you want it to fail) simply because they've already judged him. Of course, not everyone can be completely objective; I try to be, but if I go any further I'm going to turn into this cold and emotionless bastard who tries to rationalise and explain everything by hard logic.

My point is that while once bitten, twice shy is a fairly sound policy to have, it doesn't men you go taking the man's quotes out of context to justify a witch-hunt against him.
 
Ok ... first, I don't have any complaint to do about "previous events" regarding his leadership of the FIA. I didn't agree with what happened last season (Spa) but also never bought the idea that the FIA were the "Ferrari International Asistance". I'm no LH fan, no McLaren fan and no Ferrari fan, I just like F1 as a whole.

Second, I didn't take his statement out of context. The context is clearly that he is being very vocal since friday's meeting, while everyone else is very silent. He attacked Domenicalli, he attacked Howett, he said that this will only be solved in months, he said Ferrari going to court will make an agreement more difficult, he said many things more.

However, I take into consideration three things: a) this is a power struggle; b) Mosley is a lawyer; c) Ferrari filed an injunction in court.

So, all this affair (and the power struggle with it) could well be solved in court. Let's considerate the options in this case:

a) Contract between FIA and Ferrari is valid but the FIA searched and found a "loophole" in it, by creating the two tier system. That way Ferrari can race with the current regulations so the FIA complied with the contract.

Result: FIA wins, Ferrari is out of F1 next year.


b) Contract between FIA and Ferrari is valid and the two tier system created by the FIA violates it.

Result: FIA loses, regulations for next year remain unchanged, unless FOTA's suggestions (reached by unanymous vote) are accepted by the FIA. Ferrari remains in F1, Mosley keeps his job (I don't think he will quit ever) but his credibility is severely diminished.



b) Contract between FIA and Ferrari is no longer valid because Ferrari joined FOTA (hard to accept this could be a violation of the contract, but we can't know for sure).

Result: FIA can do whatever they want. Ferrari will leave F1.



If it doesn't get solved in court, it could get solved through negotiations. However, I don't see Mr. Mosley acccepting anything. He said already that he won't accept to postpone the deadline for 2010 submissions; He said already that he is not willing to change the budget capping" system.

Now, we can all argue that if the budget cap is raised enough, the bigger teams could accept it. However, there's a problem with the system itself. And that problem is that, effectively, such a system will mean that the FIA will inevitably be granted the power to inspect the teams' expenditure, finantial data, etc.

And that's a problem. Because, in the end, we are talking about giving even more power to the FIA. And some teams, most of all the manufacturers' teams, won't like the FIA nosing around their numbers.

How's that for a "hangover" post, do you race? :)
 
But because they're with FOTA now, they don't have to quit alone: Every current team bar Brawn, Force India and Williams confirmed that they'll quit along with them. The FIA realizes that Lola, Penske and USGP aren't exactly McLarens and Ferraris as far as heritage is concerned - and even IndyCar fans won't argue that - and will back down on their threats.
 
Truth is, everything is in a standstill, and Bernie Ecclestone is probably the most nervous person in the world now.

Today's news, in F1.live:

1. Mosley expects many teams to ignore May 29 deadline

"I think that we will probably get anywhere between three and six teams by the deadline," Mosley told Autosport. "After that they become a late entry and if there is a space they can take it, and if there isn't space they cannot."



2. Richards not committing to 2010 team entry:
"We are very concerned about the controversy these proposals have created with the existing teams and the uncertainty that this has created," he told GPWeek.

"It is important for us and our partners that there is stability in the sport with broad alignment on the future direction of Formula One and this will be a critical issue in our decision-making process as to whether or not to make an entry,"



3. Hockenheim future set for Wednesday meeting

Circuit boss Karl Josef Schmidt said Wednesday's meeting is "crucial" to the outcome.

He said he is not in an overly optimistic mood, but: "If a Prime Minister sits down to talk, then it is not just for fun."

And Schmidt added: "Ecclestone knows that the Prime Minister wants to speak with him."

Now, under normal circumstances, I would consider that the german prime minister wants to bargain with BE how much money is needed to host a GP in Hockenheim. But now I can only wonder if the meeting is scheduled to wednesday because the hearing (and the FOTA meeting) will happen tuesday.

And I guess that, in these circumstances, it's only normal that the german prime minister will want to know if BMW, McMercedes, Toyota, Red Bull and Ferrari will attend the 2010 German Grand Prix.
 
Hun200kmh
So, all this affair (and the power struggle with it) could well be solved in court.
Click to expand...

I don’t think the goal of this trial is to determine witch between Ferrari or FIA is the winner/looser. I believe Ferrari’s main objective is to prevent independent/new teams to enroll under the current 2010 regulation (and thus the actual 40 millions budget cap). With other teams already in, the negotiations possibilities for a higher financial limit (allowing all the teams to run under the same regulation) will be a lot more difficult, if not impossible. Anyway, this procedure proves by itself that Ferrari are not so determinate about leaving the sport in my opinion. But they all are on a very short schedule, so this may be why we see/hear very assertive positions taken from all sides.

Now, I don’t want to start a war here, but am I the only one who thinks Mosley might be right here?:nervous: Do people really believe you can trust the “market leaders” to regulate the business in a way to open it up to new contenders? I can understand why you cannot ask/impose a company to run with a third of his annual expenses without some teeth-grinding; but then you have to take into account the context wherein these regulations come into play. To quote a popular GTP thread Carmageddon is here; car manufacturers are violently hit by the worldwide economical crisis and continue to loose abyssal amounts of money despite the already radical measures taken. I hate to sound pessimistic and really hope future will prove me wrong here, but I have the feeling that we have not seen/reach the worst of it so far. With this in mind, can anybody here state for how many years can companies like, say Toyota and Renault be assured 450 millions F1 subscribers? What about smaller teams, aren’t they already in a de facto two-tier competition?

F1 Cost reductions have been in discussion between the teams for a long time now (prior to financial crunch if I remember correctly), but still - and despite alarming signs - nothing has really ever emerged. Maybe we will need to thanks Max Mosley in a not so far future for these certainly unpopular but yet most probably needed harsh decisions.
 
French court verdict on Ferrari's injunction will be made public tomorrow at 2 pm local time (I think it's 12:00 GMT)
 
Soundtrack
I don’t think the goal of this trial is to determine witch between Ferrari or FIA is the winner/looser. I believe Ferrari’s main objective is to prevent independent/new teams to enroll under the current 2010 regulation (and thus the actual 40 millions budget cap). With other teams already in, the negotiations possibilities for a higher financial limit (allowing all the teams to run under the same regulation) will be a lot more difficult, if not impossible. Anyway, this procedure proves by itself that Ferrari are not so determinate about leaving the sport in my opinion. But they all are on a very short schedule, so this may be why we see/hear very assertive positions taken from all sides.

Now, I don’t want to start a war here, but am I the only one who thinks Mosley might be right here?:nervous: Do people really believe you can trust the “market leaders” to regulate the business in a way to open it up to new contenders? I can understand why you cannot ask/impose a company to run with a third of his annual expenses without some teeth-grinding; but then you have to take into account the context wherein these regulations come into play. To quote a popular GTP thread Carmageddon is here; car manufacturers are violently hit by the worldwide economical crisis and continue to loose abyssal amounts of money despite the already radical measures taken. I hate to sound pessimistic and really hope future will prove me wrong here, but I have the feeling that we have not seen/reach the worst of it so far. With this in mind, can anybody here state for how many years can companies like, say Toyota and Renault be assured 450 millions F1 subscribers? What about smaller teams, aren’t they already in a de facto two-tier competition?

F1 Cost reductions have been in discussion between the teams for a long time now (prior to financial crunch if I remember correctly), but still - and despite alarming signs - nothing has really ever emerged. Maybe we will need to thanks Max Mosley in a not so far future for these certainly unpopular but yet most probably needed harsh decisions.
Click to expand...
It´s not the budgetcap that´s the issue here, it´s two-tier system that is the milliondollar question. I´m pretty sure there will be a budgetcap, but at say 60 million or so, so that we´ll get rid of the two rulesets.
 

Similar threads

LMSCorvetteGT2
2018 F1 Constructor development/tech
10 11 12
Replies
331
Views
24K
Lewis_Hamilton_
Lewis_Hamilton_
MagpieRacer
F1 2020 MyTeam ideas
Replies
2
Views
12K
MagpieRacer
MagpieRacer
MagpieRacer
F1 '24 Launch impressions and what should Codies do going forward?
Replies
11
Views
4K
Lightpilgrim
Lightpilgrim
Cristobal1234
Ferrari 458 Italia GT3 ELMS GTC Team Ukraine #96 2014
Replies
0
Views
988
Cristobal1234
Cristobal1234
Keef
2023 Las Vegas GP Announced
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
Eunos_Cosmo
Eunos_Cosmo

Latest Posts

Back