FOTA claims to support the fans – but do the fans support FOTA? (Poll)

FOTA's eight F1 teams are demanding changes to how F1 is run

FOTA's eight F1 teams are demanding changes to how F1 is run

In a press conference before the start of today’s Le Mans 24 Hours, Ferrari president and FOTA boss Luca di Montezemolo said:

In a couple of years the problem with Formula 1 will be solved – as I really hope, with a responsible FIA, as we want, or, as happens in other sports, organising our own championship.

FOTA claimed yesterday that F1 fans share its objections. It seems to me the best way to put that claim to the test is to run a poll…

Who do you support in the FIA-FOTA row?

  • The FIA (7%)
  • FOTA (83%)
  • Neither (10%)

Total Voters: 2,325

Loading ... Loading ...

I am not happy with how the FIA has handled the budget cap debate – or, for that matter, similar discussions over the future rules of F1 in recent years.

F1 has never strayed too far from controversy. But in recent years it seems to have become impossible for the governing body to sort out even the most minor of matters without kicking up an almighty fuss.

The prospect of F1 facing a split with as many as eight teams leaving the sport is not a pleasant one – and I hope it won’t come to that.

But I think FOTA have the best solutions to everyone’s problems, have put forward their side of the argument intelligently and, unlike the FIA, without recourse to needless provocation and antagonism.

Read more

Promoted content from around the web | Become an F1 Fanatic Supporter to hide this ad and others

Advert | Go Ad-free

317 comments on FOTA claims to support the fans – but do the fans support FOTA? (Poll)

  1. LewisC said on 14th June 2009, 11:28

    Neither for me; but closer to the FOTA end. My worry is that if FOTA are left to dictate, we end up with something like the DTM, where a few major manufacturers dictate and dominate everything. You need privateers to be able to afford to play.

    That said – still want Max’N’Bernie out asap.

    • FLIG said on 14th June 2009, 12:42

      That’s the whole point here, I can’t see it any other way, and I would love if someone could convince me that the FOTA are not trying to keep newcomers away, so they can keep their lucrative business exactly like it was in Schumacher vs McLaren years. They were probably already pissed off when BMW tried to impose themselves and when Briatore got back to bring Renault and Alonso into the mix, they kind of had a hand (the way I see it) in the demise of BAR (who, in my opinion, got a much heavier sentence than McLaren, for instance). They OBVIOUSLY don’t want new people winning, so they need the money backup. Red Bulls and BMWs are already enough competition, right?

      • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 14th June 2009, 13:00

        I can’t see it any other way, and I would love if someone could convince me that the FOTA are not trying to keep newcomers away, so they can keep their lucrative business exactly like it was in Schumacher vs McLaren years. They were probably already pissed off when BMW tried to impose themsel

        Both Ferrari and Mercedes offered engines to Brawn to keep them racing. Said team are now destroying everybody. Is that not proof?

        • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 14:38

          Both Ferrari and Mercedes offered engines to Brawn to keep them racing. Said team are now destroying everybody.

          I don’t think that ‘anyone’ was expecting that were they! At least Mercedes seem to pleased that Brawn are using their engines to good effect.

  2. FLIG said on 14th June 2009, 12:45

    And think about Mr. Frank Williams, please. He has given so much to F1 in so little time. Why do you think he’s “on the other side”? He’s a very wise man who has run his squad brilliantly for a long time.

    • persempre said on 14th June 2009, 12:49

      I`d have had much more sympathy for that view if it hadn`t been Sir Frank that stopped customer cars being used & so stopped any new team starting in exactly the way he did. He would never have got into the sport if customer cars hadn`t been allowed back then

      • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 14:58

        I`d have had much more sympathy for that view if it hadn`t been Sir Frank that stopped customer cars being used & so stopped any new team starting in exactly the way he did. He would never have got into the sport if customer cars hadn`t been allowed back then

        Ah,now…there’s that ‘self interest’ thing raising its ugly head again.

        All the teams will want what they want regardless of what ‘club’ they may have joined or what might have happened in the past.

  3. steve said on 14th June 2009, 12:54

    The manufacturers have held F1 to ransom for years, threatening to pull out at a moments notice. Since Honda the FIA have wised up. The manufacturers will come and go like they do in Sportscars.

    The FIA proposals ensure the long term sustainability of the sport – drivers support them because of the HUGE wages they are prepared to pay. But they don’t care about the future of the sport just their bit in it, just listen to Hamilton he knows nothing, nor cares nothing for the history.

    The moment they sign a Cosworth deal Brawn will leave the FOTA group. Frank Wiliams knows where the future lies.

    • Martin said on 14th June 2009, 15:31

      The FIA isnt making decisions right now that will sustain the long term sustainability of the sport. If so they wouldnt have had some fo the rediculous requirements they have had in the past. The large evtry fee is just 1 example. In no other racing series do you have to pay such a retainer, not even close.
      Max has someone in the FIA over a barrel and is influencing this whole scenario in this direction and for waht I am not sure.
      A;sp remember that Williams is no longer the sole property of Frank, and that the decisions there are being made for the same selfish reasons that the other teams are against.
      In a previous post someone stated tha Williams was 1 of the teams that blocked others from using a chassis of another team, and that is correct. Ask Dave Richards of Prodrive who would have been in F1 last year except for this.
      Your right Williams knows where their future lies, in the mid to back of the pack.

      • steve said on 15th June 2009, 20:07

        The world of the automobile has changed everyone smart knows this (of course this excludes the motor manufacturers who have no idea what is going on…. yeah big cars, Jeremy Clarkson, macho macho etc)

        Fi needs to be less expensive, less corporate, more agile, more in tune with the times. Ferrari will soon be forgotten, just another memory like the old Hockenheim Track, the Ring, the Monza banking, Surtees, Lotus and BRM. Ferrari’s bling is not shiny anymore – the future is hi-tech small and igenious teams making clever decisions and some bloody great racing.

        I have sat and fallen asleep watching this sport for 15 years and I’m old enough to remember when it really rocked. This year its started to feel a bit like that is happening again. With the corporate bulls-t of Ron gone, Ferrari cocking everything up like the old days and everyone within a tenth of each other……racing.

        I know FIA Max bad etc is like hating the teachers or something, but being in love with the bland corporate monstrosities of the manufacturers is just daft. If Toyota knew anything about how F1 works they would have won a bloody race by now. They throw millions at it and are still crap. Give it another year and they will be gone along with BMW, Renault and Merc.

  4. al_amana said on 14th June 2009, 13:55

    There’s one thing still unclear to me, in this saga.

    Since when is it that the FIA have the power to interfere with how teams run their businesses. I have previously posted a link to an article that quotes Bernie and others on what the role of the FIA is. I will post it again below. As another poster has said above, we have a majority of teams that agreed to the proposals set down by FOTA in regards to cost cutting etc. As the monetary side of F1 isn’t supposed to be of any concern to the FIA why are they being allowed to interfere in this way? I just don’t understand! The FIA are only there to be the referee!

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

  5. TommyB said on 14th June 2009, 14:08

    Lets get a break away series with the Moto GP guys. :P If they can make F1 anything like the race today that would be amazing ;)

  6. Aaron said on 14th June 2009, 14:36

    Max said if you dont like my rules go and make your own series…

    While I would prefer Max to go, you is going to go watch the F1 race with out fota teams?
    I might flick it on tv but I wont be flying to Melbourne to watch the race, I wont be watch the pre season testing with so much anticipation, I wont be buying team merchandise, I wont even log on to the internet to keep upto date on the series.

    So as a track owner and race promoter and a tv director why do I pay so much $$ to have a bunch of name name teams running a advanced gp2 series when no one is showing up or watching?

    I will however support the FOTA teams breakaway series.
    Which will always br the true F1 series (in exile)

    Some of Max’s rules are just flabbergasting…cost cutting and introduce Kers, have a BMW or Ferrari etc running same engine, have no testing so rookie drivers dont get experience in a f1 car…etc the list goes on and on and on.

    FIA grow some balls and get rid of the problem MAX!

    • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 15:09

      I will however support the FOTA teams breakaway series.
      Which will always br the true F1 series (in exile)

      I wonder which channel you’ll be watching that on should it ever actually happen?

      Some would say that a “true” F1 series would be a series without manufacturers interference.

      • sasbus said on 14th June 2009, 15:50

        Some would say that a “true” F1 series would be a series without manufacturers interference.

        Enlighten me please. Where would this F1 get their engines, gearbox, chasis, etc.?? From garage somewhere maybe??

        Wake up friend, all manufactures today where shops in the past. That come from hard work and persiverence and not how much money they had in thier poket.

        • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 16:14

          Enlighten me please. Where would this F1 get their engines, gearbox, chasis, etc.?? From garage somewhere maybe??

          You think that only car manufacturers supplied engines and gearboxes to F1!!??

          Enlightenment,just for one instance,comes in the shape of Cosworth,who many years ago supplied the MAJORITY of F1 cars with its DFV engine.Were it not for such as Cosworth and Hewland who supplied the gearboxes F1 would have been dead long ago.

          Engines could come from Hart,Judd for example.There are just as many engine people out there as there are racing teams.
          There are many engine companies out there that would leap at the chance to design and build and sell F1 engines.

          X-Trac among others would waste no time producing gearboxes for teams to use.

          The new teams are also already designing and building their own chassis.They have no choice because customer cars are not allowed.

          F1 does not need car manufacturers.

          • sasbus said on 14th June 2009, 16:29

            I get it what you want is no manufacturers. Good – what I want is everyone.

            BTW when Cosworth was providing 90% of the F1 teams, Ferrari were still providing their engines. Furthermore, in my opinion – probably not yours – this was one of the dullest moments of F1.

            Cheers mate!

          • persempre said on 14th June 2009, 16:32

            If ACEA members don’t provide engines who exactly would be left to provide them?
            Cosworth? Spec series?

          • persempre said on 14th June 2009, 16:52

            As far as I`m aware Hart was bought out by Tom Walkinshaw & went bust with TWR.
            Judd are a possibility but I don`t think they’ve made F1 engines since their venture with Yamaha in the 1990s.

          • Martin said on 14th June 2009, 21:44

            The absolute worst time for F1 was when cosworth was the dominant engine. It only had Alfa and Ferrari to compete against. Only when Renault came in and exploited the turbo rules did we start to see new ideas and new blood invade the sport. Back in the old era Mclaren was running the MP4-1 for 2 or 3 seasons..you wont ever see that again as they are constantly developing the car. The team that had a good design would just sit on it until another team surpassed it and only then would they look for new ideas for competitive edges. Now they never stop the development of the car as they know everyone else is doing the same.
            This is why you can budget cap a team.. they get their budget used up in the early part of the season and the car goes uncompetitive because of lack of money.. they will just develope under a different roof and hide it from the FIA.

        • IDR said on 14th June 2009, 16:19

          VXR, I see you quite active just in this thread.

          Just in case, do you work in Place de la Concorde, Paris?

          • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 16:28

            Just in case, do you work in Place de la Concorde, Paris?

            I didn’t vote for the FIA,but at the same time I didn’t automatically jump on ‘the other lot must therefore be right’ bandwagon.

            And there seems to be a lot of misunderstanding among some of the posters as to what F1 actually is.

            I voted ‘neither’ which is a vote that I’m getting more sure about all the time.:}

          • persempre said on 14th June 2009, 17:09

            I think most people completely understand what F1 means.
            They expect Formula 1 to be the pinnacle of motorsport & therefore more advanced & with higher performance than the minor & spec series.

          • Patrickl said on 15th June 2009, 11:41

            How would that change if the top teams spend 80-100 instead of 400 million?

            Even at that “low” level there is nothing that comes even close to F1. Not budgetwise and not in rules. They still all build their own cars.

            If anything FOTA wants to turn F1 into a spec class with their standardized parts.

          • persempre said on 15th June 2009, 13:37

            Patrick
            Have you actually read what the teams are being asked to sign up to?
            If not,it is very important that you do in order to understand just how impossible it is for them to put their signatures to it.
            2010 FIA Sporting Regulations.
            The areas highlighted in pink are the changes for this year so you can scroll down & pick them out.
            It`s worth going through from the beginning. The first 30 pages won`t take long but I`ll draw your attention to things which appear towards the end
            a) Entry Form p.31/32 – The teams who signed unconditionally signed to be bound by the changes shown on p32.
            b) The Budget Cap Regulations which need reading in their entirety from p.43

          • Patrickl said on 15th June 2009, 14:36

            First of all, I’m not sure those regulations are fixed yet since they are stil under negotiation.

            Still, I don’t see any problem there no.

          • persempre said on 15th June 2009, 14:45

            This is just going round in circles, isn`t it?
            If you have ever had to sign a legally binding document, Patrick, you should know that what you sign is what you are legally going to get.
            Nobody in their right mind would sign any kind of document on the presumption or hope that its’ contants will change after they have signed.
            In past years the teams have been allowed until Novemeber to submit their entries. Why, this year, do you think Max gave them just one week to get those entries in or face an undisclosed late penalty fee?
            This is not the way to do business. This is bullying tactics.

          • Patrickl said on 15th June 2009, 17:59

            The budget cap was planned to enter in 2009. Mosley felt the teams had delayed matters long enough and he wanted the new teams to have enough time to actually build a competitive car for 2010.

            So yeah, thing feels rushed now for the uninformed fan, but reality is that this has been worked on for years.

  7. VXR said on 14th June 2009, 16:42

    I said that F1 “does not need car manufacturers”.Not that they shouldn’t be there,and I have already given examples of just a couple of engine manufacturers in a previous post.

    Why do people think that only car makers can make F1 engines?

    • persempre said on 14th June 2009, 17:12

      If you had a Ferrari then I`m surprised that you think F1 engines can be made so easily.

      • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 17:40

        It was a ‘Mondiale’,and perhaps the most unreliable car I’ve ever had.But it was a Ferrari,rubbish build quality and all.

        F1 engines aren’t rocket science,as much as we’d all like to believe that.There are no ‘secrets’ there anymore.

        • persempre said on 14th June 2009, 18:13

          lol – Well, things have changed quite a bit since the 80s.
          Maybe not rocket science but a long way from the ones turned out by your average production line work.
          Cosworth have yet to prove that they can produce an F1 engine capable of the long-life expected under todays` F1 regs. It might be interesting to see how they get on but I may well not be watching it.

    • Martin said on 14th June 2009, 21:47

      By the way… Ford owned cosworth during the era when cosworth reigned as the dominant engine..
      So even then their was car mfg’s involved.

  8. VXR said on 14th June 2009, 16:50

    BTW when Cosworth was providing 90% of the F1 teams, Ferrari were still providing their engines. Furthermore, in my opinion – probably not yours – this was one of the dullest moments of F1.

    So it’s a good job that ‘Cossie’ were there isn’t it,otherwise there would have been nothing to see.

    Actually many saw it as the ‘Golden age’ of F1,there was ‘overtaking’ and weird stuff like that! Maybe you weren’t around then ?

    • sasbus said on 14th June 2009, 17:20

      Depends from which perspective you see it. I still think it was quite dull and BTW I’m not as young as you think but thank you!

      • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 17:26

        Depends from which perspective you see it. I still think it was quite dull and BTW I’m not as young as you think but thank you!

        It was what F1 was at the time,and maybe it will be like that again.Who knows ?

  9. persempre said on 14th June 2009, 17:26

    I was.
    I also remember the fact that because Ferrari was the only team who manufactured their own car and engine they were paid more for the R&D & production which the other teams did not incur.
    There are probably several people reading this who can go back even further than the 60s when I first got involved with the sport.
    Please don`t assume that everyone who has a different opinion than your own is an idiot or too young to remember.
    I guess you might agree that Sir Stirling Moss knows what F1 is?
    From his column reproduced on Eurosport:

    “I like to hope that things can be sorted out. It’s so important that there is harmony, it’s so important that the FIA listen to the teams and the teams listen to the FIA. You’ve got a lot of very clever people there and there’s no doubt that they are negotiating from their own corner, but I also think that they appreciate that the sport is the most important thing and that, if they go and cripple the racing, they’re going to lose a lot of the enthusiasts that follow it now.

    Max is a very strong person, which the sport needs – you’ve got to have someone strong at the head, there’s no two ways about it – but he does get these ideas. Ultimately, I hope he’s intelligent enough to realise that what the teams are putting forward is a good idea, and they decide to work together – either to find a compromise or something that suits everybody. “

    • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 17:31

      Please don`t assume that everyone who has a different opinion than your own is an idiot or too young to remember.

      Did anyone assume that.No one was called an “idiot” and the question was asked that “maybe” he wasn’t around then?

      And yes,Stirling Moss has as much right to an opinion as anyone else.

      • persempre said on 14th June 2009, 18:17

        No, you didn`t call anyone an idiot. It was the impression conveyed. However, I am happy to apologise if that was not the case.

        • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 18:36

          I’m sorry I gave the wrong impression.

          My only hope is that all of this is sorted out before it starts to get really nasty,and it’s not like we can do anything about it ourselves is it.We’ll just have to let them play their war games and see who comes out of the smoke when all the guns have stopped firing.

          • persempre said on 14th June 2009, 18:55

            No problem :)

            I think, unfortunately, this will get much nastier.
            In truth, at the moment I think it has gone too far for a reconciliation. Either Max or the main teams will have to go.
            The ultimate choice will lay with the WMSC & FIA Senate, I guess.

  10. VXR said on 14th June 2009, 18:26

    As far as I`m aware Hart was bought out by Tom Walkinshaw & went bust with TWR.
    Judd are a possibility but I don`t think they’ve made F1 engines since their venture with Yamaha in the 1990s.

    Hart did go bust in 2002,but he’s still around.Judd are a very good possibilty,they were racing at Le Mans,as were other engine manufacturers.

    • persempre said on 14th June 2009, 18:32

      Yes, but Judd or whoever, may have not long to get their act together if they`re going to supply F1 & I`m not sure that Max would want anyone else but Cosworth. After all a single engine supplier was on his wishlist at one time.
      Spec series looks more & more likely.

      • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 18:44

        Yes, but Judd or whoever, may have not long to get their act together if they`re going to supply F1 & I`m not sure that Max would want anyone else but Cosworth. After all a single engine supplier was on his wishlist at one time.

        It wouldn’t be the first time that Cosworth have ‘held the fort’ while reinforcements arrived.

        And perhaps there are other car manufactures out there that would like to build an engine without going to the trouble of trying to fit four wheels to it.

  11. S Hughes said on 14th June 2009, 19:02

    I think the poll is pretty conclusive.

    • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 20:52

      I think the poll is pretty conclusive.

      Yes,at least the poll is.

      • steve said on 15th June 2009, 21:40

        Yeah like the one in Iran….. then again knobs voted in te BNP too.

        If you read the comments most people who think about it vote in favour of the FIA, the gormless crowd vote for FOTA because its anti-Max and thats like bashing a teacher or something.

        • VXR said on 16th June 2009, 1:48

          Yeah like the one in Iran….. then again knobs voted in te BNP too.

          You could probably get Turkeys to vote for Christmas if they thought that it would stave off the threat of Chickens nicking their jobs.

  12. TommyB said on 14th June 2009, 20:10

    FOTA should break away and make a GP or F1 series. They can be called F1 once the current F1 becomes Formula Cosworth

    • VXR said on 14th June 2009, 20:59

      They can be called F1 once the current F1 becomes Formula Cosworth

      Actually,no they can’t.FOTA don’t have any rights to ‘Formula One’ or ‘F1′ wording.They will probably have to re-name themselves if they split from ‘F1′.

      It was also called ‘F1′ when Cosworth supplied most of the grid with engines for many,many years,not too long ago.

      • Oliver said on 15th June 2009, 11:23

        The series is not popular because it’s called F1.

        • David A said on 15th June 2009, 11:45

          What?

          • Oliver said on 15th June 2009, 11:50

            The name F1 or Formula one became attractive because of the competition, the caliber of teams and equipments, the sophistication and the passion. If they had called it GP1 60years ago, it would still have its wide appeal.

          • David A said on 15th June 2009, 12:38

            Oh, alright I just didn’t fully understand your first post. That is a valid point.

  13. Just one small point. Even thought they are suspended, Williams and Force India F1 are both still members of FOTA.

    This is more about preventing huge job cuts forced on the larger teams, as opposed to a gentle reduction over two or three years.

    It is also about removing a hypocritical, bare-cheeked liar from a position that he has been in longer than the previous incumbent (whom he accused of being in power for FAR too long!) and has been manipulating the regulations against the will of the teams just like he argued against back in 1980…

    I personally believe that the FIA and FOTA are right in different areas, however, I do not want to see Max Mosley involved in it any longer.

  14. sean said on 14th June 2009, 21:36

    The big problem is Cosworth have to make the engines last 4 races as will the gear box suppliers,they did have a few probs making it through a whole race last time they where in.

  15. theRoswellite said on 14th June 2009, 22:13

    a short comment about the budget cap…

    No organization wants to offer themselves up to a carte blanche financial investigation, this would be opening a can of worms (or should I say..snakes in the plane) with the potential to make the current FIA entanglements seem elementary by comparison.

    FOTA can accomplish the same thing by structuring the regulations in such a way that restrictions are placed on easily verifiable quantities, such as elements of the car, practice days (as presently regulated), number of employees traveling…and I am sure they could suggest many more specific items.

    IT IS IN FOTA’S INTEREST TO MAKE REASONABLE, AND EQUITABLE…AND TIMELY LIMITATIONS ON THEIR COSTS.

    • Patrickl said on 14th June 2009, 22:42

      If it was so easy then FOTA could have put forward a proposal that actually aimed at achieving this.

      They didn’t do this even when they promised they would (after the meeting in Monaco).

      • persempre said on 15th June 2009, 11:39

        I think they have more pressing issues at the moment,Patrick. Likesorting out if they are even going to be in the series to make suggestions about.
        They had already produced (& published online) a set of proposals covering 2009 & 2010. Some of those suggestions were adopted by the FIA & published in the subsequent updates to the regs. However,until the problem of the budget cap & governance is resolved, there is little point in them trying to make further suggestions on other issues.

        • Patrickl said on 15th June 2009, 11:42

          At the Monaco meeting they claimed to know a way to cut budgets without a budget cap. They promised to come up with a proposal, but they never did.

  16. True F1 Technical Fan said on 15th June 2009, 0:34

    Are F1 fans really this technically ignorant?

    One of the most technically challenging opportunities that F1 has offered the world of auto racing is the KER system. It was and still is an opportunity for F1 engineering to use hybrid technology to make the cars faster, and believe it or not it has worked!

    Arguably, Mercedes McLaren has spent too much time developing the KERS and not enough developing the aero package, but they will rebound, and when they do the KERS will put them over the top. Is this what Ferrari is afraid of?

    Do not fear the KERS, it is an optional accessory to the car, and if teams don’t think it is useful, don’t use it. But for FOTA to ban it entirely is ludicrous!

    Mercedes is happy to sell it to any team that wants to couple it to their Merc engines, and I guarantee it would make Brawn faster. Fans. get your facts straight, I disagree with allot of what the FIA has done, but KERS is right on target.

    Long live the KERS, I am not convinced it is dead, and true fans should not be so eager to see it leave.

    • persempre said on 15th June 2009, 11:41

      Is not a large of the problem how you spend millions on R & D (& production) of these new innovations when you will be capped at a figure which means you have to sack the majority of your staff?

    • Oliver said on 15th June 2009, 11:45

      Seems you are also ignorant of the fact that the FIA limited the power that could be harvested with KERS to 80HP. So unless the teams go into an endless cycle of refinement to get the system smaller and lighter, at great costs of course, they won’t see any benefits from adopting such a system, and the associated balance problems inherent with it.

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 15th June 2009, 20:39

      KERS is a tiny fraction of the wider argument, though. And we should remember it was the FIA that banned it when it was first devised by Ilmor (Mercedes) in the late 1990s. The technology would be vastly more developed by now if it weren’t for that.

      • VXR said on 16th June 2009, 0:30

        KERS is a tiny fraction of the wider argument, though. And we should remember it was the FIA that banned it when it was first devised by Ilmor (Mercedes) in the late 1990s. The technology would be vastly more developed by now if it weren’t for that.

        Strangely it was banned in the first year that Ferrari had its technical veto!

  17. Gman said on 15th June 2009, 1:19

    I voted for the FIA, with the following reasons…

    The existing teams all want to reduce spending, but on their terms. And if you notice, they want to keep the 2009 regs for next year also….don’t the rest of you realise they are just trying to wait out Max until he gose out of office? Then, they believe that they can continue spending as much as they want.

    I remember late last year when Honda decided to pull the plug, and everyone was running around on this and other forums stricken with fear and anexity over the sport’s future. It was believed that high costs were going to reduce the sport to 7-8 teams, and all the talk was of some teams running 3 cars. Now, the teams all want to go back to those days…

    I’ll be the first to admit that Max is being far from even-tempered in these negotiations. But on the same hand, he’s trying to preserve the future of the sport. So many of you are saying to let the big teams spend and go out of business if they wish- there’s plenty more to fill the grid. Well, those teams waiting to get in are there because of the cost cuts. Before those measures were implimented, the vast majority of the new/prospective teams were nowhere to be found around F1.

    It could be handled much better, but the FIA has the right idea here.

    • persempre said on 15th June 2009, 11:46

      My guess would be that they want to keep the 2009 regs because a) it doesn`t include the budget cap rules or the reg which allows the FIA to change any regulation as & when it chooses & b) because to keep this years` regs would be keeping costs down.

      If the FIA are so keen on keeping costs down I suggest their first step is to offer to pick up the redundancy costs for all the teams involved. Not going to happen, is it.
      In recent years it has been fairly obvious that when it comes to cost-cutting the FIA says one thing & does another, I`m afraid.

    • Martin said on 18th June 2009, 2:52

      You are wrong on the FIA having the right idea.
      If they had the right idea then this whole mess wouldnt have started.
      Honda leaving the sport is not that big a deal. They have done it 3 times now. The first after they finally won a few GP’s, then again after the turbo era as it slide back to normally aspirated and again recently. They leave whenever they want to.
      Look at who has stuck with the sport thru the good and the bad, they are the ones trying to preserve the sport at the top of motor racing. If you want budget caps and single engine series, stay with IRL, that way 10 minutes after the race starts you can be comfortably asleep either in your recliner or in the grandstands.
      The only way for this series to survive and be taken seriously is to break away and tell Max and Bernie to kiss off.

      • al_amana said on 18th June 2009, 3:27

        Excellent point Martin. Unfortunately you won’t get much more than my response to your post as it seems any threads more than a few hours old tend to be moot!

      • scunnyman said on 18th June 2009, 4:12

        I agree Martin. More people on here should look at the history of formula one instead the here and now. Some who have been watching and following F1 for a short time haven’t had the time really to justify making a valid comment.
        You can usually tell those on here who have been following F1 for longer than a couple of seasons by the way they comment.

  18. FOTA teams are willing to reduce costs, but on their terms, not Max’s. This is a fight over who will decide the competitive nature of the sport, and who gets how much of the money.

    Before the expiration of the Concorde Agreement I think all teams had to unanimously agree on sporting regulation changes. And it was damned near impossible to get the teams to agree on anything! Max has used the lapse and seized the initiative to steer the sport, wrongly or right, in the direction of his choosing.

    The true crux of the issue is who runs the sport? Max has the ball in his court and won’t give it up. Time for him to go and establish the “transparency” many have called for.

  19. m0tion said on 15th June 2009, 4:04

    Who owns Metachrome?

    • persempre said on 15th June 2009, 11:51

      Do you mean Mecachrome, m0tion?
      It`s tied up with Renault, I believe, but there`s so much buying & selling that has gone on I`m no longer sure who actually owns it.

  20. Brian said on 15th June 2009, 5:36

    Every team should have to use their own engines. None of this standardized engine crap.
    Ferrari
    Mercedes
    BMW
    Renault
    Cosworth
    Audi
    Peugot
    Toyota
    Honda
    Mitsubishi
    Nissan
    Lamborghini
    Saab
    Fiat
    Aston Martin
    I’m sure i left out a bunch of different engine types. I listed 14 different engines, thats 14 different teams. Thats 14 teams and 14 engines. That is the way it should be. It doesn’t mean that any of those companies have to own a team but I’m sure they would be willing to sell and supply the engines.
    F1 is the pinnacle of motor racing, therefore they should have each of the big name manufacturers providing engines. I don’t want to see 5 or 6 teams with Cosworth Engines, I want to see as many teams as possible, and each of them using different engines. Heck, I wouldn’t even mind seeing a team that has a custom engine built in some genuisus garage!

    • HounslowBusGarage said on 15th June 2009, 8:33

      Nice idea Brian, but it’s not terribly practical. Some companies on the list own other companies on the list (FIAT and Ferrari), others have cross holdings (Renault and Nissan), and at least one (Saab) is technically bankrupt (GM).

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.

Skip to toolbar