Exclusive: Zoran Stefanovic explains his complaint to the EU about the FIA

Posted on Author Keith Collantine

Stefan Grand Prix wanted to be on the F1 grid in 2010
Stefan Grand Prix wanted to be on the F1 grid in 2010

One of the unknown teams that filed an application to be on the F1 grid in 2010 was Stefan Grand Prix. The team’s entry has come to light since it lodged a complaint with the European Union claiming the FIA forced the potential new teams for 2010 to use engines supplied by Cosworth.

I spoke to the man behind the team, Zoran Stefanovic, to find out more about his complaint and his attempts to get Stefan Grand Prix on the grid for 2010.

He claims the team, which has racing car production facilities and has enlisted the help of ex-McLaren man Mike Coughlan, would be prepared to submit a fresh entry if the FIA opened up the tendering process again.

Stefanovic explains how he submitted his entry for 2010:

It was an official procedure we entered for Formula 1 for 2010. We put an official entry and submitted it on time. We had a meeting with Bernie Ecclestone with some people from our side. But after that we heard that we were not chosen

Basically what happened was we got information from Cosworth saying they were the only one engine that is allowed, which is not in the rules and not possible to be put in the rules. However, when we started to discuss it with them Cosworth sent us an email stating they were entitled to sign a contract and take money for this.

Apart from Cosworth we had two different opportunities but we were forced to stop because we were told Cosworth was the only one which was allowed for us.

Stefanovic said one of his potential engine suppliers is already supplying power units to at least one other active F1 team.

He does not believe the three teams that have been selected: Manor Motorsport (Britain), USF1 (United States) and Campos Meta 1 (Spain) were stronger candidates than his or some other entrants:

The three teams that have been chosen, all of them do not have the equipment or people and very definitely not one of them is a constructor itself which means that no one team has the facility to design and produce Formula 1 cars.

Our company is in the aerospace industry and we have looked at coming into Formula 1 two times. But both times we haven’t had enough ingredients to finish everything. This time the FIA put unnecessary obstacles, so practically anyone who is outside of England has insurmountable objects to overcome and we couldn’t commit to it.

If you take a close look at who is chosen it is practically people who are, one way or another, already connected with the FIA or FOM.

We practically have a team from Spain which has no facility to build anything and no facility to design a car. They are a good team, they have won other things, but they have someone else who will be doing things for them so they are not a constructor.

Another team, USF1, they also have nothing which is, at the moment, able to design and produce a car, they’re having to do things by outsourcing. And Manor again has nothing except, we presume, a design studio, which is good, but but no facilities to produce a car.

But a team with their own facilities, such as Prodrive or Stefan Grand Prix, who have something which is, on the production side, fully qualified, gets rejected. So we are very interested to see what’s going on.

Stefanovic runs AMCO, a Serbian aircraft manufacturer based in Belgrade. He believes they are well equipped to build F1 cars:

At our factory we are completely ready to assemble everything for Formula 1 from the gearbox to a complete car.

We have the capacity to design a car and people who are able to do that, and we have two windtunnels. We have a production history of nearly 100 years of producing aircraft in Belgrade.

Former McLaren chief designer Mike Coughlan is working for the company, but according to Stefanovic is not on their payroll. The restriction on him working in motor racing, which was imposed after his involvement in the McLaren-Ferrari espionage scandal two years ago, was lifted by the FIA in February. But it’s not hard to see why the governing body might take a dim view of him returning.

Asked whether he would try to enter F1 again if his appeal was successful and the FIA was forced to open the tendering process once more, Stefanovic said:

Yes, of course. That’s our intention.

I think it is important people realise Formula 1 is not just for British teams, it’s much wider than that.

When the three teams that were offered places on the 2010 grid were announced there was some surprise that some of the most credible-looking names were missing off the list – especially Prodrive (which was planning to bring the evocative Aston Martin brand back to F1 within a few years), along with Lola and Epsilon Euskadi.

The supply of low-cost engines from Cosworth was part of the FIA’s plan to reduce costs but several manufacturers have been quick to offer engine supplies too. They include Mercedes, who despite supplying three teams instead of one this year have had to reduce staff numbers at Brixworth where their F1 engines are prepared.

They are believed to be looking for another team to supply next year – potentially Red Bull, but rumours claimed they were Prodrive’s choice of engine partner for 2010.

The prospect of another EU investigation could be a worrying one for the FIA. The last such encounter dragged on for years and ended with the sports’ governing body having to make significant concessions, including giving up its claim to F1’s commercial rights.

Here’s AMCO’s statement about the FIA tender in full via the F1 Fanaic drop.io:

F1 2010 Season

76 comments on “Exclusive: Zoran Stefanovic explains his complaint to the EU about the FIA”

  1. More politics. It doesn’t end, does it?

  2. Just sour grapes from Mr. Stefanovic there. To claim that his entry was “better” than the other three that have been accepted is laughable – the other three teams have people with unsullied motorsport reputations heavily involved, whereas Zoran’s team is “associated” with the disgraced Coughlan.

    Furthermore, even if the EC does decide to investigate the supposed competition issues, it’s likely that specifying that any new entrants used Cosworth could be seen as pro-competitive, and not anti-competitive as is alleged.

    1. Sush Meerkat
      3rd August 2009, 11:41

      whereas Zoran’s team is “associated” with the disgraced Coughlan

      That’s exactly why the Stefan car could have been fast out of the box, its a Ferrari MClaren.

    2. Forcing the use of a single engine when other teams can use a choice of engines is anti-competitive by definition. It means the new teams have fewer options than the established ones and they are therefore being served an injustice. In fact, any of the three teams that were allowed in would have had the right to sue if they discovered the Cosworths were worse than their preferred engine supplier.

  3. Casino Square
    2nd August 2009, 20:07

    It seems more and more likely to me that it was true that all teams were told to use Cosworth engines. I don’t really understand EU law very well, but it sounds rather illegal to me. It’s exactly the sort of thing Max Mosley does all the time- makes the overall situation worse so long as it benefits him. Remember, the new teams were chosen right in the middle of the Mosley- FOTA war, just when he didn’t want 3 new teams alligned with any manufacturers.

    I dislike Max Mosley so much that I almost hope that the 3 new teams don’t make it, so that everyone will see what an eejit he was for not doing the honest thing and picking the 3 best candidates with whatever engines they wanted.

    1. You will probably get your wish as the teams that were chosen are using a rediesigned powerplant that wasnt competitive anyway.
      FIA should open the grid to any team who has the resourses and go back to friday prequalifing. That way they can weed out all that dont make the cut. Say by 125% of pole for the day.
      I would rather have 30 cars trying to qualify for 26 positions thatn what we have now.

      1. Would that not be an upgrading of the 2006 williams engine? Because if I recall that engine was very competitive, one of the best on the grid, but was let down by a dodgy williams hydraulic system

        1. The Cosworth engine broke down its share of times too.

          However, the engine in 2006 would have to be detuned to place itself in compliance with the current engine regulations, otherwise all established teams could sue the FIA.

  4. How interesting ! thanks Keith
    Hopefully we will have more news from Mr. Stefanovic.

    For sure I hope the E.U. investigates FIA some more, for whatever reason. The last I heard about the FIA was Ari Vatanen complaining about the misuse of funds from them .
    It seems that the 100 million fine from McLaren is being spent by Todt “Newman” and his girlfriend miss Mieuw in travelling around the world talking about road safety.
    From people like this I am sure Mr. Stefanovic has good reasons to complain.

  5. Now that I think about it, teams like Epsilon Euskadi have huge real bricks and mortar facilities, while for example USF1 ??? I have yet to see a single photo of anything of theirs. Just the amount of makeup that their promoters put on when they appear on TV gives me a bad feeling. Are they for real ?
    This team selection process sure seems obscure to me.

    1. Yes, the USF1 outfir is for real. Their shop is set up in the shop previously used by the Joe Gibbs NASCAR Sprint Cup operation. I’m sure you’ll be impressed by the facility when the offer it up for public tours, which I doubt you’ll see many other teams doing.

      1. Bartholomew
        3rd August 2009, 3:44

        OK, please send any link to pictures when available.
        cheers !

        1. Will do, except I won’t be able to get down to Charlotte anytime soon, so you may need to wait until next vacation season if you want something I took myself. Best wishes ;)

  6. HounslowBusGarage
    2nd August 2009, 20:33

    Very exciting and a damn good catch of an article, Keith!
    This is definitely EU lawyer territory as there could have been a hidden or secret condition attached to the bidding for a contract.
    There could be construed to be a practice amongst certain Europe-based organisations and of their Eexcutives making pre-conditions or exceptions to contracts that are not made obvious to the bulk of their membership or the EU community at large, and that’s got to be challenged.
    I’m chosing my words carefully.

  7. Does anybody know, why is there a selection process in the first place?
    If I remeber correctly, any team wanting to participate must either buy another team or pay 48 million dollars.

    So why not just let everybody who can pay it, try.

    And if you bring back the 107% rule, or someting similar…

    Fastest 26 cars are on the grid. Out of 15? 17? 28? teams.

    1. The requirement for a deposit was dropped. Also, I think the new teams were even promised extra money from the TV money.

      That’s why all of a sudden so many new teams wanted to enter. Anyone with half a chance wanted the “free admission” to F1.

    2. Because the selection process reduces the number of applicants to a manageable number (Monaco can only physically take 26 cars). The current entry fee is €309,000 per year, with no bond in place (unless the new Concorde Agreement indicates otherwise).

      It is now too expensive to run a team for the 107% rule to be practical, and besides the competition is so hot it would have to be 103% or something for any meaningful reduction in numbers to occur.

  8. I think that this is nonsense. If Zoran wants a team then let him have team. The more teams we have the better, right?
    But this whole thing about only being allowed to use Cosworth engines is not the first time I have heard this. I think its stupid. Let them use whatever engine they want. Heck, they could build their own from scratch for all I care.
    Besides, if we have more teams that join that have experience in aerospace, then maybe they will show everyone else how to design a car that pass another one.
    Stefanovic, Saab, Bombardier, and heck, let NASA have a team. But let them have whatever engine they want.
    ITS CALLED MOTOR SPORTS for a reason. Its about different engines racing against different engines. I think it would be great for the sport for each of the best teams to be using Ferrari, Lambo, Aston, Mercedes, BMW, and Nissan engines.
    Screw Max, he doesn’t care what the fans want, he just wants more money.

    1. Very well, Brian, an aerospace supplier would sound really exciting for F1 !
      We need fun news. Cheers

        1. In a word sarcasm. Here’s another one. Stefanovic being in the aerospace industry, maybe he can build a flying F1 car. I can see it now, Schumacher makes a come back in the Ferrari F-22 Raptor using its stealth technology to thrash the competition, but the FIA will probably ban that too. :)

  9. It would be a shame if FIA are backhandedly turning down an opportunity to keep BMW in F1 as an engine supplier. Of course, their name has not been mentioned in the article so BMW don’t have to worry about their anonymity being compromised by simple mathematics. (If you can name any other engine that is only used on one team presently, go ahead.)

    1. Actually, as the article says, it’s an engine used by “at least one other active F1 team”. He wasn’t able to say which, but my money would be on Mercedes.

  10. Andrew White
    2nd August 2009, 21:42

    It’s interesting that we had never heard about this entry before. It makes me wonder how many more entries were rejected in favour of Manor, Campos and USF1.

    1. From memory, leaving out the 3 chosen:

      N. Technology
      Epsilon Euskadi
      Prodrive(Aston Martin
      Team Lotus(Litespeed)
      Stefan GP
      MSC Organization

      Someone with a better memory, or a list, can correct any wrong entries for me.

      1. Prisoner Monkeys
        4th August 2009, 0:28

        No, that’s pretty much it, except Calrin never filed an application and MSC is the parent company of N.Technology. Ray Mallock Ltd. was intending to apply, but decided not to because the future of the sport was in doubt (but they didn’t rule out a future comeback).

        As for the entries rejected in favour of the three teams, the fifteen entries were narrowed down to a shortlist of five, and the three were taken from that.

  11. Is there really literally a quote that states that a Cosworth engine is a requirement?

    The way I read it, Cosworth informed them that they need to have a signed agreement for an engine supplier and that Cosworth would be happy to fulfill that requirement.

    I have seen other teams about having trouble getting a signed engine contract too. Maybe Mercedes and Renault were all unwilling to sign engine deals while they were themselves thinking about stepping out of F1.

    So what I think it all comes down to is that probably Cosworth simply was the only engine supplier who was willing to sign contracts other than that they really were an entry requirement.

    1. Pitpass quoted an unnamed team member from an unnamed team as having been told by Tony Purnell on the eve of the deadline that Cosworth entries were the only ones the FIA would consider.

  12. carol treurnicht
    2nd August 2009, 21:47

    great interview but when he used the words “at least” to me that includes all people supplying their own teams and one other- then the list includes Ferrari, Toyota, Renault and Mercedes. In fact the only team that supplies no-one other than themselves is BMW right?

    1. To try to answer your question as straightly as possible, he didn’t want to tell me which manufacturer he had spoken to, but he confirmed it was one of those active in F1 at present. He didn’t exclude any. Hope that clears it up!

  13. My name is Stefan so im hoping there will be a ‘Stefan Grand Prix’ team :D

    1. I don’t know, Zoran sounds a little better. It sorta has a super villian flare to it.

      1. There was a Bond villain called Zorin – Christopher Walken I think.

        1. I LOVE THIS CONVERSATION! F1 and James Bond, could there be anything better?

  14. Prisoner Monkeys
    3rd August 2009, 0:45

    I agree on the sour grapes count. I fail to see how he can expect to win here considering that the three teams that were chosen were either established racing teams and had serious motorsport connections, or in the case of USF1 had been in development for years. This Stefanovic guy builds airplanes.

    More to the point, I fail to see what the EC can do about this (and N.Technology’s claims). The twelve teams signed a Concorde Agreement with CVC, the idea being that whatever FOTA and CVC did in 2010 would be Formula One with or without the FIA. They’re legally bound to compete, and they signed on with a different entity to the one that conducted the selection process.

    Worse, Stefanovic’s throwing of his toys out of the proverbial pram could jeopardise a LOT. If the FIA was to re-do the selection process, they’d have to open up the procedure again from square one. Given that no backer in their right mind is going to commit to a Formula One project in the vague hope that a grid position might open up, prospective teams would have to find new sources of funding. That will take time, which no-one has; Campos and USF1 have been developing their cars since February and won’t expect to be ready until late this year or early 2010. So any new new teams would have half the time to build a car. Even with support from the FOM and FOTA, they’re going to struggle. Future new teams will see that and lose interest in the sport because it will be proof that success is simply too difficult. The sport will suffer, and all because someone is crying over spilt milk.

    Ironically, this Stefanovic character should know the dangers of a rushed car better than anyone: it was he who tried to purchase the remains of Lola’s 1997 team.

    There was a Bond villain called Zorin – Christopher Walken I think.

    Uh-huh. He was in A VIEW TO A KILL, and pretty much single-handedly formed the stereotype that all Bond villains are insane, sadistic evil geniuses. The role was supposed to go to David Bowie, but he wasn’t interested; he didn’t want to spend eight months watching his stunt double. Walken was a far better choice, anyway.

    1. Great info- I’m pretty much in agreement with everything you said.

    2. The trouble is that if Stefanovic doesn’t do this, it means the FIA can do as it pleases without being answerable to anybody – including the law. That would ultimately have sealed F1’s doom in a court.

      If Max Mosley doesn’t stop trying to save F1, he’s going to kill it.

  15. If its re-evaluated and Prodrive gets in it will be worth it. Considering they were given a place a couple of years ago it seems ridiculous they did not get one this round.

    1. Just a thought, but did you ever consider that perhaps because they pulled out after getting that spot a few years back, that they did not get a place on the grid this time? Perhaps the FIA was thinking…if they coulden’t do it last time when borrowing some else’s old cars, who’s to say that they could build their own cars this time?

      1. The point is that everyone would rather see them because they would be using an Aston Martin engine instead of a Cosworth.

    2. Prisoner Monkeys
      3rd August 2009, 3:13

      Considering they were given a place a couple of years ago it seems ridiculous they did not get one this round.

      Yeah, but they never made the grid, and you can bet that played a factor in the decision not to include them. I don’t recall the circumstances under which they were granted an entry in 2007, but I do recall that Richards banked a lot on having a customer chassis. When that fell through, the project was dead in the water because Prodrive couldn’t build one of their own. I noticed Stefanovic makes no mention of this; instead, he accuses the FIA of trying to stop manufacturers from entering. The same way as he ignores the fact that Mike Coughlan is associated with him; his ban from working in motorsport may have expired, but there’s still a stigma associated with him.

      1. Since it was the FIA that promised customer chassis to Prodrive before checking that it could deliver on the promise, Stefanovic was quite possibly being polite and sticking to the main point. Bear in mind that even if there was every other reason under the sun to reject Stefan Grand Prix, a rejection based on engine supplier would still be illegal under EU competition law.

  16. I honestly can’t believe how many of you are putting your faith behind this Zoran charecter….

    First, who is Zoran to say who should and should not get an entry? If he wants to run the selection process, let him run for FIA President. We all have our opinions, but perhaps he should have followed the lead of Joan Villadelprat, who expressed his disappointment in a far more classy and polite fashion following the announcements.

    Actually, before getting to the political side, I should note that the guy isn’t even smart enough to realize his own mistakes when speaking. First, he claims that the FIA selection process is biased towards any teams based outside of Great Britain. Then, he attacks the three new entries…while noting that two of them are from countries other than the UK, and even naming the nation where each of them is based! You would think an aerospace engineer would have more on the ball than that….

    Now, as for his attacks on USF1….you’re darn right they are outsourcing many of their operations, and who is Zoran to say how they should design and build their car? The outsourcing is going to provide jobs and work for many companies in and around Charlotte and beyond, and is going to save the team a ton of money. Their headquarters is set up in the former shop of the Joe Gibbs NASCAR Operation, by the way. It’s the same with Campos and Dallara…who is he to say that his method is better, or that his company is any better suited to designing and producing an F1 machine?

    Third, USF1 has mentioned several times that the aerospace industry is serving both as a role model and a source of cooperation for their operation. So for those of you who are aerospace enthusiasts, you’ll like some of the ways USF1 will do business. Perhaps Zoran diden’t realize this, or maybe he’s jealous that his company isn’t building products like the F-22 and 787.

    Lastly, as a McLaren fan, any operation that employs Mike Coughlan should know what they are getting into. One of the earlier posters said it best- the three new teams all are run by motorsport professionals who have spent years winning in various categories of motorsport, yet Zoran knows how to do it better, right?

    This is a great interview, but Zoran has quite an ego and a mouth to go with it. I really hope his team gets onto the grid at some point, so I can see their expertly-designed and produced cars getting lapped by the rest of the field.

    1. Prisoner Monkeys
      4th August 2009, 0:42

      I honestly can’t believe how many of you are putting your faith behind this Zoran charecter…

      He’s a means to an end. Even though Mosley will be gone and we can all sing ding-dong, the witch is dead, a lot of people still want to see the FIA burn. They don’t really believe in Zoran’s claims so much as they do in his endgame.

      But really, if I were a FOTA team and I saw Stefan Grand Prix or N.Technology trying to muscle their way onto the grid at the expense of another team, you know what I’d do? I’d be very inclined to teach them a lesson. I might be obligated to provide assistance, but I’d do the bare minimum and I’d do it in the most half-arsed way imaginable.

      1. The point is that, as the team with the least to lose (though Zoran will never admit it), Stefan Grand Prix is the best-placed to mount an attack upon what is clearly wrong with the FIA. Zoran can’t possibly become FIA President because the systems in place make it virtually impossible for the incumbent to be assailed, but he can teach the FIA a lesson it won’t forget in a hurry. It’s simply good that someone is willing to stand up against the “big bully”.

        I’d go so far as to say Stefan Grand Prix is probably going to do F1 more good doing this than it would have done had it succeeded in having a F1 team in 2010.

  17. I don’t think that too many people will disagree with you on anything that you said. I won’t disagree, but Zoran did have one good point that I think is the main problem.
    He seems to believe that the FIA is making it impossible for any new team to use and engine supplier other than Cosworth. And if that is the case then something has to be done about it.
    Did Zoran go about bringing up the subject the wrong way? Yes, he did. He could have picked his words much more carfully.
    Am I glad to see the United States get a team, yes. But I would also have loved it if they could have been able to use a completely North American made Engine.
    F1 will never be perfect. But it could possibly get pretty close, and that means that every once in a while we will have to put up with arrogant b@$!@rds like Zoran. He has a right to be angry. I don’t agree with his methods, but each team should have the right to pick any engine they want, even if its junk aka Cosworth.

    1. I agree with you and you are correct about th engine deal…I just don’t think it should be held against any of the new teams if they chose to use Cosworth out of their best interests. For sure, no one should be forced to use a certain engine, but if the teams wanted to go with an independent supplier, good for them.

      Indeed, he’s got every right to be upset, and good for him if he wants to channel that via the court system. It’s just never a good deal to knock other operations that he has no experieince with.

  18. Florida Mike
    3rd August 2009, 3:51

    I don’t understand the financial aspects of the engine-supply contracts, but I would imagine that a manufacturer making engines for their own use could reduce their unit-cost by suppliying a second or third team. Is it possible that BMW’s decision to leave was influenced by the selection process taking away an opportunity for them to supply an additional team?

  19. Zoran has quite an ego and a mouth to go with it.

    Well then he is perfect then isn’t he?

    I guess I’m the only one who enjoys seeing cars on the track and not being paraded up-down the pitlane and in-out of the garages. All 17-races per year should be OPEN to all competitors that qualify; 26 cars worked before and can work again.

    Viva la pre-qualifying!

  20. Why am i suddenly humming duran duran’s “a view to a kill”?
    do you think this Zoran is a gunrunning people trafficker trying to use F1 to launder his cash ?or have i gone to far?

    1. Why am i suddenly humming duran duran’s “a view to a kill”?
      do you think this Zoran is a gunrunning people trafficker trying to use F1 to launder his cash ?or have i gone to far?

      Yes, you have gone way too far. Accusing someone of being an international criminal because of an inability to distinguish between real life and the movies shows a serious lack of maturity.

      Dave Richards is now saying the same thing “Exactly what I was told I needed is a Cosworth engine”. What’s his problem now?

      I don’t live in Europe, but is it normal that people think nothing of criminal behaviour there? they are your laws after all.

      1. Are you nine?

  21. reading this article reminded me of one i’d read about a month ago, no disrespect to you keith as your article is great! The link below shows Moseley’s meddling and what Cosworth actually say.


  22. not sure what i did wrong but click “Enjoy!” for link.

  23. What exactly is the problem with requiring (officially or unofficially) all new teams to use the Cosworth? Have we all forgotten that at the time of the team selection process, the manufacturers were actively threatening to pull out and start their own series? Was the FIA supposed to overlook that?

    Had they chosen teams with ties to the existing manufacturers, there was a real risk that those new teams would have either been left sitting around holding their dicks, or been poached off to the breakaway series. Requiring new entrants to use an independent engine that is free and clear of encumbrances that would threaten the teams’ viability is completely legitimate.

    I suspect this guy is fishing for some free money. He’s employing the likes of Coughlan to design his car, yet he has the temerity to question the credentials of the teams who got in.

    He can’t hire a fluent English speaker to proofread his press releases. Guess what Zohan, at this level, spelling and grammar counts. If your entry was prepared as sloppily as your press release, it’s fair to assume your attention to detail is not high enough to qualify you to enter F1.

    His statement that the chosen teams are all somehow linked to the FIA is libelous in the case of Campos and USF1. And his statement that only English teams were considered is prima facie evidence that he’s an idiot.

    1. On the press release, I was thinking EXACTLY the same thing…I just read the release after I posted my original comment. Good job ;)

    2. The problem is quite simple – competition law requires that all companies are allowed to participate equally, unless modifications to the law are of benefit to the organisations on whom modification is imposed. Forcing new teams to use one supplier while still granting established teams a choice breaches that principle.

      It’s also worth noting that the FIA is forbidden by the EU to interfere in commercial affairs, due to a legal settlement dating from 2000. Telling some teams which company to use for their engine supply and not others would not appear to be compatible with such a settlement.

      The status of the other suppliers is almost completely irrelevant, especially if it turns out that one of the rejected teams was considering another source of engines (e.g. Mechachrome). If they are sufficiently committed to supplying an engine to sign a contract with a new team, then legally that contract has to be considered valid. Otherwise the FIA would be breaking a valid contract without due cause or authority.

      At least I’ve heard of the person who’s designing Stefan GP’s car, and Mike Coughlan is probably better at it than Nick Wirth, who’s doing the honours at Manor. Who’s designing the Campos entry?

      Manor is definitely linked to the FIA through Alan Donnelly and Nick Wirth (both of whom have worked with the FIA and its partner organisations). USF1 features the man who, until recently, was the FIA’s official press conference interviewer. Campos’ connections with the FIA are currently unknown. It is possible that Stefanovic may have a point with regard to the teams being selected all having FIA links.

      Though I will admit that the “only English teams considered” theory is laughable.

  24. You know I would actually find it really ironic if the FiA did have to run the selection process again and Zoran’s team still didn’t get selected!!

    1. Especially in the likely case that it happened after the 2010 season started!

  25. it rearly makes me wonder why other teams would want an engine supplied by onother competitor,how do they know they are getting one of the most powerfull units, surely these go to their own teams?
    as for cosworth thier engines have been in f1 for decades and were only forced out by manufacturers offering cheap if not free units.
    f1 should not dominated by manufacturers but should be open to independants with the will to win.
    i myself will be happy to see cosworth back on the grid again.

  26. What exactly is the problem with requiring (officially or unofficially) all new teams to use the Cosworth?

    It’s against European law, but don’t let the law get in the way of your thinking.

    1. Which law specifically? The law in this case isn’t is as straightforward as people seem to think, especially when you have two groups that have an antagonistic relationship. The manufacturers (via FOTA) were actively setting themselves up to be competitors to the FIA and completely torpedo the FIA’s main source of income. Not even in Europe does the law obligate you to grant favors to your competitors.

      If you own a store selling widgets from Company A, and Company A announces that they are going to open a rival store next to yours, you are completely within your rights to stop selling their stuff.

      If this ever gets as far as a hearing (which is doubtful), the FIA will argue that the breakaway threat obligated them to act in the series’ best interest by favoring non-manufacturer backed entries. And they will win that argument.

      If they pulled the same trick next year, when there is no threat of a breakaway, and a Concorde agreement contractually binding all parties, then, yeah, you could fairly argue they are stifling competition. Anyone trying to argue that today is doing it either because they don’t like the FIA (fair enough, they suck) or because their crappy F1 entry was rejected.

      1. There are two laws involved in this case, possibly three.

        Competitions law requires that all companies are treated equally.

        If the FIA wanted to ensure that Cosworth was the only supplier, it could have demanded a spec series and been completely within its rights. It didn’t.

        It could have demanded that only engines supplied by companies that hadn’t breached Article 151c of the Sporting Regulations provide engines and then found the manufacturers plotting secession guilty of a breach of said Article. It didn’t.

        The way the FIA dealt with the matter enabled established teams to use any engine they wanted provided a valid contract was in place. As a result, new teams should legally have had the same freedom of choice. If this didn’t happen, then the new teams have had a material disadvantage for a variety of reasons and competitions law has therefore been broken.

        Secondly, the FIA is forbidden from being involved in commercial affairs due to a settlement with the EU in 2000. If it has been involved in rejecting entries based on supplier, that is technically a commercial decision and the FIA would have been in contempt of court.

        Finally, the FIA would not have had the authority to break a contract between engine supplier and team anyway due to contract law (the FIA being a third party, and third parties being forbidden from enforcing breaches of contract). Refusing a team entry on the basis of engine supplier would have been tantamount to third-party breach of contract. This would have permitted the engine supplier and team to prosecute the FIA on the basis of contract frustration.

        Oh, and by the way, the Concorde Agreement technically held until replaced, so the FIA was still bound by it even though its actions suggest it didn’t want to be.

        If the FIA tries arguing the breakaway is justification for the above, it will lose the battle, largely because it will have missed the point of the case being brought in the first place.

  27. Anti-trust laws. The EC has already come down on the FIA for this. IF the EC investigates this complaint it will not be a good day for Max.

    This has 0 to do with FOTA and everything to do with the FIA, StefanGP, and it seems Prodrive. But far be it from me to stop your pointless rant.

    1. Prisoner Monkeys
      4th August 2009, 7:44

      I think Stefanovic is just bringing Dave Ricahrds into it to make his point about the new teams not being constructors; he’s very conveniently left out his assocaition with Mike Coughlan (the man’s ban may have expired, but there’s still a stigma about him) and Prodrive’s inability to make the 2008 grid.

      One could make the argument that without an external engine supplier, the four major suppliers will corner the market. In the future, new teams would have no choice BUT to run with Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault or Toyota. Cosworth represents an external supplier, a moderator who prevents the manufacturers from having too much sway over new teams.

      For example, if I’m a new team – let’s call it Monkeys – and nominate to run with a Renault engine (thus making it Renault-Monkeys; Nelson Piquet and Sebastien Bourdais would be my drivers purely to fit the name), then odds are that the support from FOTA will mostly come from Renault. I already have a relationship with them, so it makes sense. I run a Renault engine, I get Renault advice. What’s to stop Renault proper from taking advantage of that? I start running GP2 drivers that Renault recommend, but once they come good, Renault take them out from under me. I essentially become a Renault B-team, unable to compete on equal terms because of the restrictions I’ve unwillingly taken on.

      And ironically enough, because I’m now the B-team, there’s effectively a two-tier system at work. There’s the manufacturers, and there’s the newcomers who can’t compete with them because we’re the lackeys of the parent teams, and it doesn’t cost them a dime because we are our own teams (unlike Red Bull and Toro Rosso).

      That sounds like a bigger violation to me than anti-trust laws.

      1. That’s still a choice of four engine suppliers for new teams, compared to the one engine supplier the FIA is alleged to have permitted.

  28. “Anti-trust laws.”

    OK, let me be more clear: which anti-trust law specifically. Everybody is so sure this is illegal, but nobody can quote a specific statute.

    But far be from me to stop your pointless rant. (Which amounts to, “It’s ILLEGULZ!!!1!”)

    1. Zoran is quoting Articles 81 & 82 of the European treaty that deal with anti-competiton and cartel laws. They’re not hard to find.
      I still don’t think he has a leg to stand on..
      1) The treaty also states thou shalt not “(b) limit or control production, markets, technical development, or investment”. Which is pretty much what the budget cap was about to do, yet we didn’t see FOTA run to the european parliment. If it was a viable clause they would have, and we’d have known about it.
      2) There has to be an element of self interest by the FIA and not allowing all the new teams to become manufacturer dependants as (Renualt-Monkeys would be :) ) they are obviously limiting the manufacturers stranglehold. If this self interest is legal or not I wouldn’t know, but I’m sure Max Mosely does. Even if it’s a grey area, the FIA would have been prepared to defend it or they wouldn’t have stipulated the requirement to go with Cosworth so openly.

      1. I wish I’d read the whole of that treaty before making the post above..

        Paragraph 3 states pretty much, that you can ignore all the above as long as the consumer is not effected.. The consumer in this case being the F1 viewer and the “product” being the F1 series. Here I think the FIA’s self interest (or interests on behalf of “the product”) are fully justifiable.

        1. How is forcing a team to use one supplier (whose engines blew up pretty frequently when last seen in F1) rather than a wide variety of suppliers beneficial to the F1 viewer, or indeed anyone other than Max Mosley and his chosen engine supplier (I’ve left it that vague because in principle the FIA’s preferred supplier is subject to change)?

          1. i think you need to look at the stats of how many engines blew up for this manufacturer,i think you will find against all other engine manufacturers of that season their failure rate was pretty much one of the lowest and car failure was the main cause(hydraulics etc),without this you get a so called engine failure which is not related to the engine manufacture itself.
            The engine was one of the most powerful and lightest powerplants available and if it was still used from 2006 would be up there with the best available today.

          2. I analysed it at the time and only Ferrari’s was worse (even that was largely down to Midland and Red Bull also using the same engine). Cosworth had five blow-ups that season against Ferrari’s six and everyone else’s three or fewer.

  29. well, i think he has right to fight for what he believe in… i don’t think that all of you guy’s know how serious this company is… you would be suprised

  30. This story should have come as no surprise to anyone that follows F1. There is a history of the governing body having favorites and doing anything to try and ensure those favored teams success. Stories such as this one will be the downfall of F1. I have no doubt that the major reason for rejection of this team was because they refused to use the Cosworth engines. Does anyone think it is a coincidence that the three teams accepted for next year will be using those engines? In my opinion this is a non-story. This should have been a brief sentence or two and a link to the full statement. What will be worthy of a story is the outcome of these hearings.

  31. Hello Stefan: WELL DONE!!!

    Fred Filho

Leave a Reply

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

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.