FOTA issues and discussion.

[sbrfan49]

It seems evrything is turning into a political infight between FOTA and the FIA/FOM.  I guess it is no bad thing in as much as it might stop some of the nonsense and badly thought out decisions of late (sort of runs at least at one a year almost.... im thinking V8's One set tyres per race and KERS being the worst. 

4 cars out of 20 running KERS this weekend - EB, I think "badly thought out" is very diplomatic of you.

It's a farce and it needs to stop. KERS should be banned from use next season.

Cry some more Webber-fan

Can I point out that Webber's ahead of Lewis in the WDC? 

[Everso Biggyballies]

I think the benefits of KERS are pretty marginal anyway now..... Newey when interviewed indicated they might not bother at all this year, and implied they would be better off getting other improvements more beneficial.  Clearly the advances in aero are seen as a better avenue of advancement.  Ita interesting to see that McLaren (and others ) have never got near the times they set pre season when they tried without KERS.  I guess it depends on how teams deploy its benefits, ie on the straights or punching out of corners, and I guess that is down to individual KERS setups.

Personally I think it has been a waste of money, and clearly the non KERS teams have the edge at the moment.

[bpratt]

It seems evrything is turning into a political infight between FOTA and the FIA/FOM.  I guess it is no bad thing in as much as it might stop some of the nonsense and badly thought out decisions of late (sort of runs at least at one a year almost.... im thinking V8's One set tyres per race and KERS being the worst. 

4 cars out of 20 running KERS this weekend - EB, I think "badly thought out" is very diplomatic of you.

It's a farce and it needs to stop. KERS should be banned from use next season.

If KERS had've been done properly, instead of this halfbaked crap we've got, it could've been really good.

I can understand that they didn't want any one team getting a huge advantage in the first year, but to bring in a standard KERS package, wasting all of this years development, has really stuffed up the idea of KERS as I see it.

[73coupe]

with the slow up take of the kers, how long until you think bernie writes up the rules to get all cars without kers to add the extra weight, as some incentive to get on board. 

[Eno the Wonderdog]

73 coupe The minimum weight of the cars have quietly already been raised for next year by the FIA by 15 or 25 kilos (I forget which)

Might have been in Autosport.com - or Grand prix.com - or Pitpass.com - or on the BBC.

Given that they're doing it on the quiet you can bet it's not on the official website! 

[Mothers Worry]

Howett: Teams seek proper governance

From autosport.com:

Howett: Teams seek proper governance

Wednesday, May 13th 2009, 14:35 GMT

Toyota team president John Howett says teams just want to establish a correct basis of governance for Formula 1, but insists their intention is to remain in the sport.

Toyota, Ferrari, Red Bull and now Renault have threatened to leave Formula 1 if the FIA pushes ahead with its plans to introduce budget cap regulations.

The teams are unhappy that there could be two sets of rules, and they have also expressed their disappointment at how the FIA introduced the regulations without the approval of the teams.

Howett said the way Ferrari expressed its concerns yesterday was a good reflection of what the other teams felt about the current situation.

He insisted the teams' main priority is to find a proper way to introduce new regulations.

"I feel that Ferrari's statement eloquently summarises the current struggle the Formula 1 teams are facing," said Howett.

"If you consider the single thread running through all team's similar statements it is a wish to establish a correct and proper basis of governance for the sport.

"There is clearly a genuine wish for all to continue to compete in Formula 1 but only if future stability is assured.

"To secure this, the priority for the future is a process of governance which ensures all competitors compete under the same rules, that the regulations are stable and which establishes a platform from which costs can be sensibly and actively reduced without destroying the core DNA of the sport."

As others have said, negotiation could sort out this mess so we don't end up with Formula None.

But it appears obvious that the FIA undertaking proper consultation with FOTA could have avoided a lot of the pain.

[Timbit]

It's always been my understanding that the FIA released the rules knowing all too well that the teams would then react in post-haste. Even if the FIA negotiated before releasing any set of rules, they would still be driving home the idea of budgets and it would still likely get support from the teams in he end anyway. I feel that if the FIA had started negotiations before releasing the rules for next year the situation would hardly be heard of until September.

To my knowledge, no one in the FIA has come out and stated the rules as a take-it-or-leave-it thing, and they are obviously up for negotiations between them and FOTA, so I actually think the FIA playing the first hand and setting the base was a good move. Got the teams reacting (and how!), and the proper negotiations started.

The teams will cry foul over anything, and understandably so! In a business such as an F1 team, you want stability, not for the rules to change every year. In such unstable times, I'm guessing teams are almost planning into the unknown. And knowing that the design of a car can start sometimes 15 months prior to the first turn of a wheel, sudden rule changes are more than enough for a team to cry foul on. So they will always try and resist change, naturally.

But in this situation, the FIA are sure to get there way in introducing budget caps. By puttin out a 40 million pound per year figure on the table now, they will wait for what FOTA say. The fact that teams are threatening to pull out is almost irrelevant, because you know the figure will increase until both parties are happy.

[Supersleeper]

....and Renault join in.

Renault issue team statement
Flavio Briatore (ITA) Renault F1 Managing Director. Formula One World Championship, Rd 5, Spanish Grand Prix, Practice Day, Barcelona, Spain, Friday, 8 May 2009 Fernando Alonso (ESP) Renault R29., Formula One World Championship, Rd 5, Spanish Grand Prix, Race, Barcelona, Spain, Sunday, 10 May 2009

The Renault Formula One team and parent company Renault issued the following statement on Wednesday:

The decision of the Federation International de l’Automobile (FIA) to introduce two sets of Formula One technical regulations for the 2010 Formula One season has caused the Renault Group to reconsider its entry in next year’s FIA Formula One World Championship.

There is frustration that FOTA’s constructive proposals, including major cost saving measures to be adopted progressively between 2009 and 2012, which were carefully constructed by FOTA members, have been completely ignored without any form of consultation by the FIA with the teams.

It should be stressed that FOTA has set the same, if not lower, financial objective as the FIA, but Renault strongly believes that this must be introduced through a different procedure agreed by all parties.

Renault also believes that it is paramount that the governance of the sport is coordinated with a spirit of consultation with all parties (FIA, FOM, FOTA) in order to achieve a better balance between the costs and the revenues. Renault is also of the firm view that all entrants in the World Championship must adhere to and operate under the same regulations.

President of the ING Renault F1 Team, Bernard Rey, commented: “Renault has always considered Formula One as the pinnacle of motor sport and the perfect stage to demonstrate technical excellence. We remain committed to the sport, however we cannot be involved in a championship operating with different sets of rules, and if such rules are put into effect, we will be forced to pull out at the end of this season.”

ING Renault F1 Team Managing Director, Flavio Briatore, commented: “Our aim is to reduce costs while maintaining the high standards that make Formula One one of the most prestigious brands on the market. We want to achieve this in a coordinated manner with the regulatory and commercial bodies, and we refuse to accept unilateral governance handed out by the FIA. If the decisions announced by the World Council on the 29th of April 2009 are not revised, we have no choice but to withdraw from the FIA Formula One World Championship at the end of 2009.”

Pretty good coordination of press releases.....

[Mothers Worry]

....and Renault join in.

Pretty good coordination of press releases.....

[Bumble1290]

It appears that Merc are far to scared of upsetting Uncle Max and have decided not to break ranks with the other team and jump ship.

Could there be pocket lining going on here, sort of keep your firends close and your ememies closer.

http://www.planet-f1.com/story/0,18954,3213_5322700,00.html

Mercedes break rank with F1's manufacturers
Thursday 14th May 2009
 
Mercedes Motorsport boss Norbert Haug is refusing to jump on the bandwagon of his Formula One rivals currently on a collision course with FIA President Max Mosley.


Renault yesterday joined Ferrari in threatening to withdraw from Formula One unless fundamental changes are made to the recently-announced regulations for next year.


Team boss Flavio Briatore and president Bernard Rey both denounced the FIA over their plans to introduce a £40million budget cap that would in turn result in a two-tier F1.


Briatore, in particular, also roundly condemned motor sport's world governing body over their lack of governance and failure to consult the teams on a subject of such far-reaching magnitude.


Yet whilst Ferrari, Toyota, Renault, Red Bull Racing and Toro Rosso - the latter two teams through owner Dietrich Mateschitz - have all voiced their opposition, Mercedes have so far remained silent.


The view is Mercedes do not want to be heard speaking against the FIA after the organisation took a lenient view on McLaren over the Liargate saga last month.


Haug maintains talk of following Ferrari and Renault's lead and threatening to withdraw "is not a topic at Mercedes."


Haug, though, can appreciate the stance being adopted by Ferrari, and is keen to see a resolution on the matter.


"I know that from conversation with (Ferrari president) Luca di Montezemolo and (team principal) Stefano Domenicali that Ferrari has thought about this threat very well," said Haug.


"After 60 years in Formula One they would not do so without some serious thinking.


"We will try to help to find a solution. All the teams are agreed that there cannot be two regulations in one series."


The FIA see their system as simple: you either choose not to accept the cap and race under the current regulations, or abide by the cap and enjoy a degree of technical freedom.


However, those cars would have a considerable performance advantage via greater engine and KERS power, as well as aerodynamic aids.


Given the choice, it leaves the FIA at a loss to understand why the teams do not all sign up for the cap, thereby running under the one set of rules.


But it is Mosley's governance of the sport that has enraged so many, and the fact he unilaterally acted without consulting the teams, who also fear the way the cap would be policed.


As Briatore remarked: "Our aim is to reduce costs while maintaining the high standards that make Formula One one of the most prestigious brands on the market.


"We want to achieve this in a co-ordinated manner with the regulatory and commercial bodies, and we refuse to accept unilateral governance handed out by the FIA.


"If the decisions announced by the World Council on the 29th of April are not revised, we have no choice but to withdraw from the FIA Formula One World Championship at the end of 2009."


Mosley and the teams are due to meet in London tomorrow when it is hoped a resolution can be found to safeguard the sport.

[Eno the Wonderdog]

That's funny - surely jumping ship is Ferrari's job! 

[Mothers Worry]

It appears that Merc are far to scared of upsetting Uncle Max and have decided not to break ranks with the other team and jump ship.

If there current form is an indication of a downward spiral in the team the only way McLaren may be assured of winning another title is by staying put with a bunch of second tier teams.

It won't make any difference, it will then be a second tier sport anyway..........

[Mothers Worry]

Ecclestone joins FIA/FOTA meeting

From autosport.com:

Ecclestone joins FIA/FOTA meeting

Thursday, May 14th 2009, 09:46 GMT

Formula 1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone is to join a meeting between FIA president Max Mosley and teams in London tomorrow to discuss the row about a two-tier category next year.

After a week in which Ferrari, Toyota, Renault and the two Red Bull-owned teams have all confirmed that they will not lodge entries to the 2010 championship if the rules are not changed, tomorrow's talks look set to be crucial for the future of the sport.

Teams are unhappy that the imposition of a voluntary £40 million budget cap could lead to a two-tier F1 in 2010, and they are also aggrieved at what they believe has been a lack of consultation at the imposition of new regulations.

With the entry deadline for the 2010 championship closing at the end of this month, the FIA, Ecclestone and the teams only have two weeks to come to a compromise.

But despite the swell of opposition to the new rules among teams, Ecclestone believes that the main issue is sorting out Ferrari's position - as they are the most important team in F1.

"The key to F1 is Ferrari," Ecclestone was quoted as saying in the British press on Thursday. "They have been there for 60 years. They are partners of ours.

"They are the people we need to take into consideration. At the moment everyone is hanging on to their apron strings. Sort that out and we will be OK."

Of the other manufacturers in F1, only BMW and Mercedes-Benz have not yet joined those outfits stating that they will quit the 2010 championship if the rules are not changed.

BMW motorsport director Mario Theissen said in Spain last week that his team's stance would be made clear after this week's meeting, while Mercedes-Benz motorsport boss Norbert Haug has said his company is not looking for an exit.

He was quoted in the German press as saying that threatening to withdraw from F1 was 'not a topic at Mercedes'.

He added: "I know that from conversation with (Ferrari president) Luca di Montezemolo and (team principal) Stefano Domenicali that Ferrari has thought about this threat very well..

"After 60 years in Formula 1 they would not do so without some serious thinking. We will try to help to find a solution. All the teams are agreed that there cannot be two regulations in one series."

Ferrari has made it clear that its threat to withdraw from F1 is not just sabre-rattling, and that it is serious about switching to other racing categories.

Enzo Ferrari's son Piero Ferrari told The Guardian: "I strongly believe that if you look at the past of Ferrari, today's image is born from victories in the 24 Hours of Le Mans and sports and GT racing.

"We cannot forget our beginnings, and the passion of my father is still in the company. But we want racing with clear rules and starting from the same point."

When asked about his father's threat to quit F1 in 1986 and switch to an assault on the Indianapolis 500, Ferrari added: "He wasn't bluffing. He was serious. And so are we."

[Everso Biggyballies]

FIA's crunch meeting with FOTA teams - No agreement reached on Friday



The meeting has been and gone and it seems with no agreement reached..... the teams have gone away to consider their options after the governing body refused to compromise over plans for a two-tier category.

Max Mosley said there had been 'friendly' discussions with teams but that the FIA was not willing to back down over its plans for a £40 million cap.....

De Montezemola was not there for the meeting in the end, with Howitt taking his place as vice chairman of FOTA, following the death of Luca's Father caused him to pullout.

One thing that did emerge during the meeting is that Ferrari has lodged legal action in the French courts to block the 2010 rules - claiming their introduction was a breach of a technical veto they had..... Im sure we haven'r heard the last of this and I still expect it to be a compromise ..

[Mothers Worry]

I don't know how "friendly" the discussions could really be about the death of (possibly) the world's greatest motorsport. Obviously if things have been started in a court they can't be that friendly.

My sincere condolences to Luca and his family and fiends for their loss.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Teams vow to find cost cutting solution 

From autosport.com:

Teams vow to find cost cutting solution 

Friday, May 15th 2009, 18:01 GMT

Formula 1 teams have vowed to keep working towards finding a cost-cutting solution acceptable to the FIA, despite the failure to reach an agreement in Friday's showdown talks with the governing body.

With time ticking down to the closure of entries to the 2010 world championship later this month, the teams failed to convince the FIA to back down on plans for a £40 million voluntary budget cap.

Members of the Formula One Teams' Association (FOTA) held a meeting after their talks with the FIA, but no firm plan was put in place and most team principals left without wanting to comment on the situation.

However, Ferrari team principal Stefano Domenicali was encouraged that all teams remained united in their efforts to find a way forward - with further talks now set for the Monaco Grand Prix weekend.

"I think that the meeting shows that on one side there is a very united group of teams that were discussing with the president of the FIA about the future, and above all this regulation. That is what I can say," he said.

Ferrari has joined Toyota, Red Bull and Renault in threatening not to enter the 2010 championship if the rules are not changed.

When asked if there was the possibility of finding a compromise deal: "I think that, as we said, it is a work in progress. We are working hard to find a solution and I think today with the teams we showed our unity, with a different perspective but it was important to reiterate our concept"

Domenicali also made it clear that the matter was more than simply agreeing on cost cuts.

"I think that is not only the case. We need to discuss about other things regarding the governance and the way the rule is done. It's not only this point on the table of the discussion."

Speaking about the looming May 29 deadline, Domenicali said: "You know what our position is. I think that the time is short, but we will try to work very hard."

As we know this was always bigger than just the money and the two tier system but I'll keep my fingers crossed these teams can resolve this.

[Eno the Wonderdog]

I thought it was interesting that there was a 'technical veto' given to Ferrari. Articles I've read have claimed from 1998 or from 2005 - either way it's proof positive that the FIA have pandered to Ferrari by allowing them to influence the rules and the first time I've see either party admit that there was any more to it than giving Ferrari a bigger slice of the pie.. 

[Mothers Worry]

I thought it was interesting that there was a 'technical veto' given to Ferrari. Articles I've read have claimed from 1998 or from 2005 - either way it's proof positive that the FIA have pandered to Ferrari by allowing them to influence the rules and the first time I've see either party admit that there was any more to it than giving Ferrari a bigger slice of the pie.. 

But this isn't really about Ferrari.

FOTA is an amalgamation/association and I'm pretty sure that Ferrari, although they have shown some direction in getting FOTA up and running, are not telling these other teams how they should react to the FIA/CVC or what position these teams should take in the negotiations.

If it was McLaren, RBR or any one else for that matter in Ferrari's position with FOTA the story would be much the same in my opinion.

This is bigger than any one team.

[Everso Biggyballies]

Agree this is currently / has transpired into more than about one team, (Ferrari weren't the first to threaten to drop out, but were third after Toyota and Red Bull) 

However I think Eno's comment is more about historical preferences towards the Scuderia.

To be honest the advantages that Ferrari 'won' in 2005 were a bribe from Ecclestone and co to ensure that the GPMA (breakaway) did not happen. It was nothing to do with Ferrari demands.   Ferrari took the offer (bribe) that the first major team to sign the last (temporary) Concorde was offered.  This was open to any major team at that time, the first to break ranks and in effect be the one to break the back of the GPMA.   Ferrari broke ranks first and took the loot.   The other tempter was at the time said to be the ability / honour of having a say with the future regulations of the sport. (I assume that this also had the Luca clause shall we call it, that gives the power of veto over new regulations. 

Bernie offered that to a few teams who had the equal opportunity to bite the bait.  Ferrari just happened to be the first to grab the extra 80 million or whatever the figure was.

The question re the power of veto over new regulations is going to become one of those legal complexities, as now technically there is no Concorde, the old temporary one has expired and the teams are therefore competing without a Concorde. per se, other than letters of agreement from all concerned.  Does that mean the clause of veto is now obsolete and has expired, or was it continued under the terms of the temporary agreement.

The very fact that Ferrari get more of the pie than any other team is the same means that McLaren are guaranteed more than Renault or Brawn etc.  It is known by all parties .  The basis of reward from the FOM pie under every Concorde since the first in 1981/2 (after the FISA / FOCA battles has always been on the basis of a 'points credit' if you like, based partially on the results of the previous years WCC, upon which the bulk is paid on, including freight and travel, but with if you like bonus credits based on years in F1, total championships and other forms of shall we say  'historical kudos'.  In a way, what the team brings to the F1 package that Bernie goes out and sells to broadcasters and promoters.  These bonuses, whilst not public information, are known to every team that signs the Concorde or have done. 

[Mothers Worry]

However I think Eno's comment is more about historical preferences towards the Scuderia.
 

........ and that was then this is now. I really think if this was just about Ferrari it wouldn't be so big a deal but, as we all realise, this whole political stoush has been brewing since FOTA came on the scene.

Have Ferrari been advantaged in the past? Yes.

What bearing does that really have on the current run of teams threatening to leave the sport? In my opinion, none at all.

If people want to just bash Ferrari well and good, they are welcome to their opinions about Ferrari. But this is about the big picture, the whole tamale.

In the greater scheme of things Ferrari is just one of a number of teams about to walk out the door.

What will the history of F1 be worth then? Probably very little.

[Everso Biggyballies]

In the greater scheme of things Ferrari is just one of a number of teams about to walk out the door.

What will the history of F1 be worth then? Probably very little.

Agreed.