Jump to content


Photo

Was Max Right?


  • Please log in to reply
267 replies to this topic

Poll: Was max right? (224 member(s) have cast votes)

Was he right?

  1. Yes (75 votes [33.48%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.48%

  2. No (149 votes [66.52%])

    Percentage of vote: 66.52%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 MaxFan1

MaxFan1
  • Member

  • 1,061 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:32

With the recent pulling out of BMW, was max right to argue for budget cuts? I get the feeling while the BMW team itself wouldn't have liked the budget cuts, the main BMW bosses would have loved it. BMW in their PR stated something about "lack of innovation", but if they had accepted the budget cuts they WOULD have got those innovations like unrestricted engines, KERS with more restrictions removed, Movable rear wings, 4 wheel drive and steering, more free body work regulations.

I would have loved to see it.

Edited by MaxFan1, 29 July 2009 - 11:33.


Advertisement

#2 Motormedia

Motormedia
  • Member

  • 2,024 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:34

You bet he was right!

#3 danr

danr
  • New Member

  • 20 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:34

Is that you Max? Welcome to the forums! :p

#4 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,863 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:51

Now, probably yes.

A few years ago, as he was luring the manufacturers into F1, no. He fell into the same trap as Jean-Marie Balestre in the late '70s-early '80s.

Edited by Victor_RO, 29 July 2009 - 11:51.


#5 Phucaigh

Phucaigh
  • Member

  • 2,838 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:51

Max was wrong, is there a team at Brackley?

The answer is yes, it was not as bad as Max made out it would be if a manufacturer left, it is nothing different in reality to a privateer leaving.
Actually maybe that is wrong, Aguri Suzuki left and no one replaced that private team.

#6 MaxFan1

MaxFan1
  • Member

  • 1,061 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:55

Max was wrong, is there a team at Brackley?

The answer is yes, it was not as bad as Max made out it would be if a manufacturer left, it is nothing different in reality to a privateer leaving.
Actually maybe that is wrong, Aguri Suzuki left and no one replaced that private team.


The key reason in both those cases being that cost of running in F1 is too high.

#7 fed up

fed up
  • Member

  • 1,986 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:57

The key reason in both those cases being that cost of running in F1 is too high.


Why don't they distribute the income equitably?

#8 MaxFan1

MaxFan1
  • Member

  • 1,061 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:59

Why don't they distribute the income equitably?


Because of teams like Ferrari which won't allow it.

#9 wewantourdarbyback

wewantourdarbyback
  • Member

  • 6,358 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:59

This is a loaded question, both sides wanted budget cuts but Maxxx wanted to introduce a cap.

There's a difference.

#10 JPW

JPW
  • Member

  • 3,335 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:01

Of course Max was right both about the manufacturers in general and about the drastic cost cutting for 2010.
Maybe his way to get them in place left a bit to be desired but generally he was right on the money.

I liked this quote from Epsilon boss Joan Villadelprat today about BMW:

"I'm surprised because they have done a lot of work, on the Concorde Agreement, and being members of FOTA... But it's the always same with big manufacturers, and in the end it's other people making the decisions, and that's what Max Mosley feared and what he was saying."

Now let's hope that the FIA find a way to get Epsilon Euskadi in for 2010.




#11 MaxFan1

MaxFan1
  • Member

  • 1,061 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:03

This is a loaded question, both sides wanted budget cuts but Maxxx wanted to introduce a cap.

There's a difference.


To me they are identical. What does budget cuts mean? Everyone has to reduce their budget by a certain percentage? If so then it doesn't change anything with big teams being able to spend more, which means they can either dominate, or leave F1 if they don't. If by budget cuts you mean everyone having to cut down spending to the level of the smallest team then that's basically a cap.


#12 wewantourdarbyback

wewantourdarbyback
  • Member

  • 6,358 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:05

To me they are identical.


They simply cannot be, a cap is a restriction put in place by a law by which you cannot exceed a maximum budget. If the teams cut their budgets they don't have to be forced to do so in specific ways or be pushed into a two tier championships.

#13 FredF1

FredF1
  • Member

  • 1,997 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:06

It's a pity that Max has decided to stand down now that F1 needs his guiding hand more than ever. :(



#14 Phucaigh

Phucaigh
  • Member

  • 2,838 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:06

The key reason in both those cases being that cost of running in F1 is too high.


Max and the FIA should stop changing and making up new rules every few months. That drives costs.

#15 Phucaigh

Phucaigh
  • Member

  • 2,838 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:07

It's a pity that Max has decided to stand down now that F1 needs his guiding hand more than ever. :(


Everyone is more than replaceable in their job.

#16 MaxFan1

MaxFan1
  • Member

  • 1,061 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:07

They simply cannot be, a cap is a restriction put in place by a law by which you cannot exceed a maximum budget. If the teams cut their budgets they don't have to be forced to do so in specific ways or be pushed into a two tier championships.


But the only way teams will cut their budgets is if there ARE restrictions put in place by law. Otherwise, teams will just spend as much as they can afford to.

#17 Andy35

Andy35
  • Member

  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:08

You could equally say was FOTA right as they wanted budget cuts too. Another good poll would be "Was Max right in saying budget cuts and then screwed it up completely by demanding unpractical amounts which would have put people out of work even quicker ?"

Mind you, as someone pointed out today, as I think FOTA are ok, I must be thick.

Regards
Andy

#18 JPW

JPW
  • Member

  • 3,335 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:09

It's a pity that Max has decided to stand down now that F1 needs his guiding hand more than ever. :(

Maybe it's not too late  ;)

#19 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 8,596 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:10

I am not sure that he was. But that stem from me disagreeing that the FIA should concern themselves with monetary regulations.

All companies in F1 should be allowed to spend as little or as much as they seem fit to. If a manufacturer decide to do F1, with no sponsors, and spend some Usd 2 billion per season so be it. If a manufacturer decide to spend Usd 11,07 then so be it.

Basically boils down to choise of business model, both BMW and Honda leaving without meeting their goals, is simple proof that they went about F1 using the wrong model.

What I do think the FIA should concern themselves with, is writing and enforcing regulations and it would relatively simple to write some, which would stop a lot of the overspending, since this is simple and easy it is naturally not what will happen.

I am certain that Max / The FIA will tout this as proof

"that we are and were correct"

But I do not agree that to be the case, the matter of teams leaving is nothing new, the reasons vary and the reasons are often glossed over using excuses.

Success at F1 is hard, very very very hard. It takes the right team from the guy sweeping the floor to the top manager, it takes some luck and it takes super super super hard work and application. We as fans sitting on the sidelines have all the answers, except that among us we can't agree on anything, this is how our little world is exactly as the insular world of F1.

All relatively small potatoes but.....

Ban pit stops
Ban car to pit telemetry
Ban pit to car telemetry
Ban automated gear boxes
Ban adjustable wings
Allow total of 3 wings per season, angle of attack can be changed nothing else.
Allow max square area of 'wing / aero foil' on car, if found generating to much downforce, reduce with immediate effect.
Flat bottom = flat bottom, no slants, holes, indentations. Between front and rear axel bottom is flat.
No fly by wire, throttle cable controlled by driver and driver only.
Engines to last 20% of races regardless of number of races.
No bargeboards, nothing which is an aero wing / foil / element allowed betwen front and rear axel
No carbon brakes
Each team get 'x' kilometers of testing in calander year, they can use when ever they want to.

I am fully aware of the view that I present a vision of dumbed down F1, I do not agree and apart from where I ban / allow stuff the slate is a clean, and the teams and manufacturers can spend as much they want to find the advantages.

Max did not have it right, BMW did not have it right, Honda did not have it right.

:cool:

Advertisement

#20 FredF1

FredF1
  • Member

  • 1,997 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:12

Everyone is more than replaceable in their job.





Jean Todt isn't half the man that Max is.





#21 OnyxF1

OnyxF1
  • Member

  • 547 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:15

In Max's case, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy since he brought the oh-so terrible and evil manufacturers into the sport. I don't get why people feel the need to trust either FOTA or the FIA. Both organisations are full of pricks. I don't see the logic in supporting either.

#22 Johnrambo

Johnrambo
  • Member

  • 940 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:17

How can you make a poll like this? Mosley has talked about cutting costs but he has changed the rules all the time and introduced ridiculous and expensive KERS that have done the exact opposite.

#23 Calorus

Calorus
  • Member

  • 3,395 posts
  • Joined: June 05

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:18

Max wasn't just right, he was Far-right.

#24 MaxFan1

MaxFan1
  • Member

  • 1,061 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:19

How can you make a poll like this? Mosley has talked about cutting costs but he has changed the rules all the time and introduced ridiculous and expensive KERS that have done the exact opposite.


KERS was expensive because there was no budget cap in place. If there was a budget cap, teams would only be able to afford to spend a certain amount on KERS. Some teams would do a better job than others under the same budget. Then we would see who's the most innovative.

#25 FredF1

FredF1
  • Member

  • 1,997 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:20

In Max's case, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy since he brought the oh-so terrible and evil manufacturers into the sport. I don't get why people feel the need to trust either FOTA or the FIA. Both organisations are full of pricks. I don't see the logic in supporting either.




And yet everyone gets all worked up about a bunch of multi-millionaires making advertising billboards run round in circles for little or no benefit to anyone but themselves.


Funny old world really.



#26 BMW_F1

BMW_F1
  • Member

  • 7,670 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:20

Yes he was.. To many children on this board have no idea about the corporate world, economics and how less important is f1 to these large companies.
CEO's flip flop according to how good their companies are doing financially. Every employee down to the cleaning lady gets impacted.

When Max said that companies stop having coffee in the pantries, he was absolutely right becuase I experienced this and I work for one of the largest financial corporations in the world.

This has nothing to do with max or whoever was leading the FiA, after all pulling out of f1 is a sad thing and I am sure many at corporate were sad that it happened but its not their choice to make and Mario is simply a puppet in this equation.
Toyota or Renault could be next..

Luca simply wants to keep an elite group of teams and have unlimited spending - what he does not realize is that f1 is the bread and butter of ferrari, for the manufactures f1 is simply a satellite operation with a budget that must be controlled and checked againt ROI, just like any other major project for a large corporation.

Could BMW have pulled the plug when everyone including my grandmother was buying BMW's.?.. I doubt it..

Good earnings back in 04 was what gave Mario the opportunity to form his own team by buying Sawber..

#27 William Hunt

William Hunt
  • Member

  • 3,413 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:20

Of course he was absolutely right; that budget cap was necessary. And he will be even more right if Toyota and Renault quite; as I suspect will happen.

#28 OnyxF1

OnyxF1
  • Member

  • 547 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:23

And yet everyone gets all worked up about a bunch of multi-millionaires making advertising billboards run round in circles for little or no benefit to anyone but themselves.


Funny old world really.


The most cynical description of F1 I've ever heard. Good job. :up:

#29 Andy35

Andy35
  • Member

  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:23

KERS was expensive because there was no budget cap in place. If there was a budget cap, teams would only be able to afford to spend a certain amount on KERS. Some teams would do a better job than others under the same budget. Then we would see who's the most innovative.


But it would be cheaper to not have it at all. KERS has not really added to overtaking this year to so improve the viewing, in fact it has sometimes meant that cars have not been able to overtake because although faster on the corners they have lost out on the straights. The thing that always makes more overtaking is lack of grip, not more power, as shown by every wet race. If the FIA had any sense they would reduce this massively, which would reduce costs, not increase them, but they haven't.

Regards
Andy


#30 Rob

Rob
  • Member

  • 8,273 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:25

KERS was expensive because there was no budget cap in place. If there was a budget cap, teams would only be able to afford to spend a certain amount on KERS. Some teams would do a better job than others under the same budget. Then we would see who's the most innovative.


But the point is that whilst Max was saying that Formula One needs to cut costs, he introduced something which resulted in the teams spending a combined total of half a billion dollars.
At the same time that Max was saying that Formula One needs to be greener, the "fuel burn" qualifying was introduced.
Just after the recession in the 90s, Max was saying that the small teams were an embarassment to the sport and introduced a $48 million bond to stop small teams entering. Result = F1 drops to 20 cars from 26 the previous year and two prospective new teams decide against entering.

It's not that Max is some sort of saviour. Max's arguments are based around political capital and his personal wishes at the time.

#31 JPW

JPW
  • Member

  • 3,335 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:30

Of course he was absolutely right; that budget cap was necessary. And he will be even more right if Toyota and Renault quite; as I suspect will happen.

At least one of them, it kind of explains also why Briatore and Howett were persuing the breakaway and had such active roles in FOTA. Both men knew that their board could pull the rug from under them at any minute.

#32 the9th

the9th
  • Member

  • 1,544 posts
  • Joined: July 06

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:33

Of course Max is right. Team managers are way too greedy, that's why they want the superfluous money to keep pouring from the manufacturers right into their pockets. Salaries are inflated in F1, its technology is almost irrelevant in the real world. FOTA are just a bunch of populist followers of the big "Marque", the Marquis Monty...
It's all about brands and marketing and little about technology or "the pinnacle of motor sport". It's quite shallow and it's a shame we came down to this. FOTA are not about sport, it's a bunch of people cheating the constructors, protecting their own businesses. Funny how many fans have blindly sided with them.

#33 FredF1

FredF1
  • Member

  • 1,997 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:34

The most cynical description of F1 I've ever heard. Good job. :up:





It's more world-weariness at this stage. F1 being in imminent danger of collapse has been with us since the very beginning. It's all a bit Chicken Little by now as far as I'm concerned.

#34 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,686 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:35

It's a pity that Max has decided to stand down now that F1 needs his guiding hand more than ever. :(


F1 is in the mess it is because of his guiding hand.

#35 Rob

Rob
  • Member

  • 8,273 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:37

F1 is in the mess it is because of his guiding hand.


And what his guiding hand is spanking at the time...

#36 FredF1

FredF1
  • Member

  • 1,997 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:42

F1 is in the mess it is because of his guiding hand.





Not to worry. His 'guiding hand', as you put it, will soon be working a little Napoleon doll from the back.


There's no letter 'B' in Zey need ze punishment so he'll be fine.


#37 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,686 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:46

Not to worry. His 'guiding hand', as you put it, will soon be working a little Napoleon doll from the back.


There's no letter 'B' in Zey need ze punishment so he'll be fine.


As I put it? It was your line, not mine.

#38 ex Rhodie racer

ex Rhodie racer
  • Member

  • 3,002 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:46

I once said (about two months ago) that in about 10 years time Max would be seen in a totally different light to the one he was being cast in. I was so wrong. It has taken less than two months. :rotfl:

#39 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 7,956 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:47

If Max was right, BMW would have stayed.

Costs are down now and in 2011, cost will have reduced further down to early ninetees spending figures.

Clearly, it's not just about cost reduction.

Advertisement

#40 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,510 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:49

It was an opportune moment for BMW to withdraw under cover of shilly shallying over the new regs. They pulled out because they weren't competetive, and this was losing them kudos on the public relations front.

Under a severe budget cut they would have been even less competetive, as they would be institutionally incapable of reducing their administrative overhead to the detriment of the overall production budget; as will Toyota be. Ferrari will "interpret the rules", not in the sporting sense, but in the manufacturing/development sense - they spent many years pretending that 100% of a Ferrari was made in Italy, but we know differently. Italy, which has a thriving economy totally unknown to the Italian Tax Collector is ideally placed for low cost racing car production.

They couldn't stand the heat - BMW are leaving the kitchen...........................

#41 Jodum5

Jodum5
  • Member

  • 1,247 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:53

He was right, but he's still a prick and I'm glad he's on his way out (hopefully).

#42 FredF1

FredF1
  • Member

  • 1,997 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:53

As I put it? It was your line, not mine.





No need to get so worked up. It's only motor {snigger} racing after all. A harmless past time for multi-millionaires to go about spending other people's money (for the most part) on occasional weekends in various parts of the world. You know, all that round and round stuff - curing cancer, bringing about world peace and solving world hunger like they do. We should worship them like the Gods they are.




#43 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,686 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 13:02

No need to get so worked up. It's only motor {snigger} racing after all. A harmless past time for multi-millionaires to go about spending other people's money (for the most part) on occasional weekends in various parts of the world. You know, all that round and round stuff - curing cancer, bringing about world peace and solving world hunger like they do. We should worship them like the Gods they are.


Whatever :rolleyes:

#44 cas422

cas422
  • Member

  • 67 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 29 July 2009 - 13:02

He was wrong. Clearly Honda and BMW's pullouts aren't simply about money. They are about value however. My guess is that the company sees the benefit of an F1 program in terms of marketing potential, and technical development. Since technical development is severely curtailed and green technology development is being completely eliminated, it's 100% about marketing and it's hard to drive a marketing campaign when you're qualifying at the tail of the field, and finishing in the bottom 5 GP after GP.
In addition Moseley's role-play (be it Nazi or German), Ecclestone's recent idiotic comments, and the complete immunity that they both seem to enjoy as far as consequences, can't have gone down well with a German company.

#45 FredF1

FredF1
  • Member

  • 1,997 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 13:04

Whatever :rolleyes:




Sorry.

Could you point out the bit where it says we have to take the whole manky circus seriously? Only I can't seem to find that in the T&C's for this board.




#46 dutra

dutra
  • Member

  • 1,062 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 29 July 2009 - 13:08

Max was right. You can't buy a well structured team like Sauber and then because of stupid decisions leave F1... It's not good for the sport.

#47 BMW_F1

BMW_F1
  • Member

  • 7,670 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 29 July 2009 - 13:42

But the point is that whilst Max was saying that Formula One needs to cut costs, he introduced something which resulted in the teams spending a combined total of half a billion dollars.
At the same time that Max was saying that Formula One needs to be greener, the "fuel burn" qualifying was introduced.
Just after the recession in the 90s, Max was saying that the small teams were an embarassment to the sport and introduced a $48 million bond to stop small teams entering. Result = F1 drops to 20 cars from 26 the previous year and two prospective new teams decide against entering.

It's not that Max is some sort of saviour. Max's arguments are based around political capital and his personal wishes at the time.


dude.. how many times have you heard this.. ?
Different times demand different actions. If you keep operating with the same old goals and do not adjust to the economy for decades you are a poor manager.. Because Max took an action or said something 10 years ago that goes against what he proposed recently does not prove a single thing..

#48 miniman

miniman
  • Member

  • 2,457 posts
  • Joined: May 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 13:49

Don't be fooled, Max Mosley is the only reason BMW and others manufacturers will leave F1. The sullied environment that Max built and maintained over the past 3 years is detrimental to the interests of the big manufacturers and their marketing goals; budgets have or will have minimal impact in the various corporate board decisions.




#49 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,686 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 29 July 2009 - 13:50

dude.. how many times have you heard this.. ?
Different times demand different actions. If you keep operating with the same old goals and do not adjust to the economy for decades you are a poor manager.. Because Max took an action or said something 10 years ago that goes against what he proposed recently does not prove a single thing..


But his actions the last few seasons alone are in total contradiction to what he has been saying at the same time.

#50 BMW_F1

BMW_F1
  • Member

  • 7,670 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 29 July 2009 - 13:51

If Max was right, BMW would have stayed.

Costs are down now and in 2011, cost will have reduced further down to early ninetees spending figures.

Clearly, it's not just about cost reduction.



this is what happens..

When the economy was flourishing Mario went to BMW corporate with a business proposal for an F1 team.
He asked for a substantial amount of money and resources..
His business plan was projected to be long term.. 3-5 years and we'll take it from there.
In 4 years he said he was to start having a winning car.. - accomplisment met (Canada 2008)
In his 5th year he said he would be fighting for the championship - Project failed..
During all this time BMW has been impacted by the poor economic climate.
Mario must have gone to BMW headquarters to ask for more money to try and salvage the season when they introduced a new body with zero results. I could imagine this was not a happy request with everything else that is going on.. (closing powerplants and dealearshitps around the wolrd)
BMW still suck and by now the big shots must be really pissed off because their money was wasted and it hurt their company's financials.
Because they're suck so bad this year their only chance to try and be competitive is to throw more money on R&D and the reality is that BMW/Toyota/Renault do not have this luxury like ferrrari and mclaren for example..

Edited by BMW_F1, 29 July 2009 - 13:58.