Jump to content


Photo

Luca Di Montezemolo Hits out at Bernie Ecclestone


  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

#51 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 6,789 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 03 December 2012 - 17:14

Right he might be, but when was Ferrari known for grooming young talent, excepting Massa? The initiative with the Driver Academy is pretty recent and did start ( wonder of wonders... ) exactly together with the testing ban 2009/10 IIRC. And I would really like to know if LdM would complain so much about aero dominance if Ferrari would have comparable know-how, personal and facilities as Red Bull...


There is other drivers like Sergio Perez and Jules Bianchi - so I wouldn't say Ferrari is inactive in that field. Better late than never, wouldn't you say? It does not take away from the fact that a healthy amount of on tarmac testing has always been part of F1.

Advertisement

#52 Gagá Bueno

Gagá Bueno
  • Member

  • 358 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 03 December 2012 - 17:20

Well, "Gaga Bueno", that man is the president of Ferrari, an important figure in the FIAT empire and a sought after manager who has received repeatedly offers to be minister of economy in Italy. He masterminded not only the 70s Ferrari era and the 90s/2000s Ferrari era, but also was the successful manager of the 1990 soccer world championship in Italy.

I take it that your qualifications, of course, are much higher than that.


Mr Cordero di Montezemolo might be also the Pope or a guy who likes a little paddock brawl ( was it Mosport or Watkins Glen in the 70's?) and that would make his statement and the way he handled the whole affair not smarter, in my judgement... Sorry if I'm not entitled to it, I thougt it was a free world...

#53 Shambolic

Shambolic
  • Member

  • 342 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 03 December 2012 - 17:29

I'm trying to understand. When Bernie robs great, historical tracks of their races to dump another desert or street circuit on the calendar, people are up in arms. When he denies the fans the ability to share favourite race moments, people are up in arms. When there's a sniff of him meddling to manipulate a close championship, people are up in arms. When he makes unprovoked attacks on teams and drivers, people are up in arms.

When Ferrari seek "rule clarification" (no more, no less a skullduggerous approach than Red Bull raising complaint over the Brawn car, McLaren chasing after Williams fuel temperature), then suddenly Bernie is the voice of truth and reason, and needs to be held aloft for his vanquishing of the evil foe.

Another puzzlement is, if flags are flags but lights aren't flags, unless the lights are before flags or in the place of flags where there are no flags, then can Schumacher have his 2010 Monaco result back please?

#54 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 3,887 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 03 December 2012 - 17:31

if flags are flags but lights aren't flags


Lights ARE flags. Not the steering wheel ones, the LED screen ones.

#55 D.M.N.

D.M.N.
  • RC Forum Host

  • 7,098 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 03 December 2012 - 17:49

Firstly - if you're here to just talk about 'flag gate', leave. This thread is to talk about di Montezemolo's quotes which are as follows:

We are constructors, not sponsors: I'm no longer happy that we can't do testing on tarmac and that you can't give any chance for young drivers to emerge, since some people have used the expression 'It's a joke' in recent days, I would like to say that this is the real 'joke'. Yes, I'm referring to one of Ecclestone's phrases: my father always taught me that you have to have respect your elders, above all when they reach the point that they can no longer control their words. So I will stop there. Certainly, old age is often incompatible with certain roles and responsibilities.


On-topic, I do agree with di Montezemolo's points here. Personally, I think the amount of Winter testing is okay, but the amount of Young Driver testing is not okay. There has been criticism of some of the driving this year, and the longer there is not much Young Driver testing then the longer it will continue. Instead of criticising di Montezemolo, people are missing the real issue, because although di Montezemolo has said some stupid stuff in the past (three cars), the above quote is absolutely spot-on.

There needs to be more Young Driver testing, otherwise we will never find the next talent. The Young Drivers' need to develop in a Formula 1 car, otherwise we will get more drivers' that are race rusty and crash a lot (Grosjean and Maldonaldo). I don't think di Montezemolo is asking for a 2004-esque situation again, but him asking for more testing is completely rationale. Ferrari have been wanting to replace Massa for a few years, except there are not enough young drivers out there able to fill the seats. Why? Lack of testing. The rules need to change for younger drivers sooner, rather than later.

Arguably, the testing rules are a joke - because they do not help young drivers at all.

I don't agree with his quote about Ecclestone, it just seems to be a attack for the sake of an attack and if anything takes away from the preceding quote. The headline should not be 'di Montzemolo hits out at Ecclestone' but instead 'di Montezemolo wants more young drivers tests'.

#56 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 1,643 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 03 December 2012 - 18:13

I completely agree with Di Montezemolo with regards to his comments on testing. However, every time we hear from him he fails to do anything with his comments. How many times has the threatened to leave F1 now? Or start a new series? Or said Ferrari would not accept the ever increasing restrictions on development? If he wants to contribute to a discussion among F1 teams, fine - but his 'all or nothing'-comments make him look rather silly when each and every time he is the one who has to compromise. He might as well be some random forum poster at this point. :down:

Edited by Nonesuch, 03 December 2012 - 18:15.


#57 ali.unal

ali.unal
  • Member

  • 2,885 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 03 December 2012 - 18:56

Firstly - if you're here to just talk about 'flag gate', leave. This thread is to talk about di Montezemolo's quotes which are as follows:

Secondly, there is no "flag gate" thread any more to discuss that matter. Incidentally, Ecclestone has just given his reply to Montezemolo's statement and pointed out that "I think there was so much pressure from probably the driver. You must remember he's been saying nearly every race this year the car is rubbish and it's a bit difficult for them not to look as if they're trying to do something to help him." As we don't have any thread to talk about on this, I am forced to paste his quotes here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/20579360

#58 Hermanator

Hermanator
  • Member

  • 47 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 03 December 2012 - 19:35

I always enjoy these threads about Luca di Montezemolo. For a lot of people, he seems to be the person you love to hate. Typically these threads develop in the following way:

"Can you believe the nonsense that LdM is now saying again?"
"Ferrari are such bad losers"
...[some more replies, till at some time:]...
"Well, I actually agree with him on the point of aerodynamics vs engine. And well, I actually also agree with him on the point of artificial-overtaking with DRS. And well, maybe he also does have a valid point about not being allowed to test."

So what if, for once, you try to put your dislike for the man aside, and just thing about what he has to say. Maybe he does not say so strange things at all. And maybe it's just that he always has a quite firm opinion about F1, and is not shy to share his opinion with the world. Whether Ferrari just won or not. The thing is, it's been a while since they won...

#59 FerrariFanInTexas

FerrariFanInTexas
  • Member

  • 1,123 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 03 December 2012 - 19:41

To the extent discussion of testing vs. virtual car development is permitted here, let me ask something of all of you who support a ban in in-season testing. How well has the ban on in-season testing worked out for the small teams? Did HRT manage to massively upgrade their car over the course of the season in the wind-tunnel or using the simulator?

I know it's supposed to save money and all, but honestly, it's working out more as an excuse for the small teams to explain why their cars never really develop during the season. Looking at team budgets, RBR, McLaren, and Ferrari are probably spending just as much in the "no-testing" era as Ferrari and McLaren spent back in the "testing" era. So is the ban really effective at reducing costs? IMO, it's really just allowed a few teams (like the top four in the standings) to develop over the course of the season using expensive wind tunnels and simulators, whilst leaving the smaller, poorer teams to struggle through the last half of the season with little to no meaningful development from the beginning of the season.

If we're serious about reducing costs, let's go ahead and ban cfd and wind tunnel development as well. Design your car in the winter, test it before the season starts, and run with what you brought. Of course, that would not be Formula 1, but it would certainly be cheaper.

If we accept as a starting point that some teams will spend $250-300M per season, and others will spend less, does it really matter if they spend their money at Mugello or Fiorano versus spending it in a computer lab or a wind tunnel? Ferrari likes using test tracks, and I see no reason why they should not be allowed to do so. RBR likes using their expensive and highly accurate computer programs, simulators, and wind tunnel. Good for them as well.

Finally, if the point of the ban was to make Friday practice a time when the cars would all run and test new parts for the sake of "The Show", then let's have another test session on Fridays, or lengthen the current time of the two we already have each Friday. Given the amount of race weekend decisions that have to be made based on Friday running, is it really logical to think people are going to be trying out new parts all day long? Yes, some test out the new developments, but it's really to see if they should be run that weekend. It's nothing like what would be going on in a proper test session.

Advertisement

#60 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 5,661 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 03 December 2012 - 20:21

On-topic, I do agree with di Montezemolo's points here. Personally, I think the amount of Winter testing is okay, but the amount of Young Driver testing is not okay. There has been criticism of some of the driving this year, and the longer there is not much Young Driver testing then the longer it will continue. Instead of criticising di Montezemolo, people are missing the real issue, because although di Montezemolo has said some stupid stuff in the past (three cars), the above quote is absolutely spot-on.


As much as I agree with the need for more opportunities for young drivers, I don't believe at all that is Montezemolo's concern. He wants more testing because he believes Ferrari would be stronger if they could return to the old days with lots of testing allowed throughout the year. Not that caring solely about Ferrari's interests is necessarily a bad thing for the company's boss, but he should be honest and just state that rather than hiding behind a more altruistic motive.

To the extent discussion of testing vs. virtual car development is permitted here, let me ask something of all of you who support a ban in in-season testing. How well has the ban on in-season testing worked out for the small teams? Did HRT manage to massively upgrade their car over the course of the season in the wind-tunnel or using the simulator?

I know it's supposed to save money and all, but honestly, it's working out more as an excuse for the small teams to explain why their cars never really develop during the season. Looking at team budgets, RBR, McLaren, and Ferrari are probably spending just as much in the "no-testing" era as Ferrari and McLaren spent back in the "testing" era. So is the ban really effective at reducing costs? IMO, it's really just allowed a few teams (like the top four in the standings) to develop over the course of the season using expensive wind tunnels and simulators, whilst leaving the smaller, poorer teams to struggle through the last half of the season with little to no meaningful development from the beginning of the season.


I don't think there is any question that the budgets have gone down over the past few years. We no longer have Toyota types spending close to half a billion a year, and even if Red Bull continuously come under fire for breaching spending limits, it's still somewhat less expensive than it has been in the past. All the teams on the grid do have access to wind tunnels and CFD equipment - now that HRT has gone at least - and I believe that it is cheaper than constant track testing. Not to mention building a wind tunnel is going to be far easier than acquiring your own private test track within easy reach of headquarters.


If we accept as a starting point that some teams will spend $250-300M per season, and others will spend less, does it really matter if they spend their money at Mugello or Fiorano versus spending it in a computer lab or a wind tunnel? Ferrari likes using test tracks, and I see no reason why they should not be allowed to do so. RBR likes using their expensive and highly accurate computer programs, simulators, and wind tunnel. Good for them as well.


Costs need to be controlled for the teams own good. We don't want another situation like 2009 where half the teams run into some sort of trouble. We know they're incapable of coming to some sort of agreement themselves, so telling them what they can and can't do seems to be the only option. And there's not really an either/or situation - if they could Red Bull and Ferrari would be doing plenty of both and spending large amounts on it. Besides, there are some restrictions on wind tunnel usage and CFD too, there is no open choice on one and a ban on the other.

#61 kpchelsea

kpchelsea
  • Member

  • 249 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 03 December 2012 - 20:58

Ecclestone getting involved in this way leading to even more escalation - how wise is that?

I keep forgetting that Ferrari are not a normal F1 team

#62 rijole1

rijole1
  • Member

  • 625 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 03 December 2012 - 23:08

I completely agree with Di Montezemolo with regards to his comments on testing. However, every time we hear from him he fails to do anything with his comments. How many times has the threatened to leave F1 now? Or start a new series? Or said Ferrari would not accept the ever increasing restrictions on development? If he wants to contribute to a discussion among F1 teams, fine - but his 'all or nothing'-comments make him look rather silly when each and every time he is the one who has to compromise. He might as well be some random forum poster at this point. :down:

:up: Agree with you, Monte is right about testing. But he really shouldn't go on with his old stupid threats. No one believes him anymore.
Maybe Monte is getting old and don't remember that he has said those things before?  ;)

#63 itsademo

itsademo
  • Member

  • 392 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 03 December 2012 - 23:42

Bernie indeed was not diplomatical at all calling the request for clarification a "complete joke". There is probably some bigger issue beneath the surface, otherwise Bernie would not have had such a dig at Ferrari.

In terms of content, Luca di Montezemolo is certainly right. If testing were allowed again - not unlimited testing, but enough to give also young drivers a fair chance as well as help the teams test on track if their results on the drawing board are correct. It's always been part of the sport and the lack of testing makes F1 development increasingly a virtual exercise.


So i take it you have missed the part about HRT closing down then?
Or would you be happy to perhaps see 5 or 6 more teams go simply because they cant match the added expenditure of testing resulting in two or three teams ending up miles down the road and the others as little better than grid fillers making up the numbers in races.
IMHO that would hurt young drivers prospects far more than the lack of testing ever will.
Besides as others have said if they really wanted to give young drivers a chance do what other teams have done and get them in the car on friday.
Heck make FP1 a mandatory young/test drivers session only it does not raise costs and keeps the status quo while giving young/test drivers time behind the wheel, most would only object to that if their real agenda behind claiming they need testing time for young driver development was never about giving young drivers a chance and actually about getting more time to test the cars!!

#64 AlexS

AlexS
  • Member

  • 2,178 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 04 December 2012 - 03:15

And we have here the typical people that think that banning testing cuts expenditure. Banning something doesn't cut a cent.

All the money teams can collect: sponsors etc goes to others things. Even if the FIA build the cars for a fixed price the money would went to someone, even if it was a rock festival.

#65 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,712 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 04 December 2012 - 03:27

So, now Schumacher is also one of the 'culprits'... And the samurai-gladiator-matador also has something to say, albeit not having so many titles as Fangio or Schumacher...

And about Bernie being old, who's capable of such a statement:

"It is not acceptable that Formula One no longer transfers technology to our road cars. The aerodynamics is now becoming something which has nothing to do with the research. ( :drunk: ) This cannot be a sport in which there is no longer testing on the track. We have run out of patience. We are car manufacturers, not sponsors. As Ecclestone said, 'it's a joke...'".


Should care more about his own glass house IMO.



This just means that Luca is frustrated that Ferrari have lost the aero battle. Just like Alonso, he is in his own way blaming Newey

Edited by halifaxf1fan, 04 December 2012 - 03:40.


#66 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,153 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 04 December 2012 - 07:05

So i take it you have missed the part about HRT closing down then?


F1 is an expensive hobby, and HRT if they didn't know that, they probably should. On second point, when it was proven that simulators with various levels of sophistication are a proper substitute for experience with on track racing?

Lastly, how long it will take before F1 community will realize that you cannot year after year reduce on track racing, be it in or off season, and then devote first half of a season for developping cars and pretend that it is racing. Sooner or later people might question wisdom of that.

I agree with LdM that testing is essential, and top teams running each three high performance cars could be far more interesting concept over what we see today.

Edited by Sakae, 04 December 2012 - 07:07.


#67 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 2,872 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:28

F1 is an expensive hobby, and HRT if they didn't know that, they probably should. On second point, when it was proven that simulators with various levels of sophistication are a proper substitute for experience with on track racing?

Lastly, how long it will take before F1 community will realize that you cannot year after year reduce on track racing, be it in or off season, and then devote first half of a season for developping cars and pretend that it is racing. Sooner or later people might question wisdom of that.

I agree with LdM that testing is essential, and top teams running each three high performance cars could be far more interesting concept over what we see today.



HOBBY???? perhaps up until the 90's when all rich ol farts wanted to have a F1 team for publicity or fun or whatever. but now it's a full fledged business with several companies floating share and becoming public limited companies. HRT was bought by some idiots (thesan capital) who thought shifting team to spain would attract buyers when the economy there is in siesta.

Also, the F1 community are not idiots, it's funny to hear only a Certain Ferrari who happen to own a racing track in the backyard are shouting above all for re-introduction of testing while established teams like Macca/RBR/Lotus etc aren't doing that. why is that??? anyone who has watched last 3 years should know the level of uncertainty introduced by exploring the great unknown potential of a car. it has added spice to what was once a processional borefest. if it doesn't please some snobbish fans, so be it.

lastly, this idea of having 3 cars is ridiculous, so say ferrari has 3, but RB/Macca has 2 because of money or whatever, then by sheer number, a certain team will win WCC anyway, not to mention the borefest it'll create by teams to employ team orders to the fullest. I can accept perhaps customer cars based on previous years design, but F1 is such an advanced sport these days that even the benefit of that is questionable.

#68 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 1,152 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:37

So i take it you have missed the part about HRT closing down then?
Or would you be happy to perhaps see 5 or 6 more teams go simply because they cant match the added expenditure of testing resulting in two or three teams ending up miles down the road and the others as little better than grid fillers making up the numbers in races.
IMHO that would hurt young drivers prospects far more than the lack of testing ever will.
Besides as others have said if they really wanted to give young drivers a chance do what other teams have done and get them in the car on friday.
Heck make FP1 a mandatory young/test drivers session only it does not raise costs and keeps the status quo while giving young/test drivers time behind the wheel, most would only object to that if their real agenda behind claiming they need testing time for young driver development was never about giving young drivers a chance and actually about getting more time to test the cars!!


You can't. In a race weekend, everything is restricted. You can't change a gearbox without penalty, so you can't test those for example. And with no testing, the race drivers need the track time. See for example Senna. An inexperienced driver who suffered from missing FP1. Without a spare, a crash of the young gun often means no FP2 as well. Then you have one hour FP3 to prep for your whole weekend. With a bit of bad luck the gearbox or engine was damaged, so you have at least 5 places grid penalty as well.

And you see the results of simulator testing. Maldo and Grosjean are used to "press start to continue" in their simulator. Nothing beats the real thing. Why do you think airline pilots don't only use the simulator for training?;)
I dare to say not a penny was saved. Rumor has it that RB is spending over 600m. Way more than Toyota ever did. And a F1 team WILL spent it all.

HRT never tested pre-season. I don't think they are the reference to go by. After three years, there is still a distinct gap between the old and new teams. A new team needs testing to get up to speed. It isn't viable as a business to stay at the rear forever.

#69 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,153 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 04 December 2012 - 09:54

HOBBY???? perhaps up until the 90's when all rich ol farts wanted to have a F1 team for publicity or fun or whatever. but now it's a full fledged business with several companies floating share and becoming public limited companies.

Perhaps we differ on how we view life, but I think that anyone who considers participation in F1 anything other than hobby and/or advertising platform for their unrelated core business, must have their head examined. Several entrants, not just HRT have probably over-extended themselves.

Also, the F1 community are not idiots, it's funny to hear only a Certain Ferrari who happen to own a racing track in the backyard are shouting above all for re-introduction of testing while established teams like Macca/RBR/Lotus etc aren't doing that. why is that???

Has Macca/RBR/Lotus (and others) declared they do not require track-testing? If that would be a case, why are we reading all that rumour about RBR size of budget? Maybe what we have are funds misallocated on wrong technology, and validation of design on the track in pre-season could save actually some money than what is being spend on corrective measures of work-in-progress. We should not forget that having good race has some intangiables. Mercedes surely doesn't like mud on their name just because after spending billions, they are deprived of traditional engineering development (as others are), so basically money aren't spend well.

Lastly, this idea of having 3 cars is ridiculous, so say ferrari has 3, but RB/Macca has 2 because of money or whatever, then by sheer number, a certain team will win WCC anyway, not to mention the borefest it'll create by teams to employ team orders to the fullest. I can accept perhaps customer cars based on previous years design, but F1 is such an advanced sport these days that even the benefit of that is questionable.

I think assumption was, that all top teams would have three cars. If DM can have two teams and no one calls him an idiot, I am not sure why LdM should be with his drive to interject some class into F1. I rather see PdR and whoever else sitting in the Ferrari, than in HRT, to be honest. It's really not my fault if some people fail to see benefits of it.

Edited by Sakae, 04 December 2012 - 09:55.


#70 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 2,872 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 04 December 2012 - 13:02

has anyone read this hilarious parody letter :p from OffonF1.com ???

Letter From Luigi

Bella Tifosi


You know a me for some time. I speaka from the heart and when I speak to you I say eesa not right, eesa not fair. Eesa not fair for Bernie to call us the complete joke. So I explain you something.


People they say now – hey that Ferrari team - they are the bad a sport asking the question whether Vettel eesa really the World Champion. But we have the deep and sincere duty to our fans to finda the truth.


After the result we receive thousands of e.mails and letters asking us to look at film of the race. We say, we don’ wan’ to interfere. What you can do? But nearly 2000 enquiries we receive. And all from village in Asturias. Mr and Mrs Alonso.


They say their pussy cat-a hide because Fernando come a home and keek it so much. Every time Domingo the cat hear the word “Interlagos” he run for the catflap.


Anyway, we looka at the film real hard and we see that the green flag eesa marginally waved and we say, well okay, “lucky this time.”


But I no take-a the advice from the old midget man. Bernie he eesa so very old he make Silvio Berlusconi look like Brad Pitt. Now that eesa old. He needa the nurse to sorta himself out.


Now Mamma say to me, Luigi, shudduppa ya face. The nice man with silver hair feex us with the top prize money guaranteed every year, what more you want. I say no mama eesa principle. We no do testa no more. When Stefano fur cuppa the design, it take-a the whole season to sort it out. And we have a track-a by the factory. We no use. Eesa crazy


So I take-a no advice from the old man. I give-a the warmest sincere congratulations to Vettel for sneaking home just in front of the magnificent scuderia and next season we getta Senna to hit him good and proper.


Ciao and Forza!


Luigi M.


Edited by eronrules, 04 December 2012 - 13:03.


#71 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 5,288 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 04 December 2012 - 16:50

This just means that Luca is frustrated that Ferrari have lost the aero battle. Just like Alonso, he is in his own way blaming Newey



Agreed. He and Ferrari need to shut up now with these kind of comments. They have sounded and behaved like poor losers since the championship ended and LdM is adding to that with these flamboyant statements and claims. He should chill and behave with the decorum rather than act like the town clown. As leader, his words are attributed to and represent all of Ferrari.

Edited by bourbon, 04 December 2012 - 16:51.


#72 PokePoke

PokePoke
  • Member

  • 131 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 04 December 2012 - 20:06

Has Macca/RBR/Lotus (and others) declared they do not require track-testing?

Yeah, after test days at Mugello . One of reason why F1 cost much less than 6-7 years ago is ban in-season testing and freezing engines. We have 2012 year, where global economy is very bad shape and only Ferrari has tenths of millions $ from tobacco company.... Ferrari is also road cars manufacturer (with large facilities), which brings enormous profits at a time when other manufacturers are losing money. It is easy to say such nonsense comes when you have such facilities
For me case is very simple - LdM said what he said, because Ferrari interests are't necessarily aligned with the interests of other teams and Formula 1, which is in contrast to other World Champs (GT, WRC, MotoGP, WEC etc ) continues to grow, without problems with sponsors and still earn cash.
Luca is aware of the fact that the power of Ferrari comes from a powerful political force and the great facilities, which currently can not be used against the competition, like in the past (when two separate teams ranover and over thousands of kilometers at Mugello and Fiorano without prying eyes of the rest of the competitors and FIA).

Edited by PokePoke, 04 December 2012 - 20:10.


#73 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,153 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 04 December 2012 - 21:04

Yeah, after test days at Mugello . One of reason why F1 cost much less than 6-7 years ago is ban in-season testing and freezing engines. We have 2012 year, where global economy is very bad shape and only Ferrari has tenths of millions $ from tobacco company.... Ferrari is also road cars manufacturer (with large facilities), which brings enormous profits at a time when other manufacturers are losing money. It is easy to say such nonsense comes when you have such facilities
For me case is very simple - LdM said what he said, because Ferrari interests are't necessarily aligned with the interests of other teams and Formula 1, which is in contrast to other World Champs (GT, WRC, MotoGP, WEC etc ) continues to grow, without problems with sponsors and still earn cash.
Luca is aware of the fact that the power of Ferrari comes from a powerful political force and the great facilities, which currently can not be used against the competition, like in the past (when two separate teams ran the test over and over thousands of kilometers Mugello and Fiorano without prying eyes of the rest of the competitors and FIA).

You might be right, and I do not wish to create false impression that I possess unique inside and understanding of LdM' politics, but it stands to a reason, a topic perhaps for another thread, that without testing F1 is on self-destructive course IMO, and will either in the future converge into another series, or we will see range of incremental changes soon. Tripartite commission that is currently in embryonic stage is just beginning of that journey (as I think), and for good reasons. People do not like what they see, however how they shall attack those issues without rocking boat too much is another thing, and remains to be seen.

Think of it this way – what I see in March and beyond is a lot of unfinished business after winter when prototypes have their wheels falling off, a condition which has been protracted from about three races initially just not too long ago, than six (season starts in EU), and this year I got an impression that some teams hasn’t recovered at all, and were struggling right through to the last race in Brazil. How much fun is that for anyone?

Mercedes, safe to presume, is in it to shine, and have their brand projected in best possible light. Without having a competitive car from GETGO is hurting them, and there will be some cut-off point when fun is over. Proper testing can alleviate a lot of pain, and much of embarrassment on the track. Simulator’s hasn’t done it as far as I can see, especially when those are of different sophistication from a team to team, whereas track millage is for real, a common denominator, where they all are on common ground.

Needless to say that I am one of very few around here who believes that there will be no F1 without manufacturers and them selling just engines to other minor teams goes only so far regarding promotion of a brand. Ferrari, LdM’s subject of interest, would be not very happy to compete against (what they would consider) unequal partners if big names leave, and ultimately they might disappear as well. You can imagine what will be left of once mighty F1, if not shadow of its former itself.

Finally, I am not sure how much more costly testing is, when compared with substitute technologies and methodology, but try to put price tag on all those redesigns and extra trials this year, including the embarrassment, and all of that just because there was not time to do something about it in January and February.

Of course you and others might disagree with me, but hopefully I have explained my view sufficiently.


#74 Miggeex

Miggeex
  • Member

  • 421 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 04 December 2012 - 21:24

Testing would be awesome. It just so expensive getting to do even one lap with these cars... I remember there were some numbers told when Kimi tested with the old Lotus Renault(?) earlier this year. They were more like guesses though I think.

But it surely wouldn't make any sense if only few teams would have the resources to organize tests.

#75 sniper80

sniper80
  • Member

  • 505 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 04 December 2012 - 21:54

Testing should come back. There are not enough GP's in the year to keep us busy! :rotfl:

#76 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,153 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 05 December 2012 - 04:43

Testing would be awesome. It just so expensive getting to do even one lap with these cars... I remember there were some numbers told when Kimi tested with the old Lotus Renault(?) earlier this year. They were more like guesses though I think.

But it surely wouldn't make any sense if only few teams would have the resources to organize tests.

F1 is an expensive undertaking, that's loud and clear for very long time, and while to test a car is expensive, compare that cost to a cost of remedial measures through the season, and ultimately impact of a lost season with its tangibles and intangibles, just because you do not have a proper equipment to compete, nor you have new drivers who are thoroughly familiar with the F1 equipment. I am not sure that book-keepers bottom line is implicitly indicative of all what's in stake.

Edited by Sakae, 05 December 2012 - 04:44.


#77 encircled

encircled
  • Member

  • 772 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 21 December 2012 - 11:37

Ferrari president di Montezemolo suggests F1 needs new management

Amid a desire to see the sport get some fresh impetus to attract a wider audience, di Montezemolo has suggested that F1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone should ease his grip of the sport.

"We need people with a more modern view," di Montezemolo was quoted as saying by The Independent. "It is the same in my company. In a couple of years I will no longer be the person for Ferrari. Someone else will come.

"What I always say to Bernie is that the one-man show in life is finished. You need a team around you. We have to ask these questions in a positive way and look ahead. Sooner or later it will happen to Bernie as to me."



#78 Red17

Red17
  • Member

  • 3,196 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 21 December 2012 - 11:46

Ferrari president di Montezemolo suggests F1 needs new management

I sure would like to see the teams step into Bernie's shoes and directly ask the promoters huge amounts of cash. :smoking:

The problem with Luca's words is that they always come at times when we know money is being negotiated. He may be right and actually mean it, but the context imediatley makes you think they are just asking for more money, besides, Ferrari's only factory team runs in Formula 1.

#79 boldhakka

boldhakka
  • Member

  • 2,330 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 21 December 2012 - 11:52

Costs were cut for a reason, Ferrari was on board with it, and the reasons for those cost cuts still apply. If more testing is something they want to prioritize, then they should suggest ways to offset the corresponding increase in costs somehow. Simply demanding increased testing is like an employee going to his manager and complaining about problems without offering his thoughts on solutions to those problems - it's childish.

Advertisement

#80 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,153 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 21 December 2012 - 22:31

Ferrari president di Montezemolo suggests F1 needs new management

Whatever your feelings are about him, LdM makes I think a valid point; one and the same as fans made several times already in here in the past. One can only admire the man that he is not hiding in the closet about it. It is even more wonderful that this is coming up just a few days after Ecclestone uttered his thoughts on number of teams in F1, and how he cares only whether SF stays, and others then can leave without regrets. To sum it up as I understandn it:

Ecclestone: We need Ferrari in F1, others not so much, and if anyone wants to leave, have a nice day!
LdM in response: We are thankful for all in the past, but now we need new blood. Good bye Mr. Ecclestone.

Love is in the air.

______________

I am of course joking, but new ideas and vision for the series is always useful.

Edited by Sakae, 21 December 2012 - 22:33.


#81 Tombstone

Tombstone
  • Member

  • 1,005 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 21 December 2012 - 22:38

No link - you'll have to buy Motor Sport to read it for yourself - but in the latest issue it reports that Bernie countered ldm's little tantrum by telling the Italian media that "not so many years ago he (BE) happily dealt with an 88 yr old enzo ferrari.

#82 ali.unal

ali.unal
  • Member

  • 2,885 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 21 December 2012 - 22:46

Looking how Lotus managed to leverage its Twitter use, I do wonder what the official F1 account could have done with all facilities and content in their hands. They are underperforming badly in terms of Internet usage and they have to react as soon as they can. There are lots of good examples out there about how Internet can be exploited to get more attention and fanbase into the sport. Official F1 management is behind in every step. Therefore, I semi-agree with LdM. Ecclestone himself doesn't need to be sidelined. However, he has to hire right people to the right positions. He needs support on that front.

#83 2ms

2ms
  • Member

  • 2,212 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 22 December 2012 - 23:00

LdM is like the Berlusconi of sports. The rest of the world outside of Ferrari and Italy look at these guys and just wonder what planet these people live on. Nothing either one of these can do anymore can surprise anyone. They're just in a different galaxy.

We have what people consider the most exciting season of F1 in modern history and it's the one the LdM chooses to attack Ecclestone and say F1 needs to be changed :lol:

#84 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 22 December 2012 - 23:24

No link - you'll have to buy Motor Sport to read it for yourself - but in the latest issue it reports that Bernie countered ldm's little tantrum by telling the Italian media that "not so many years ago he (BE) happily dealt with an 88 yr old enzo ferrari.


I find it funny that BE is now so old that dealing with Enzo Ferrari is to him "not so many years ago".

Edited by EvanRainer, 22 December 2012 - 23:25.


#85 Tombstone

Tombstone
  • Member

  • 1,005 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 23:49

I find it funny that BE is now so old that dealing with Enzo Ferrari is to him "not so many years ago".


I'm 46. The mid to late 80s don't seem that long ago.