Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

Concorde Agreement - has it been signed?


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#1 D.M.N.

D.M.N.
  • RC Forum Host

  • 7,097 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 19 January 2013 - 21:13

I'm a bit confused regarding the status of the Concorde Agreement. Am I right in saying that it hasn't been signed yet for 2013 onwards? It has all gone quiet on that front, and a look on Google and AUTOSPORT shows that there was no official announcement at the back end of 2012.

Either an agreement was done quietly, or they are still discussing. A bit odd for there to be no agreement two months before the start of the season. Looking at Wikipedia (can't find anywhere else...) in 2008 "As such, a full Concorde Agreement was not in place for the 2008 season, with the Memorandum and other individual teams acting as a stop-gap solution."

Will this happen again for 2013?

Advertisement

#2 Red17

Red17
  • Member

  • 3,196 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 19 January 2013 - 21:18

Correct me if im wrong.

Didn't Bernie say the thing was agreed upon?
There was also the rumour that 3 teams were not offered the agreement, which would imply that the final document has been made.

#3 Wingcommander

Wingcommander
  • Member

  • 635 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 19 January 2013 - 21:22

I thought all the teams except Marussia had signed the CA. And the last time i heard Marussia hadn't even been offered a deal.

#4 D.M.N.

D.M.N.
  • RC Forum Host

  • 7,097 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 19 January 2013 - 21:42

I thought all the teams except Marussia had signed the CA. And the last time i heard Marussia hadn't even been offered a deal.

That was my thought too - but it doesn't seem to be official on the FIA or Formula 1 websites. I know there was negotiation throughout last year, with Mercedes being mentioned early on, but never anything official.

#5 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 19 January 2013 - 21:46

I was going to post a link, but now I cannot find the article in which just this week Ecclestone said that there are open issues with it. This lack of headlines on the subject was a topic elsewhere already when Mercedes agreed to carry on.

Edited by Sakae, 19 January 2013 - 21:48.


#6 Red17

Red17
  • Member

  • 3,196 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 19 January 2013 - 23:02

Wasn't there a year when they extended the expired deal while negotiations took place? I could see something like that happening again.

#7 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 20 January 2013 - 08:03

This could use explanation...

LdM: Era of one man show cannot go on | 22.12.2012

With the next edition of the Concorde Agreement still in limbo, despite needing to take effect from the end of the year, and a new set of rules coming in for 2014, di Montezemolo believes that the time to act is now.


...still in limbo?



#8 Craigster

Craigster
  • Member

  • 82 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 26 January 2013 - 14:26

This could use explanation...

LdM: Era of one man show cannot go on | 22.12.2012


...still in limbo?


Still waiting and now Eclestone says there is no need for a Concorde Agreement so maybe it will never happen
http://en.espnf1.com...tory/99281.html

#9 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 26 January 2013 - 15:30

Still waiting and now Eclestone says there is no need for a Concorde Agreement so maybe it will never happen
http://en.espnf1.com...tory/99281.html

AMuS - FiA and their fees seems to be a roadblock to peace in the family.

#10 InSearchOfThe

InSearchOfThe
  • Member

  • 481 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 27 January 2013 - 22:48

Bernie saying there's no need for the CA can only mean it works to his advantage. Go figure.

#11 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,455 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 27 January 2013 - 22:58

No matter the situation, Bernie always has to work it to his advantage. He cant/wont/shouldnt admit anything else.

#12 InSearchOfThe

InSearchOfThe
  • Member

  • 481 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 January 2013 - 00:03

No matter the situation, Bernie always has to work it to his advantage. He cant/wont/shouldnt admit anything else.

You're right. It's his job to make CVC money. But it's like he's from bizarro world where everything he says i think the opposite. I wouldn't be at all surprised if next month he bitches about it not being signed and threatens to have scab teams race in case of a strike.

#13 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 28 January 2013 - 06:00

Next GP race is 48 days away, testing even sooner. Will FiA show up at the track without an agreement, that's the next big question.

#14 apoka

apoka
  • Member

  • 3,336 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 28 January 2013 - 07:12

That agreement was one of the reasons of the "secret" meeting of the top teams in Italy.

#15 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 28 January 2013 - 07:28

Maybe, but where in media we find conclusion on this matter? Last meeting was FOTA-style meeting, perhaps about FiA, but without FiA, yet statements we heard from Ecclestone weren't very helpful; if anything, it was pretty much negative (in my perception anyway). I am not sure what all this means, unless there is some protracted period ahead of give and take, but at the end before we fly to the land of Oz, an agreement of some kind will be on the table. There is no mechanism in place that can superceed FiA on short notice, at least as far as I know off.

#16 Slackbladder

Slackbladder
  • Member

  • 1,110 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 28 January 2013 - 12:02

James Allen clearly reads the forum!

James Allen ‏@Jamesallenonf1
Struggle for control of F1 rule making as new Concorde Agreement remains unsigned http://goo.gl/fb/Vfwzy



#17 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,273 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:37

Bernard is hosting a meeting in London today. Expect announcements?

@f1enigma: I think that the most important news today is happening off-track. Bernie meets with some teams in London

#18 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,273 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:54

Apparently meeting smaller teams today.

#19 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 15 March 2013 - 20:40

CA is not signed; confirmed during today's meeting with team principals. (FiA / FOM are "working on it").

Advertisement

#20 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 18 April 2013 - 05:14

The other day question popped up, I thought it was, performed search, but I am not reassured that CA with FiA has been concluded. It's one month to-date when following article was printed:

FT

Anyone knows better? Searched FiA site as well, but ended up empty handed, which leads me to believe, that this remain an open issue, and FiA probably operates (for now) under 100 years clause...

FiA' actual statement on 2013-03-14

Rule-making with no Concorde Agreement in effect
In the absence of a Concorde Agreement, we had to resort to the Sporting Code. It is clear about rule changes. We consult the teams via what, in essence, are unofficial technical and sporting working groups and then we take proposals to the World Council. There’s very little difference to our previous method of operation. Of course we hope a Concorde Agreement will be ratified shortly and that we can revert to the previous way of doing things



#21 Wingcommander

Wingcommander
  • Member

  • 635 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 18 April 2013 - 06:05

I dont think it has been signed. Is it so that in theory atleast FIA could do whatever they want with the rules? Not that they have any need to do that.

Also apparently many teams are not very pleased with the next concorde's money distribution, where RB, Ferrari and McLaren would get a lot more money just for participating. Previously the prize money terms have atleast been the same for everyone (except for Ferrari's bonus).

#22 Race2win

Race2win
  • New Member

  • 26 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 18 April 2013 - 06:45

The Concorde Agreement has not been signed yet. Teams are still far from agreeing to all the points in the agreement. But its not the end of the series as the previous CA has a clause that says, if the new one is not signed on time the current one still applies. Thats why the teams & FOM are not in a rush. But Ive read an interview of Bernie a while ago that one of the main points of revenue sharing in the agreement has been accepted by all teams. This year they are getting 63% of the share as opposed to 57% last year. So I think the major hurdle is on the technical regulation side which the teams cannot come to a consensus.

#23 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 18 April 2013 - 06:54

For sake of accuracy lets clarify, commercial roadblocks notwithstanding, as I understand it, each team has accepted CA, but one (Marussia?), a team whom CA wasn't offered for some reasons. It's merely FiA which is left hanging. Ecclestone sometimes I think speaks perhaps more that he should, but at one time didn't he even suggested that he could go actually forward without FiA? Since he didn't elaborate further, I am not sure what he had on his mind. Whatever he meant however, it certainly didn't put JT into distress, and if it did, than he hid it very well, I must say.

#24 Race2win

Race2win
  • New Member

  • 26 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 18 April 2013 - 07:53

I dont understand why people slag Eccelstone. I agree some of his ideas a not perfect but you cant deny the fact that the spectacle he created, which you and I can what is great. He should be given credit for that. Moreover, if it wasnt for Ecclestone we wouldnt have the FOM which pays out revenue generated for F1 to the team. Without that none of those long term team owners would be millionaire and billionaires. As more money started flowing in teams did become more and more selfish. Rather than them collectively taking decisions for the benefit of the sport and its fans, they started thinking of what is best for themselves. A lot of people curse Bernie for selling the TV rights to Sky, but with teams demands for more money that was the best the FOM could do.

#25 Wingcommander

Wingcommander
  • Member

  • 635 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 18 April 2013 - 12:39

I dont understand why people slag Eccelstone. I agree some of his ideas a not perfect but you cant deny the fact that the spectacle he created, which you and I can what is great. He should be given credit for that.


I do, but yes Bernie has done a lot of good and should be credited more for that. If it wasnt for him F1 might be in the same state WRC (and many other series) is where you can basically check the result from tomorrows newspaper.

Moreover, if it wasnt for Ecclestone we wouldnt have the FOM which pays out revenue generated for F1 to the team. Without that none of those long term team owners would be millionaire and billionaires. As more money started flowing in teams did become more and more selfish. Rather than them collectively taking decisions for the benefit of the sport and its fans, they started thinking of what is best for themselves.


Can't agree with this. If we didnt have FOM, we would still have FOCA (which was led by Bernie) and a big portion of the tv money wouldnt go to investors' pockets. It was Bernie and his personal greed that took the commercial rights from the sport to investors' hands. And that is something everyone is going to have to live with until about year 2100. The problem is that Bernie doesnt think anymore (if he ever did) what is good for the sport, but what is good for the show (=more money). He keeps the big players happy, because they are important for F1's commercial value, but he doesnt care much about the rest of the teams. Bernie must create profit for the investors and imo that has started to affect his actions.

#26 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,367 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 20 April 2013 - 09:34

AMuS: Waiting for the Concorde Agreement: The 25 million dollar question"

Es gibt immer noch kein Concorde Abkommen. Experten glauben, dass der Grundsatzvertrag nicht vor der nächste Wahl des FIA-Präsidenten im Dezember unterschrieben werden wird. Bernie Ecclestone und Jean Todt pokern um 25 Millionen Dollar, die von den Rechteinhabern in die FIA-Kasse fließen sollen.


"There is still no CA. Experts think that the fundamental treaty will not be signed prior to the next FIA president election in December. BE and JT are gambling for 25 million dollar, which the rights holder shall pay to FIA"

#27 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 20 April 2013 - 09:48

Teams will get hammered at the end, because neither JT or Ecclestone seems to be backing off their positions. This is going to be a transfer cost from development and operations to investors and a police (FiA). How that will effect quality of racing is anybody's guess.

#28 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 11 May 2013 - 08:43

Trouble in the family?

#29 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 10,817 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 24 May 2013 - 23:31

Article in the Guardian: "Seven F1 teams face crisis over looming bill for extra £1.32bn" http://www.guardian....isis-bill-costs

Some excerpts:

The teams, who are absorbing the terms of the next Concorde Agreement, are already angry that the private equity firm CVC Capital, who hold a controlling stake in F1, take out more than half of the sport's $1.5bn income. With so much money going out, the teams cannot cope with rising costs and Bob Fernley, Force India's deputy team principal, claimed that CVC are "the worst thing that had happened to the sport."

These seven teams are already incensed that most of the money goes to the four biggest operations, Ferrari, Red Bull, Mercedes and McLaren. CVC are scheduled to increase payments to the teams from 47.5% to 60% of the sport's income – but the extra money will go to the big four. Fernley said: "There should be a more equitable distribution. It's quite right that Ferrari, McLaren and Mercedes get recognition. I would like to see Red Bull recognised in 20 years' time but not after five years of pumping money into the sport."

Whitmarsh said: "In addition, under the new agreement, the teams will to pay Pirelli $105m over the seven years." Fernley added: "Everything we're doing at the moment is about increasing costs. There is no initiative at all about reducing costs. If we don't sit down and address it very carefully we're going to lose teams.

#30 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 25 May 2013 - 07:21

...Whitmarsh said: "In addition, under the new agreement, the teams will to pay Pirelli $105m over the seven years." Fernley added: "Everything we're doing at the moment is about increasing costs. There is no initiative at all about reducing costs. If we don't sit down and address it very carefully we're going to lose teams.


Who, what, when, with whom? Whitmarsh had his opportunity as FOTA chairman, and what has he done about it? (Whatever "it" is).

Edited by Sakae, 25 May 2013 - 15:51.


#31 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 25 May 2013 - 07:46

Tough to side with anyone. After all, it's a business and everyone wants to bargain the best position for themselves. FIA would probably say (FOM's contract is with FIA for 100 years) to the team, 'you guys don't need to spend this much, let's have a budget cap of $150 million per year'. Teams will ask some more % of what is going into FOM's coffers. FOM would say we have to spend a lot on lot of things, besides we took the punt on F1 long time back, invested in it, and it is only fair that we get properly profited for it. Would teams break away from FIA to hold their own series? We know that won't happen. Because Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes and Red Bull have been nicely bribed to stay with them. Perhaps they all have to compromise and that would be fun to see.

#32 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,615 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 25 May 2013 - 07:49

Well, isn't Bernie's plan to lose teams?
He wants only ten of them.

Problem is most of the teams are on the brink.

#33 BoschKurve

BoschKurve
  • Member

  • 1,148 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 25 May 2013 - 15:49

Tough to side with anyone. After all, it's a business and everyone wants to bargain the best position for themselves. FIA would probably say (FOM's contract is with FIA for 100 years) to the team, 'you guys don't need to spend this much, let's have a budget cap of $150 million per year'. Teams will ask some more % of what is going into FOM's coffers. FOM would say we have to spend a lot on lot of things, besides we took the punt on F1 long time back, invested in it, and it is only fair that we get properly profited for it. Would teams break away from FIA to hold their own series? We know that won't happen. Because Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes and Red Bull have been nicely bribed to stay with them. Perhaps they all have to compromise and that would be fun to see.


I would never exclude the possibility of teams breaking away from the series, because after all, you said it best when you say that it is a business.

The teams aren't going to be in the business of losing money just to go racing.

Here's the thing, the teams got fleeced by the Mosley/Ecclestone commercial rights deal. That was the biggest scam in existence, as it was done just to line their own pockets.

Personally I think the time is near proper for a breakaway series to happen. A shame though that the teams all talk more than they act, because frankly they could do a lot better starting from the ground up rather than continue to be held hostage by CVC/Ecclestone.

#34 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 25 May 2013 - 15:56

I would never exclude the possibility of teams breaking away from the series, because after all, you said it best when you say that it is a business.

The teams aren't going to be in the business of losing money just to go racing.

Here's the thing, the teams got fleeced by the Mosley/Ecclestone commercial rights deal. That was the biggest scam in existence, as it was done just to line their own pockets.

Personally I think the time is near proper for a breakaway series to happen. A shame though that the teams all talk more than they act, because frankly they could do a lot better starting from the ground up rather than continue to be held hostage by CVC/Ecclestone.

I dream about that for very long time.

#35 BoschKurve

BoschKurve
  • Member

  • 1,148 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 25 May 2013 - 16:21

I dream about that for very long time.


I dream about it every day still.

I honestly think the whole thing (F1) would fall apart completely if Ferrari led the way. F1 needs Ferrari far more than Ferrari needs F1, which is why I'm not sure what value Montezemolo sees any longer in the series being the way it is.

#36 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 25 May 2013 - 16:42

I dream about it every day still.

I honestly think the whole thing (F1) would fall apart completely if Ferrari led the way. F1 needs Ferrari far more than Ferrari needs F1, which is why I'm not sure what value Montezemolo sees any longer in the series being the way it is.


Please correct me if my recollection is inaccurate, but FOTA's relationship with its partners has very checkered history, and whilst in 2009 Ferrari were part of manufacturer's threat of breakaway series, the same team secretly made pact with Ecclestone in the past on more than just one occasion, thus I am not convinced whether they should or could be exactly trusted party in any such deal. (As a certain former Mercedes-Benz executive can attest).

Edited by Sakae, 25 May 2013 - 16:45.


#37 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 5,656 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 25 May 2013 - 17:21

I dream about it every day still.

I honestly think the whole thing (F1) would fall apart completely if Ferrari led the way. F1 needs Ferrari far more than Ferrari needs F1, which is why I'm not sure what value Montezemolo sees any longer in the series being the way it is.


It doesn't. And Montezemolo sees the same thing Ferrari have cared about for the last few decades, their advertising platform.

#38 BoschKurve

BoschKurve
  • Member

  • 1,148 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 25 May 2013 - 17:41

Please correct me if my recollection is inaccurate, but FOTA's relationship with its partners has very checkered history, and whilst in 2009 Ferrari were part of manufacturer's threat of breakaway series, the same team secretly made pact with Ecclestone in the past on more than just one occasion, thus I am not convinced whether they should or could be exactly trusted party in any such deal. (As a certain former Mercedes-Benz executive can attest).


That sounds about right to the best of my recollection. I know Montezemolo periodically starts singing about how Ferrari will take their talents and cars to Le Mans when he needs to rattle his saber at F1/FOM. I think perhaps what keeps him from doing this is simply the ease at which he can operate within F1 compared to any other race series out there.

I've always viewed the major relationships in F1 as nothing more than a good old boys network of the worst kind. If you consider the people who have the most power within the sport, their relationships all harken back to the 1960s/1970s. Even successions within the FIA have all involved that small group. Keep in mind also, MrE said all his employees wouldn't be without jobs once he sold off Brabham. Sure enough you've got his old spannerman Charlie Whiting in the position he is in...and he's hardly qualified for it as seen by how he is in over his head when it comes to the legality of various things. Point is that F1 is very much about who you know, and what your relationship with the few who hold power is. Perfect for Montezemolo who was around in the 70s to cavort with Bernie and Max. Why, his former employee is running the FIA now anyway.

If you ask me, this is the real reason the manufacturers who've gotten involved in F1 fail so miserably. They go in expecting something run a little more on the up-and-up, yet are in over their heads when it comes to dealing with all of those who hold the power. They have no one to appeal to because the power is all concentrated at the top. There's no higher power to appeal to. You don't know what you are getting with F1 given all the Machiavellian double-dealings and political powerplays that are constantly ongoing. Not that any other race series have these issues, but the manufacturers who've fielded works teams have gotten fleeced to no end. They don't know how to work the backroom magic because they've got stockholders and corporate boards to answer to, and be responsible to. I suspect if Colin Chapman were still alive, you would have seen Lotus easily beating the crap out of the manufacturers fielding teams simply because he could be autonomous in his thinking and dealings. This is why I think Mercedes is currently getting fleeced by Brawn and his high-priced collection of technical directors with Lauda and Wolff bringing up the rear. They all are close with Bernie. And the same group of people get ever richer year after year.

Edited by BoschKurve, 25 May 2013 - 17:47.


#39 BoschKurve

BoschKurve
  • Member

  • 1,148 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 25 May 2013 - 17:42

It doesn't. And Montezemolo sees the same thing Ferrari have cared about for the last few decades, their advertising platform.


The Ferrari brand is bigger than F1 is now. They can go wherever they like at this point. If they opted for prototypes at Le Mans, they would do just fine with advertising.

Advertisement

#40 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 25 May 2013 - 17:54

That sounds about right to the best of my recollection. I know Montezemolo periodically starts singing about how Ferrari will take their talents and cars to Le Mans when he needs to rattle his saber at F1/FOM. I think perhaps what keeps him from doing this is simply the ease at which he can operate within F1 compared to any other race series out there.

I've always viewed the major relationships in F1 as nothing more than a good old boys network of the worst kind. If you consider the people who have the most power within the sport, their relationships all harken back to the 1960s/1970s. Even successions within the FIA have all involved that small group. Keep in mind also, MrE said all his employees wouldn't be without jobs once he sold off Brabham. Sure enough you've got his old spannerman Charlie Whiting in the position he is in...and he's hardly qualified for it as seen by how he is in over his head when it comes to the legality of various things. Point is that F1 is very much about who you know, and what your relationship with the few who hold power is. Perfect for Montezemolo who was around in the 70s to cavort with Bernie and Max. Why, his former employee is running the FIA now anyway.

If you ask me, this is the real reason the manufacturers who've gotten involved in F1 fail so miserably. They go in expecting something run a little more on the up-and-up, yet are in over their heads when it comes to dealing with all of those who hold the power. They have no one to appeal to because the power is all concentrated at the top. There's no higher power to appeal to. You don't know what you are getting with F1 given all the Machiavellian double-dealings and political powerplays that are constantly ongoing. Not that any other race series have these issues, but the manufacturers who've fielded works teams have gotten fleeced to no end. They don't know how to work the backroom magic because they've got stockholders and corporate boards to answer to, and be responsible to. I suspect if Colin Chapman were still alive, you would have seen Lotus easily beating the crap out of the manufacturers fielding teams simply because he could be autonomous in his thinking and dealings. This is why I think Mercedes is currently getting fleeced by Brawn and his high-priced collection of technical directors with Lauda and Wolff bringing up the rear. They all are close with Bernie. And the same group of people get ever richer year after year.


Thanks, pretty good summary. Enjoyed.

#41 BoschKurve

BoschKurve
  • Member

  • 1,148 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 25 May 2013 - 18:05

Thanks, pretty good summary. Enjoyed.


No problem, glad you enjoyed it. :)

#42 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 5,656 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 25 May 2013 - 19:40

The Ferrari brand is bigger than F1 is now. They can go wherever they like at this point. If they opted for prototypes at Le Mans, they would do just fine with advertising.


It's really not. No individual element is bigger than the sport. If Ferrari decided to leave next year, which they won't, there will be a bit of furore in the media and some disappointed tifosi, then life will go on and F1 will continue with it's 20 races a year. Ferrari will be left with running prototypes for the one weekend that gets a smidgeon of attention outside our world, and perhaps a bunch of other races which no one but the most dedicated fan cares about. Hardly a leap to suggest they may be losing something by pulling out.

#43 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 25 May 2013 - 20:50

No sport is bigger than life. No team is bigger than the sport. No individual is bigger than the team.

F1 would go on if Ferrari leaves. Other more successful teams have left in the past. In the initial years of F1, Ferrari was not even the strongest Italian team. But it is highly unlikely Ferrari would leave. They have well and truly bought by FOM to remain with them. One thing for sure. If Ferrari leads a breakaway series, that is when the chances of the breakaway series happening is the biggest. That they would be able to pull better than any other team, many teams combined actually.

#44 Nomore

Nomore
  • Member

  • 248 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 25 May 2013 - 21:15

No sport is bigger than life. No team is bigger than the sport. No individual is bigger than the team.

F1 would go on if Ferrari leaves. Other more successful teams have left in the past. In the initial years of F1, Ferrari was not even the strongest Italian team. But it is highly unlikely Ferrari would leave. They have well and truly bought by FOM to remain with them. One thing for sure. If Ferrari leads a breakaway series, that is when the chances of the breakaway series happening is the biggest. That they would be able to pull better than any other team, many teams combined actually.


more successful than Ferrari ? who ? :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

#45 Nomore

Nomore
  • Member

  • 248 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 25 May 2013 - 21:18

http://brandfinance....-powerful-brand
:wave: :wave: :wave: :wave: :wave: :wave:

#46 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 26 May 2013 - 02:53

http://brandfinance....-powerful-brand
:wave: :wave: :wave: :wave: :wave: :wave:



Most interesting; I didn't know that. Thank you.

#47 Wingcommander

Wingcommander
  • Member

  • 635 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 26 May 2013 - 07:00

Ferrari wont leave F1. There is nothing more to say about this.

#48 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 26 May 2013 - 15:06

Well no, Ferrari won't leave F1, that's true, that is until better alternative or necessity knocks on the door.

#49 Wingcommander

Wingcommander
  • Member

  • 635 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 26 May 2013 - 15:18

Well no, Ferrari won't leave F1, that's true, that is until better alternative or necessity knocks on the door.


That is all covered with Bernie paying Ferrari so much money. There is no better alternative for them.

#50 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,144 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 27 May 2013 - 21:22

I do not want to start a new thread, nor I would know where to post this, but does anyone knows who it is working on next year tire related specs? I mean not only basic technical info such as form, loads, geometry, but also that nonsense we are exposed to in current year in terms of rate of degradation, usable life span, etc.
A supplier wants contract, thus I assume there is something on the paper already. Who has reviewed this specs especially in light of current events, how many teams had input, etc. Does anyone knows?

Edited by Sakae, 27 May 2013 - 21:22.