8 replies to this topic

[billthekat]

Were there any agreements similar to the Mayfair Scale/ Paris Agreement prior to that particular deal being hammered out in late 1963?

Although I have looked, I really have not found anything which quite fits the bill. Needless to say, this sort of thing is about as popular a topic as one could ever imagine in Grand Prix racing.

Nor have I managed to find as much as I would like about the Formula Junior Constructors' Association, which gave birth to the Formula One Constructors' Association in January 1964. Needless to say, there appears to be a linkage between the Mayfair Scale/ Paris Agreement and the creation of the F1CA which seems apparent to even The Untrained Eye.

This is a part of the research effort that I have plodding along trying to sort out in recent days. Thus far, I have yet to find anything, although the dearth of discussion on such matters seems to speak volumes on how the starting money game was played.

I am becoming convinced that the birth of Modern Formula One As We Know It dates to 1964 with the Paris Scale and the F1CA making their appearances upon the stage. Not exactly an earth-shaking thesis, but one that I have mulled over at some length. Toss in the renewed interest in the International Sweepstakes as truly an International event and seems to be much more to the season than we often give it credit.

Just curious since there seems to be some gaps in my review of the literature and one can overlook the blindlingly obvious if you aren't careful.

[Dennis Hockenbury]

Originally posted by billthekat
I am becoming convinced that the birth of Modern Formula One As We Know It dates to 1964 with the Paris Scale and the F1CA making their appearances upon the stage. Not exactly an earth-shaking thesis, but one that I have mulled over at some length.

Perhaps not earth-shaking, but a thesis with which I completely agree Don.

It remains troubling that so little published information is available on this topic.

[Roger Clark]

There was a Monte Carlo Scale which preceded and was replaced by the Mayfair scale. Prior to that, starting money was fixed by haggling.

[billthekat]

Roger,

At least I have been able to find something in detail on the Mayfair/Paris agreement, but nothing on consequence on the Monte Carlo scale. Indeed, I have very few who even mention the Monte Carlo agreement much any details. Indeed, I am not even certain as to its tenure! Initially I had thought it would be mentioned somewhere in some form or fashion, but my lack of knowledge does not allow me to even make any comparisons. Very frustrating since DSJ never seemed to think it of enough interest to say much about it. Indeed, the more I have looked, the more noticeable it becomes that the discussion of the "business" of Grand Prix racing was generally muted in print.

I had set this aside for awhile, but sneaking up on it hasn't helped....

[Roger Clark]

In its 1963 form, the Monte Carlo Agreement required that organisers of World Championship races accept two cars from each of BRM, Lotus, Cooper, Lola (presumably Parnell's team was seen as a continuation of Bowmaker), Ferrari, Brabham, ATS and Honda (so perhaps there is some justification in the Boor Half Ton series!). Of these, BRM, Lotus and Cooper were the A-list, getting largest starting money for their first car, slightly less for the second. Lola and Ferrari, the second group received less for their first car than the A-list did for their second. BRM received a bonus as reigning world champions. The money paid included £100 which was supposed to cover practice. If a car practiced but did not race it would receive only the £100.

All of this was independent of the drivers employed, except that the figures were reduced by 20% if a non-graded driver was used. The big change with the Mayfair agreement was that it made separate provision for drivers, depending on their success in the previous year's championship.

The Monte Carlo Agreement was described as a gentleman's agreement, which presumably meant that their was still scope for Ferrari to argue for more because of the colour he painted his cars, and for the organisers of the Monaco Grand Prix to accept only sixteen cars.

I don't know when the Monte Carlo Agreement came into force, but I am sure that I have read a description of a similar scheme with the addition that special consideration would be made for RRC Walker's car when Moss was driving it. I'll try and remember where that was.

The signing of the Mayfair Agreement and the founding of the Constructor's Association were undoubtedly significant in the evolution of Formula One as it is today but it was an evolution and there were other changes which were equally significant. In my opinion, the most important was the increasing cross-fertilisation of European and North American racing. In Europe at the time we tended to think of it as a one-way street and affecting only the design of the cars. It was from this time that European teams became much more aware of the commercial possibilities of motor sport. I'm not saying that the 1968 Lotus wouldn't have been painted the way it was if Chapman hadn't gone to Indiana five years previously but it must have made him aware of the possibilities.

[billthekat]

Roger,

You are touching on a very puzzling point: in my ignorance, I have always been under the mistaken agreement that the Monte Carlo Agreement was exactly what you have termed it -- a Gentleman's Agreement. And an agreement that was apparently limited to only the GP de Monaco. That is my point in asking about whether there was another "collective bargaining" agreement that was widely accepted within the GP community. I have found nothing as of yet which suggests that the other clubs "bought" into the Monte Carlo Agreement. Or, as usual, am I missing something?

You have also identified one of the several other threads that seems to make 1964 so interesting, the re-disovery and restating of the American racing market for European -- British, actually -- producers.

It has gotten to be much longer story than I intended.

[Roger Clark]

Originally posted by Roger Clark

I don't know when the Monte Carlo Agreement came into force, but I am sure that I have read a description of a similar scheme with the addition that special consideration would be made for RRC Walker's car when Moss was driving it. I'll try and remember where that was.

It was in BRM Vol 2, pages 90 and 91. The Monte Carlo agreement was made on January 27 1961. Peter Berthon represented BRM and Doug's account is taken from his report to Sir Alfred.

The meeting was fairly heated, with Herr Schmidt of the AvD, who seems to have been negotiating on behalf of the CSI, walking out at one stage. The CSI proposed a sliding scale based on three categories of constructor, similar to that which I described for 1963. This was rejected by the constructors who argued that as they all had to make new cars their costs would be similar. In the end they agreed a common scale for all works cars, £1,000 for the first car, £900 for the second and £800 for the third. Scuderias, Equipes, Finance Houses etc, with the exception of Moss, would be offered between £400 and £600. There is no indication of what Moss would be paid, but all parties seem agreed that he was a special case.

It is clear that this agreement was to apply to all organisers of championship races. There is also reference to the 1959/60 Frankfurt scale, so it seems that even this was not the first such agreement.

[Ray Bell]

Who is there around today who might have been there as part of these agreements?

Jack Brabham... maybe John Surtees...

I know all too well the realities of asking questions of these guys... but I'm sure they'd not 'colour' their answers about monetary things as much as they would about racing issues.

[billthekat]

Talk about overlooking the obvious..... Good grannies, I knew I read it somewhere, but I thought it was in one the contemporary magazines and simply could not figure it out since everyone seems to generally ignore such things. Another, "Doh!" Moment.... Thank you, as always....