31 replies to this topic

[csylt]

I've just seen in Dieter Rencken's story today that it quotes series organiser Scott Poulter who says of its origins "Then I discovered that Tom Rubython (publisher of BusinessF1 magazine) had investigated the viability of a full championship. But Tom was too busy running his magazine, so I took over his material, then funded additional research."

I wonder if this means that BusinessF1 will be doing the MAsters programmes and magazines?!

[tidytracks]

And printing them where exactly?

I'm getting my money down for Lithuania now.

[Ross Stonefeld]

steady...

[csylt]

So long as the copy isn't libellous it surely doesn't matter where it is printed...

[csylt]

I wonder what was keeping Tom so busy on his magazine that Mr Poulter apparently had to take over the Masters project? Tom still seems to have a soft spot for the series though - there have been some glowing articles on it in BusinessF1

[tidytracks]

Originally posted by csylt
So long as the copy isn't libellous it surely doesn't matter where it is printed...

All I meant was that, following all the hubbub with the FIA, I thought Business F1 was now being printed in some far off land, as nobody wanted to take the risk of printing the mag anymore, and that Rubython would probably keep using the same print house if he were to do the programmes.

Was it Rubython who came up with the original idea for GPM? News to me. I thought it was somebody else, but I can't remember for the life of me who. And that's about as vague a post as you're going to see, lol

[Ross Stonefeld]

My first brush with GPM was in BusinessF1 about a year ago, they had ads for it that was a black page with the GPM logo, and the names of the drivers underneath and very little else. Your initial thought was "oh what crazy idea do we have for this off season"

[zac510]

I haven't been fortunate enough to read a BusinessF1 magazine but I understand it to just be a financial magazine.
Could someone please tell me what could possibly be libellous within the magazine?

By Private Message, if required?

Thanks!

[ensign14]

Originally posted by zac510
I haven't been fortunate enough to read a BusinessF1 magazine but I understand it to just be a financial magazine.
Could someone please tell me what could possibly be libellous within the magazine?

They appear quite often in Court...Alan Donnelly for one sued BusinessF1 for allegations about his role in the FIA and where his remuneration went. The mag had to pay £8,500 in damages, which is puny, but also legal costs, which would be gigantic.

Basically BF1 prints a lot of scuttlebutt and slags off a load of people. E.g. Pitchforth and Purnell (for getting zero sponsorship for Jaguar), F1 Racing (for praising Pitchforth and Purnell), Mosley (for washing his hands over Indy fiasco), SFW (lousy driver management) &c &c. There are a lot of financial details therein but the gossip pages are where the defamatory comments are made.

[zac510]

Intriguing strategy for an inside-industry magazine.

Thanks!

[csylt]

I think you're absolutely right Tidytracks. I'm surprised that Lithuanian features haven't accidentally sneaked into the magazine! Like Ross, the first place I saw the Masters ads was in BusinessF1 - that was a few months after an article about Poulter appeared in the magazine saying that he has a longterm ambition of starting a new racing series. I wish I knew where BusinessF1 gest its crystal balls!

[csylt]

by the way Tidytracks the quote from GPM's Scott Poulter in Dieter Rencken's story says "Then I discovered that Tom Rubython (publisher of BusinessF1 magazine) had investigated the viability of a full championship. But Tom was too busy running his magazine, so I took over his material, then funded additional research." I wonder whether Rubython came up with the idea himself or did he get it from elsewhere?

[tidytracks]

Has Rubython ever come up with his own ideas? From what I've heard of his reputation, its only vindictive ideas he manages to create on his own. lol. I heard once he even put his name on someone else's article at one of his mags. I could be wrong... you know how these stories get blown out of all proportion.

[Cosmograph]

Originally posted by tidytracks


All I meant was that, following all the hubbub with the FIA, I thought Business F1 was now being printed in some far off land, as nobody wanted to take the risk of printing the mag anymore, and that Rubython would probably keep using the same print house if he were to do the programmes.

Was it Rubython who came up with the original idea for GPM? News to me. I thought it was somebody else, but I can't remember for the life of me who. And that's about as vague a post as you're going to see, lol

What was the problem with the FIA? Any trademark issues with Bernie and the "F1" in the name?

Lastly, why would the "printers" face liability. It would the publisher and writer's liability unless the laws are different in the UK. In that case printers would have to have libel lawyers sign off on everything they touch. Unlikely IMO.

[ensign14]

Originally posted by Cosmograph


What was the problem with the FIA? Any trademark issues with Bernie and the "F1" in the name?

Rubython sued Ecclestone because BCE would not grant Rubython a paddock transfer to cover GPs. A move never likely to succeed and it did not.

Originally posted by Cosmograph

Lastly, why would the "printers" face liability. It would the publisher and writer's liability unless the laws are different in the UK. In that case printers would have to have libel lawyers sign off on everything they touch. Unlikely IMO.

They do face liability because they publish the defamatory material. As do shops stocking such material. There is a defence of "innocent dissemination" so these guys are not usually sued; but if a magazine has a record of being sued in Court chances are a store will become aware of this and if they continue stocking regardless they can be done.

[ensign14]

He must have sources inside the industry - but then again is someone providing him with false info? Has Bernie set anyone up to feed him porkies?

[csylt]

I have heard that not only does Rubython put his own name on other people's stories but he also puts other people's names on stories he has written!! I have this on very good authority.

Scott Poulter has done a great job with Rubython on the GP Masters though! It surprises me that Bernie has let it all go ahead. Ecclestone keeps such a tight grasp on everything even loosely F1 related yet here we have a seniors series which is nothing to do with him and people are saying that the racing is even better than F1.

Tom and Bernie are old friends though - business partners indeed. it was of course Bernie who funded EuroBusiness and Formula 1 Magazine which Tom ran and I wrote for myself. As for who's funding GP Masters, that's an interesting question - in Dieter Rencken's story Scott Poulter mentions six high net worth backers but doesn't say who. the main holding company is owned by a BVI company so it's tough to tell...

As for Tom suing the FIA and losing, that's spot on as well. The FIA's Alan Donnelly had more luck against him though: http://www.carter-ru...y-Judgment.html

[Cosmograph]

What's the market for his magazine. We don't get it in my locale and IIRC its horribly expensive. Assuming the claims of tabloid journalism are corrrect, who'd pay $400 USD per year for such "entertainment"?

[skinnylizard]

oooh, i like financials. but i dont think its quite possible to get hands on one of these here in bombay.

[ensign14]

Originally posted by Cosmograph
What's the market for his magazine. We don't get it in my locale and IIRC its horribly expensive. Assuming the claims of tabloid journalism are corrrect, who'd pay $400 USD per year for such "entertainment"?

Must be people in the industry otherwise Donnelly would not have sued (or would have received lower damages). It has a few pages of stats &c which may be of use to sponsors.

Maybe it's like Private Eye in the House of Commons...people read it with lawyer to hand.

[csylt]

Apparently BusinessF1 was all over the place at the Grand Prix Masters. Not sure whether it was the Simtek story cover or the latest one with A1GP on it. If it was the former, people may have spent more time reading it than watching the race - the cover story was one of the longest I have ever read. Not the most coherent either!

[tintin]

Originally posted by Cosmograph
What's the market for his magazine. We don't get it in my locale and IIRC its horribly expensive. Assuming the claims of tabloid journalism are corrrect, who'd pay $400 USD per year for such "entertainment"?

Believe me, if you sent them a cheque for $400, they would let you subscribe.

I don't think I've ever met anyone who admits to subscribing to it.
...most people in the industry appear to get free copies.

[Talisman]

Originally posted by ensign14
Basically BF1 prints a lot of scuttlebutt and slags off a load of people. E.g. Pitchforth and Purnell (for getting zero sponsorship for Jaguar), F1 Racing (for praising Pitchforth and Purnell), Mosley (for washing his hands over Indy fiasco), SFW (lousy driver management) &c &c. There are a lot of financial details therein but the gossip pages are where the defamatory comments are made.

I used to be quite sceptical about BF1's views about Pitchforth and Purnell but how have things turned out for them? They are both widely accreditted with turning Jaguar around during its last two seasons yet BF1 paints a picture of them as being incompetent backstabbers. I've heard stories from ex-Jag types that give credit to both versions of the story but lets look at it another way, despite having no enforced gardening leave I believe both Pitchforth and Purnell are unemployed, or are not employed within motorsports. Now if P/P were as good as the mainstream press appear to believe, surely they would have been snapped up within minutes of departing Jaguar? The fact that noone is touching them with a bargepole gives credence to BF1's view don't you think?

Also, BF1 have certainly been sued a few times but have you read the articles they HAVEN'T been sued for? It makes VERY interesting reading. Eddie Jordan diverting the $20 million dollar payoff from Honda after 2002 to a separate company that just happened to have him and his wife on the board of directors until someone on the Jordan F1 board started to ask questions about where the Honda money had gone to. Eddie Jordan lying to and intimidating the Vodaphone exec who was negotiating with Jordan and Ferrari about sponsorship. John Byfield being utterly incompetent and lying over Button's contract with BAR to both Williams and to BAR.

The financial stuff is certainly interesting and would appeal very much to the group of people who make a living off F1, whether promoters or whatever. It is most definitely worth a read, but £25 a copy is quite steep.

[ensign14]

Originally posted by Talisman


I used to be quite sceptical about BF1's views about Pitchforth and Purnell but how have things turned out for them? They are both widely accreditted with turning Jaguar around during its last two seasons yet BF1 paints a picture of them as being incompetent backstabbers.

And another point made by BF1 that seems to be borne out is that they were useless at selling sponsorship. After all, what else is there on the Red Bulls? I wondered whether Mateschitz' decision that they would be sole sponsor (and making a virtue of it at the start of the season) was faute de mieux.

Originally posted by Talisman

Also, BF1 have certainly been sued a few times but have you read the articles they HAVEN'T been sued for? It makes VERY interesting reading. Eddie Jordan diverting the $20 million dollar payoff from Honda after 2002 to a separate company that just happened to have him and his wife on the board of directors until someone on the Jordan F1 board started to ask questions about where the Honda money had gone to.

It may have been true...but there are possible reasons behind such diversion; a tax-efficient way of paying wages or something.

Originally posted by Talisman

Eddie Jordan lying to and intimidating the Vodaphone exec who was negotiating with Jordan and Ferrari about sponsorship.

That didn't need much digging out - all you needed was the transcript of the Jordan v Vodafone trial. I take your point though.

More interesting to me are the stories that the mainstream media simply does not touch, perhaps out of fear that they will be frozen out of access. E.g. the Weber trial for perjury for one where the sainted Willi was forced to pay a fine (50k euros, I think, but that says a lot for him). Was that ever in Autosport? F1 Racing?

[Talisman]

Originally posted by ensign14
And another point made by BF1 that seems to be borne out is that they were useless at selling sponsorship. After all, what else is there on the Red Bulls? I wondered whether Mateschitz' decision that they would be sole sponsor (and making a virtue of it at the start of the season) was faute de mieux.

I must have missed that one about the sponsorship, but in retrospect it makes sense. The Jaguar may have been chock full of logos but most of them were in it as a favour to Ford or were Ford subsiduaries/associates like AT&T, HSBC and Lear. The only Jag sponsor I remember that didn't have an obvious link was Becks.

[Felix]

More interesting to me are the stories that the mainstream media simply does not touch, perhaps out of fear that they will be frozen out of access. E.g. the Weber trial for perjury for one where the sainted Willi was forced to pay a fine (50k euros, I think, but that says a lot for him). Was that ever in Autosport? F1 Racing?

It was on Autosport.com on 16 August:

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/46327

[Jacaré]

Originally posted by Talisman
The Jaguar may have been chock full of logos but most of them were in it as a favour to Ford or were Ford subsiduaries/associates like AT&T, HSBC and Lear.

I reckon Jackie Stewart would have personally made a lot of those deals back in the old days of the team, with the likes of HSBC etc

[ensign14]

And even that is interesting - look at the headline. It could barely have been spun by Weber better. Just one comment at the end that Nuppeney has re-started his lawsuit as a result of the perjury charges.

[csylt]

I wonder about some stories in BusinessF1 though. A case in point is Eddie Jordan diverting the $20 million dollar payoff from Honda after 2002 to a separate company that just happened to have him and his wife on the board of directors until someone on the Jordan F1 board started to ask questions about where the Honda money had gone to. This appeared in the January 2005 issue of BusinessF1. However if you (regsiter for free) and take a look at the following link, you'll find a very similar story in the Irish Independent newspaper (fifth down) from April 2004:
http://www.unison.ie...&issue_id=10682

At least Grand Prix Masters was far simpler to follow than this...

[Mat]

I just heard that Business F1 has been placed into receivership and Rubython is personally bankrupt. Is this because of, or seperate to GP Masters?

[tintin]

This is separate.
However he has started up a new magazine.

[todayshorse]

What is the new magazne called?

-F1Business
-Buisness in F1
-Euro businessF1
-Buisness business
-F1BusinessF1

Im never sure what to make of Mr Rubython, my mrs likes his senna book, but i wasnt convinced, i sort of liked that glossy F1 magazine (well the odd bit of it)that he was involved with, until it got more and more senna this senna that every issue, and how all teams should be using a twin keel or somthing, and any that didnt, well, may the devil strike them down. Somthing like that anyway.

I dont really know much about him but it seems he starts somthing, makes a wad, loses it, starts somthing else. Or am i wrong?

Or is it not worth bothering :