Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourer
I guess that the statement from the US representatives will either be the start of something bigger or achieve nothing at all. Interesting move.
|
It was the anticipated move. Everyone felt there were clear anti-trust issues with this? It's effectively closed off. The response from FOM didn't do them any favors as it was blatantly biased. Based upon their justification a number of the existing teams don't belong in F1.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourer
Much of what is said in the statement refers to US companies (GM specifically) not being able to compete against rivals. The logic fail in that of course is that Ford is able to do so with RBR and GM could do so too - once it has an engine in 2028 of course (whether that engine be in an Andretti car or another team's car).
|
Of course repeating the FOM position really doesn't address the issues that Andretti and GM bring up in the letter. Of course for FOM it's a closed issue. As we all know the answer was... No to Andretti and GM, we would love to see you... with an existing team. And of course the 2028 aspect is pure fiction and nothing more than a delaying tactic to push the problem far enough into the future that Andretti and GM has moved onto other things. So the FOM logic doesn't make any sense at all. I mean nobody in their right mind would believe the "try again" answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourer
Also interesting that most, if not all of the questions asked have already been answered in the FOM rejection statement - maybe the Congress members are unaware of that document? Maybe they are also unaware that it indicates the answer would be different for 2028 once Caddy has its own engine?
|
You say "would" be different for 2028. There is zero evidence of that (see above). And I assume you are joking that the FOM response is somehow not part of this? It would be at the heart of it (see earlier comments).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourer
Maybe the next thing we'll have is one of the existing teams approaching the EU complaining that a new team within the current Concorde Agreement would impact too much on its revenue and put many jobs at risk?
Then we'd have blowhard politicians from both sides of the Atlantic beating their chests.
|
It's probably hard to build your arguments on a foundation of monopolistic behavior. It's not a good look and not particularly defensible.
What do I think will happen with this? Probably nothing. Probably just continue to be a thorn in the side of F1. It just seems to depend upon it getting any traction in the US political sphere. It if does, then maybe something might come of it. And I expect the next Concorde Agreement will double down and instead of revising the process to allow new teams, they will remove that all together and just fix the team count at 10. And this is already reported as being the direction. I do think that does create more anti-trust issues for the future however.
Richard