Is this a new era of F1?

NJDMONEY · 22 Jun 2005, 01:05 (Ref:1336646)

Now that Max and Co have finally stood up to the teams and enforced the rules and it cost the teams dearly, is this the galvanizing event that makes the teams fall in line to accept all of Max's "cost decreasing, competition increasing" rules?

Robert Duncan · 22 Jun 2005, 02:05 (Ref:1336669)

I am not sure who stood up to whom. Max may have stood up to the teams, the teams may have stood up to Max, but at what cost to Formula One? The teams may have to pay, but it will really just mean less budget to race. Formula One loses all around.

I think Max's forcing competition via rules is the root cause of all this mess.

The current regime is destroying F1, has been for the last ten years.

We might be entering the era of no Formula One...

ggreen29 · 22 Jun 2005, 02:09 (Ref:1336672)

With all the litigation possibilities as well as fines and reimbursement the teams will have to pay to FIA or sponsors, Max's decision Sunday increased costs while decreasing competition...though maybe that's what you meant.

NJDMONEY · 22 Jun 2005, 03:24 (Ref:1336714)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ggreen29

With all the litigation possibilities as well as fines and reimbursement the teams will have to pay to FIA or sponsors, Max's decision Sunday increased costs while decreasing competition...though maybe that's what you meant.

No. The premise of my question was the previous rule changes Max proposed but many of the teams resisted. Those changes were, beneath the surface, intended to reduce costs and increase competition.

ggreen29 · 22 Jun 2005, 03:31 (Ref:1336716)

Max's decision on Sunday did the opposite, hence I question his judgement...again.

Raglanparade · 22 Jun 2005, 03:51 (Ref:1336735)

I think there may be some truth in this 'new era' statement.

Over the last ten years, the companies that support Formula 1 have gained increasing power (through the increased volumes of money flowing through the sport).

Michelin tryed to use there tyre supply advantage to out muscle the rules of the sport. Some may even suggest that Michelin attempted to hold the FIA to ransom over the US GP.

The FIA stood up and made a stand, and did so for the good of the sport. The underlying argument by Max and Bernie is that the FIA rules the the sport, not Michelin, not Ferrari, or any other Manufacturer or Supplier.

The US GP debarcle could have been avoided, yes. But it would have set a precedent of businesses and players in Formula 1 having power over the FIA.

Formula 1 will go on, it always has, and always will. F1 can live without Michelin, F1 can live without Ferrari, F1 will always be F1, and will always have an audience. What the FIA has to concentrate on now is making the best of the current situation, without backing down on there 'we are the boss' stance.

ggreen29 · 22 Jun 2005, 05:03 (Ref:1336760)

Their "'we are the boss' stance" has created the smallest F1 fields in my lifetime (and I'm not referring to the 6 at Indy). The folks at the top maybe making money, but their physical product is shrinking. As the micromanagement increases the field decreases. The trend shows no sign of reversing.

frederick · 22 Jun 2005, 06:03 (Ref:1336782)

I certainly think it's a new era

Max can rant and rave about the rules all he wants, they're empty threats
If the 7 teams and Michelin tell him to get stuffed what's he going to do?
Kick them out of the championship?
dis-affiliate them from the FIA?

That's exactly what they want

Max wins !
he's left with Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi in the "official" F1 championship

Red · 22 Jun 2005, 07:21 (Ref:1336818)

The teams had signed a certain Concorde Agreement. They too have obligations. The 7 teams and Michelin can't tell him to stuff it. Before 2008 that is.

Dutton · 22 Jun 2005, 07:28 (Ref:1336823)

Well they could, it would just cost them a lot of money.

frederick · 22 Jun 2005, 07:52 (Ref:1336835)

Well this is only the FIA we're talking about. It's not as if they're a sovereign state or anything, they might try to sue but against 5 manufacturers and a tyre company they will only get tied-up in the courts for years
and the main reason for their existing will have gone, along with any authority over lesser classes of motorsport being diminished as a result

Robert Duncan · 22 Jun 2005, 11:32 (Ref:1337029)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasonhill9884

Formula 1 will go on, it always has, and always will.

But will it be Formula One or Formula Max.

Why do we need another spec series?

We already have spec series in the states that use various sets of common tires, transmissions, brakes, suspension, ECM and engines. They provide great racing, but they are not F1.

Maybe F1 should be renamed International Racing League. Yeah, IRL that's the ticket

.

Hip Priest · 22 Jun 2005, 11:48 (Ref:1337039)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasonhill9884

I think there may be some truth in this 'new era' statement.

Over the last ten years, the companies that support Formula 1 have gained increasing power (through the increased volumes of money flowing through the sport).

Michelin tryed to use there tyre supply advantage to out muscle the rules of the sport. Some may even suggest that Michelin attempted to hold the FIA to ransom over the US GP.

The FIA stood up and made a stand, and did so for the good of the sport. The underlying argument by Max and Bernie is that the FIA rules the the sport, not Michelin, not Ferrari, or any other Manufacturer or Supplier.

The US GP debarcle could have been avoided, yes. But it would have set a precedent of businesses and players in Formula 1 having power over the FIA.

Formula 1 will go on, it always has, and always will. F1 can live without Michelin, F1 can live without Ferrari, F1 will always be F1, and will always have an audience. What the FIA has to concentrate on now is making the best of the current situation, without backing down on there 'we are the boss' stance.

I agree that the FIA should act more like "The Boss".

However, if i made an large mistake in work, my boss would punish me, but he would also come up with a way of working around the mistake so that our client wasn't adversely affected by it.

Your should also let Max know that Ferrari are not bigger than F1 too. Because when Bridgestone turned up at a sodden Interlagos with no wet tyres, everyone had to do the first few laps under yellow flags until the track had dried sufficiently for Ferrari to use their intermediates. However, when Michelin make the exact same mistake, the same treatment is not forthcoming.

BootsOntheSide · 22 Jun 2005, 12:15 (Ref:1337075)

From what I rememebr the issue at Interlagos was more than Michelin hadn't brought suitable wet tyres for the monsoonal conditions (it was probably as wet as we've seen in F1 for a decade). If you're right, then the whole thing is even more sordid than we thought.