There are a bunch of stories knocking around this morning which are designed to be noticed. One is the suggestion that there could be a Bahraini on the board of the Formula One group, another that Mercedes-Benz could pull out of F1. Neither are to be taken too seriously. If one looks at the ownership of the various F1 teams one could extrapolate any number of daft stories about who might be on the board of the Formula One group. If CVC Capital Partners wanted to put a member of the Taliban on the F1 board, no-one is going to stop them. But does that mean that they will? It is true that the Bahrain holding company Mumtalakat has 50 percent of the shares of McLaren, but who is the chairman (and therefore the casting vote)? As to whether Mercedes will pull out of F1, the story is similarly misleading. Yes, Mercedes may have totted up how much it would cost them to withdraw from F1, but they might also have worked out how much lawyers fees would cost to mount a challenge to the Formula One flotation and realised that lobbing a law suit would certainly get the attention of the financial people and would probably screw up any hope of the float taking place. Thus it is in the interest of the Formula One group to find a workable solution with the German car company, rather than watch it go and take a quarter of the F1 engines with it. These are games that are played at times like this in F1 negotiation. If the Formula One group pushes too far it has a lot more to lose than Mercedes. In the old days when the Formula One group and the FIA were hand in glove then a challenge was a more dangerous path to take, but these days the Formula One group must play a little less fast and loose. The people behind the money need their reputation unsullied and they have taken plenty of pain in recent years in Germany, which is a story that has still not gone away. They do not need a lawsuit from a major car company, which in recent years has been one of the pillars of the sport.
- Comment
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
joeblogsf1 
Mercedes supply 3 out of 12 teams = 25% ??
Never was good at maths… but that looks right to me.
Thanks for the summary Joe. I guess these kind of stories were to be expected during the Concorde and now floatation negotiations.
Mercedes, the team and the engine supply, pulling out on the face of it would be quite detrimental to the sport. I’m sure all relevant parties are well aware of that. Has there been any talk, or should we expect and talk, of new manufactures joining?
In the early 2000’s there was often as much talk off manufactures building engines or buying teams as there is countries building tracks today. Is the automotive industry really not interested in F1 at the moment? Is it too expensive? too elitist? not “Green” enough?
Side note, indirectly related, watching some of the continuous season reviews on a certain dedicated F1 channel I’ve been amazed at the level of unreliability there was in F1 until very recently. It’s one of those things you forget I guess. Surely with the essential development freeze on engines an F1 programme should appeal to manufacturers at the moment
Joe, there’s also this:
http://rt.com/news/bahrain-arrest-nabeel-rajab-673/
but it is impossible from the outside to tell who is who, really, at least to me, or at least my casual study of just big arguments tells me some people just latch on. I shouldn’t joke like that, but just get two guys in a shouting match, and friends jump in with the most tenuous of positions, one side or the other.
Sadly I have a pal who is like that, causes a lot of arguments, or has ever since some unfortunate turns in his life, but I thought the observation relevant that men (not exclusively) do like to take positions just for the sake of it.
By all means say that I am demeaning the politics, because I simply dislike politics, but what I am trying to say that in any power shift, there’s always people willing to take advantage of that, to fill the gaps. Please understand, I don’t understand the politics in Bahrain, shall not claim to know. But I would be pleased to be informed.
. . .
For F1, I think the err upshot of having a Bahrain GP is showing itself here in this rumor mongering. I’m going to keep a level head about the actual race, and what surrounded it, but maintain that noone thought anything through. Not Parisian salons, for sure. These “stories” look like mud slinging, to me. I mean, deliberate embarrassment.
Tin foil hat on: there may very well be people upset in Bahrain, in high places or low, who would very much like to derail the flotation. Even those who are within the establishment may have taken it very hard that F1 brought such attention. To such people, it is quite conceivable they care less for F1, even if they have put some tiny bit of their money into the sport. Face can be ever so much more valuable, in the long run, than darling Bernie’s card little games in the Singapore parlour.
Regards the hand in glove thing. I find it very hard to get a grip on any position M. Todt takes. I suppose a good part of that is it was so easy – for me, at least, understanding his personal background – to suss what Max’s line was. Joe, I do know you speak on friendly terms with a really interesting cross section of the French racing elite. I would love to hear – here or in the magazine – more of the personal views as to Jean T’s style, now he most certainly has his feet under the desk. If you could do that interview style with anyone not directly racing, from JT’s background, that would be excellent.
I didn’t read your piece this way the first time, but I think you hit the nail on the head: “Who is JT?” is a very serious question this year and next.
There was an interesting article in today’s (London) Times newspaper about it. They claim that in the last 20 years they, Mercedes – Benz have poured in to F1 close to $1 Billion, but since leaving F1 as a team back in the 1950’s, they have only won one race, since returning.
Bernie’s reply was that Red Bull and Ferrari and McLaren have won a lot more races, hence why they are at the top table, and not Mercedes. The same he said about Honda and Toyota who have pulled out of F1.
Of course, Mercedes has put in money, but also gained as teams have had to pay for the engines, and when the car – team wins, they also gain with association, but of course it didn’t say that in the newspaper article. Headline figures, only, typical newspaper. Yes it got you wondering about how much they have spend, and what sort of return they have had from it.
Honda got a lot of return on their investment over the years. You can see it in car sales, and that was only with association. Some very interesting university studies about this type of investment – marketing spend have been done to show the direct link to sales – spend in F1. In today’s climate we see the same sort of results with Red Bull, and the value – return on spend they get back from there involvement in F1. Brand awareness is much higher than some of the other sectors they invest in.
As for Mercedes – Benz, they think of themselves as a premier car company which of course they are, hence why they seem to think they should be at the top table. I would think that if the same case applies then Renault have a very good claim to be at the top table well before Mercedes Benz get there seat. Given that they had a team that did win a lot of races, and yes they have supplied a lot of teams with engines. Not sure of the figures, which I am sure Joe, has on his finger tips.
I presume that this was the source of the other stories. There is obviously a desire in some quarters to deal with Mercedes before they mess up the float. Thus trying to nudge them towards the door, using the media is no surprise.
Joe,
In a way this goes back to what I would call, the historical – heritage of F1. We need certain tracks and we need certain teams with a long history in F1 to be in the mix for the float.
As for the IPO, it will be geared towards what sort of revenue stream Bernie has put forward over the next say 5 years. That is then down to the contracts – filing cabinets of papers – he has and now strong they are to enforce. If the deal is with a local government, and they change hands, then one wonders where the value is, and of course we are seen a change in France and Greece in Europe right now. (There have been 11 leadership changes in Europe since the problems started).
I personally don’t see how strong of a hand Mercedes Benz actually have, compared to say Renault. Over the years, as you know we have had all the big car companies in F1, some with much better track records than Mercedes, and they have left, either gone from motor sports or looked at other parts of the motor sports sector to put their time and money into, and in a few case had a much better return on time & investment and awareness of their brand.
Bernie is not stupid, and he does like Mercedes, has a few of their pre-war cars in his collection, from their old glory days. But he is right, they have only won one race as a team since the 1950’s, where as the other 3 teams at the top table have won championships for Drivers and Constructors in the last 10 years alone.
There is also a huge desire within MB, not contemporary but in perpetuity, to associate themselves with a heart of motorcars they cannot quite claim. They feel they have certain rights over motorcars and racing.
This is not true, in absolute history, but they will do an awful lot to put their name at the forefront of public imagination. They are the ones who always have a haughty demeanour, as to their history, do not be confused by their nice guys in the paddock. I think arrogance = driving a MB. That’s why I drove them . .
They have a huge agenda to explain why they are not more e-motive than the super diesels and electric trains of AUDI or Peugeot.
For historical reasons, personally I do not deal ads with MB, though I have loved many of their motors. I just think they are pushing things through, and don’t have the engine tech.
If you buy a S class, I mean they have everything first, break tech through today and heads up displays with IR, always ahead on that. . . well those always are stunning, but the real move now is to super efficient powerful – say that again, powerful – diesel. MB are always fixing everything else, meanwhile selling brutal lumps for other to tune. But when I grow up to be an exec (har har) I want a wicked LM spec engine in my limo!
They are not in that game.
My experience, as a company, MB have always been tetchy, they want you to believe, they do not want to engage in much debate. Take it or leave it, their version of history.
I personally love the MB serious coachwork and interiors, but i feel they slip a bit.
The one car I want to get, not very expensive now, just few of them, is their 1991/2 600 SEC.
I couldn’t stretch to that, at time, my motors paid me back by being loaned to a friend whose sons did chauffeur drive, so no coupes allowed – upshot never had to clean the buggers!
But if I could go back and have garaged a 60 grand motor, I’d love to dust off one of those. Seriously sweet, insane to sling one about, the ones I was loaned. Metallic brown, by the way, was what I wanted, whooo, pure cheese!
Ooops, sorry. Just saying I love the Benz, but I think they are truly off the ball. I want a Benz limo styling, with a AUDI or Peugeot 4ish L engine, because that would trounce the old V12 6.0L I am reminiscing about. That is a torque battle well lost by the V12s.
I think my plan was to say that MB are not cool in motors, particularly not since they did the Maybach rebuild, and they want their toys returned. They actually do act as if they gave the industry to everyone else to play with.
Might explain why they are digging hard into F1.
Ahh, well one can in theory buy your own LMP:
http://www.rmauctions.com/FeatureCars.cfm?SaleCode=MC12&CarID=r347#
Who needs a batmobile . .
oh, the travails of poverty, not having one’s private racetrack and all that !
I am pretty darned sure now that Peugeot actually did show a prototype limo with their LMP diesel. [googles a bit] yup, the 908 RC. Now I know what I was banging on about. What is it with these people not putting motors like that into production?? I say unfair, even if I couldn’t afford one.
My apols for absolutely regrettable grammar above. I grew up lusting after big Benz, wangled a way to afford them, but more grown up me doesn’t see the attraction. I can’t tell you whether the peculiar sample of me is any indicator, but I struggle now to think what MB’s core market is. There definitely used to be a “type” who would drive one, and I don’t see that any more. If I think as a driver, so many equivalents come to mind first, the AUDI A8 possibly front of queue. I just haven’t heard of any young lad aspiring to own a Merc in a very very long while. Not sure boys always did, but I am tempted to suggest they lost their status symbol image. Which would make any company act funny.
I really agree with John C’s comment below, and wonder if Merc are not trying to regain some mojo exclusively through F1. It all looks a bit clingy, to me . .
This is what happens when you go walking out in the rain to get dinner stuff with petrol head mate, arguing what car we should buy next, and getting a bit wound up that new Jag turbo (this season’s styling is so much better, so no ex hire ones to pick up) is most assuredly off the menu. Dinner was spent with us plotting . .
My take on it is Mercedes don’t like the fact that the success of the team they bought out (under specific & difficulty economic circumstances, albeit on the back of a double championship win) is being ignored.
Heck, had they simply renamed the team ‘Brawn Mercedes GP’ then this whole mess could maybe have been avoided.
I would have liked it if they had kept Ross’ name on the title. Ross most definitely earned the recognition. I’d like F1 to be more personal. Even AUDI’s all conquering LM team recognizes Reinhold Joest without any detraction from the car company.
He seems lately to have been distracted, but what I truly like about Tony Fernandes, is he came in and put his face to the game, when the other new team owners hid away. Hope to see him front and center more often, again.
I also agree it could have avoided all sorts of corporate bother, naming the team as you suggest. Mercedes corporate might have thought a bit more about the hangover from other big car cos coming and going. It’s not a terrible deal for them, but I always get a bit of a feeling they are somehow cold and remote as a company, and that’s not bitterness at insane 4 figure servicing bills I used to pay!
Hi Joe,
Another fine piece in diffusing the situation!
The overriding feeling I get is that Mercedes are too valuable to F1 – to Bernie, in that should they leave, F1 will rely solely on Ferrari for it’s ongoing reputation.
What this will also mean is that F1 would become increasingly vulnerable to Ferrari’s demands.
If Ferrari left the sport, which isn’t inconceivable given comments by Luca di Montezemolo in recent years, F1 would be finished.
This entire prospect underpins the floatation and one would have to suspect that the sport will come to it’s senses, indirectly due to Ferrari once again…
http://real-motorsport.com/2012/05/08/merc-pulling-the-plug-on-f1-really/
Cheers!
Nobody is indispensable. Had you asked somebody in 1965 whether F1 could survive Lotus, Brabham, BRM and Cooper all pulling out of the sport I think they would have assumed that would spell the end. A decade earlier if you had told anyone that within five years Maserati and Mercedes would both be gone there might well have been a shudder of apprehension. Down the years we’ve also lost constructors such as Alfa Romeo, Vanwall, Renault, Benetton, Matra and Tyrrell (and Williams are as good as gone, sadly), all of whom were Championship-winning outfits. However, done over a period of years, and with many of the top teams suffering long slow declines, the sport could lose anyone and survive.
From my point of view, thinking back to my early F1 experiences, there were periods of the 1980s and 1990s when Ferrari were a joke. They survived the early ’80s slump because Gilles Villeneuve was spectacular even in a dog slow car, but the Alesi-Berger period of the 1990s could have seen Ferrari drop off the grid and only the die-hard tifosi would have missed them. Did viewing figures fall? I don’t have the numbers, and my UK viewpoint might well have been skewed by the effects of Mansell mania, but I doubt it. If you think Ferrari have magic racing pixie dust then I say two things to you: A1GP, and Indianapolis 2005. If Maranello think that watching a field of Ferraris only competing against each other, or some make-weight no hopers getting trounced by the red cars, will make compelling viewing then they are wrong. You are only as good as your opposition and with mediocre opponents Ferrari can only show that they are slightly less mediocre.
Ferrari are actually in an exceptionally weak position. Their entire brand identity is tied into their F1 involvement; it is their only real form of advertising. If Ferrari withdrew from F1 what would their USP be? How would they differentiate themselves from Lamborghini, Pagani and the rest? Going up against Audi and Toyota in the WEC would be their only blue riband option, and they’d likely get their backsides handed to them on four interlocked Ingolstadt plates, at least for the first few years. Formula One really is Ferrari’s only option, and I wish that somebody would call their bluff and see just how many of their words are puffery and posturing. There might be a dip in viewers for a couple of years, but once the FIA had proven that the fastest cars and best drivers were still in racing in F1 then the punters would return. Ferrari needs Formula One far more than Formula One needs Ferrari.
I’m with John C.
me too!
Point noted, not going to argue with that one!
Mercedes has big enough hands.
Of course, if Mercedes did leave, it would royally screw up McLaren, which could all be part of the plan, given the way they’ve been treated by TPTB over recent years…
As pointed out by others, F1 will survive the withdrawal of manufacturers, sponsors, teams, drivers, tracks, etc. The key however is viewers. Bernie’s success over the years has been to convince people to watch the spectacle and that the spectacle is bigger than any one personality or team. This has been what he plays off against other parties in his negotiations.
But. I wonder if the sport is in a decline from its peak. Are there new markets to conquer? Is the sport starting to get too expensive (tickets, TV subscriptions, etc) for the sport to continue to grow and hence add value to its owners? Or will the sport simply become an affordable luxury good – trading volumes for higher prices – much like the LVMH stable products.
Bernie’s success has been his ability to do deals, and to divide and conquer
And on that note, no wonder why there’s confusion everywhere whilst Big B lays off his latest trick . . does anyone ever learn?? 🙂