Luca Montezemolo is a character. Now 66, he has been around Formula 1 – to a lesser or greater extent – since 1973, when he became Enzo Ferrari’s personal assistant at the age of only 25. The following year he was promoted to become Ferrari’s sporting director. He transformed the F1 team from being an operation that had not won the Constructors’ title since 1964, into a mighty force that would win four Constructors’ titles in five years between 1975 and 1979. He was also one of the primary architects, along with Bernie Ecclestone and Max Mosley of the Concorde Agreement in the early 1980s.
In 1977 he moved up through the Fiat empire: managing the drinks company Cinzano, leading Fiat’s publishing empire for a while, running the Italian America’s Cup Challenge and heading the Italian World Cup organization. He was the golden boy. At the end of 1991 Gianni Agnelli called him back to Ferrari to sort out the mess it had become. Montezemolo was then 44 years of age and he has held the role ever since, although his links grew weaker in 2004 when he became President of Confindustria, the Italian employers’ federation, and then chairman of Fiat itself, a role he held for six years. Since 2010 he has been more hands-on at Ferrari, while also trying (unsuccessfully thus far) to break into Italian politics.
With the F1 season just finished, Montezemolo decided to go on Italian TV, giving an interview broadcast last night to RAI, the Italian national broadcaster. This was interesting in a number of respects, notably because he confirmed once again that “we have reached an agreement with Ecclestone and the FIA and we are the only team with the right of veto: more political weight than that is impossible! We are aware of our strength in Formula 1, which without us, would be completely different. Having said that, it’s true that weight also comes from having a winning car and that was lacking.”
He said that he expects to see considerable change at the FIA after the next presidential election.
“For too many years the Federation has always been the same and, as in everything, a change is required,” Montezemolo said. “Having said that, a strong sporting authority is always a priority for Ferrari.”
On the sporting side he said that 2013 was “a year to forget, a disappointing season” and said that there were three reasons for this: the team’s inability to develop the car in the second half of the year; the change in the tyres which meant that the Ferrari no longer worked as well and suggested that “one team” had not behaved correctly in the horse-trading over the tyre regulations, saying that had been “a touch of Pontius Pilate about it”. The final reason he gave for Ferrari’s lack of success was Felipe Massa’s inability to score points.
“Our aim is to build a car capable of winning,” he said, in relation to 2014. “We have carried out a very extensive reorganisation and highly regarded engineers such as [James] Allison have joined us or returned to us. There will be the new regulations which will give more importance to some areas, such as the engine, where we are very competent. We have good cause to be optimistic and all the ingredients to win are in place. We have come within a whisker of success too often and now we must win, I just hope there are no unclear aspects that could have an influence on things.”
In addition, Montezemolo suggested that Bernie Ecclestone’s stated desire to have Christian Horner as his replacement was a joke.
“As the years go by, he [Ecclestone] more and more enjoys making jokes,” he said, “and I’m happy he still has the desire to do so…”
The message was hardly subtle, but it reflects a widely-held view in F1 circles that Bernie’s suggestion of Horner as a possible successor was not very serious and that it was probably made because Mr E felt the need to suggest to someone (presumably the investors in the Formula One group) that there is a possible succession plan, rather than having them parachute someone into the sport.
joeblogsf1 
Ferrari needs F1 more than the other way round. The sooner they stop paying them more and giving them preferential treatment the better. Ridiculous situation!
yes, an F1 made up of soft drink companies, Maldonados and Chiltons. brilliant!
Odd, that’s F1 now, regardless of Ferrari or perhaps even because of Ferrari (keeping the teams divided via preferential treatment).
Ferrari won’t leave if they had their prefect badge removed. They’d threaten and sulk and posture like any spoilt brat but they know they need to be in the pinnacle of Motorsport and will stay. And if they didn’t? So what. Plus ca change plus c’est la meme chose! If one of the top football clubs decided to leave the champions league and play netball I doubt all their fans would switch and never watch football again. They would keep watching and eventually side with another team.
You don’t know what you’re talking about. If Ferrari would lose their status, and if they do leave the sport, F1 will lose enourmously. At Silverstone, there were almost as many red caps and t-shirts as McLaren. That’s at Silverstone, where Ferrari have probably the least fans.
I would say in my un-educated opinion that the attendance to F1 GPs without Ferrari would drop by at least 10-15%.
Even Bernie said the most important things to fans about F1 are Ferrari and the noise the engines make.
Pinnacle of the motorsport? F1 is no longer that in my opinion. It could be called pinnacle just because the technology and the money spent, but not the racing. And Ferrari are in it for the racing.
Well when someone starts with ‘you don’t know what you are talking about’ and then continues by admitting their opinion is ‘uneducated’ I fail to see the value in giving any response other than ‘tripe!’ 😉
I agree – I don’t like the current state of F1 and we will see what 2014 brings -but Ferrari for better or worse are not the show – they are just one of the First Division – nothing else. The same applies to the road cars for all the mystique that the marque has
Maybe this is Luca’s way of throwing his hat in the ring for Bernie’s job. At 17 years younger than the man he’d be replacing his appointment would bring both youth (relatively) and experience.
Joe, If a new benevolent dictator in F1 took over and took away Ferrari’s veto, split 40% percent of the money among the teams and had a spending cap. Would Ferrari leave F1? Would F1 shrivel up and die?
Ferrari needs F1 as much as F1 needs Ferrari. They forget that sometimes.
Heartened to hear Montezemolo paid his dues at a mere ‘drinks company’ before tackling F1.
The sport ‘completely different’ without Ferrari?
Yes, Lotus-Renault would have come 3rd in the 2013 WCC and the rest would have shuffled up – that’s about it.
I’m glad the stated ‘aim is to build a car capable of winning’ for 2014 – begs the question what the aim for 2013 was.
I’d guess it’s the same as every other team: “To build a capable of winning”.
Sadly, as for most teams, there was someone else building a car more capable of winning,
🙂
Isn’t Luca calling the stewards and the FIA out on inconsistent and biased decisions sort of hypocritical?
Hypocrisy flows easy in the streams that drain from F1.
That’s almost Zen in its poetry. 🙂
Your words are usually refreshingly direct – this ditty however is delightfully deep in its simplicity….. Do you mind if I adapt and reuse in my workplace?
Mr. Montezemolo can obviously say whatever what he likes, but scapegoating Felipe Massa in any way is laughable. If Ferrari had had two Alonsos this year, they’d theoretically have scored 484 points (242 points X 2). And they’d still have lost the championship by 112 points to Red Bull’s 596 points (unless the argument is that Alonso #2 would have taken points off of Webber, but I can’t imagine that that would have made 4 1/2 races worth of points of a difference).
The moral, as always: if you want to win the World Championship, you have to build the best car, or have the best driver in a car that’s 95+% as good as the best car. That’s how it works every year, in the entire history of the sport. That is on Ferrari, not Massa, and until they fully internalize that, they can rearrange the deck chairs in car #2 as many times as they like, but it won’t result in a championship.
Nicely put Speedgeek! I also thought it was a cheap-shot at a pilot they call family who’s leaving the team. I can only assume he was playing to the tifosi
I needed something to do instead of throttling my manager so I worked out what would have happened if the second Ferrari had been in Alonso’s slipstream for the entire season, finishing a place behind at every race and adjusting the Red Bull scores accordingly. The question could be rephrased as “What if Massa was precisely as good and precisely as lucky as Alonso but entirely subservient to him?” Well let’s have a look…
This Alonso clone, Alonso II (shall we call him Kimi?) would score a total of 191 points, scoring 7 podiums along the way – for comparison Massa got 112 points and just one podium.
However, the impact on Red Bull of putting Alonso II in the second Ferrari is pretty minor. Once you exclude the times Massa finished ahead of one or the other Red Bulls or they (or Alonso) didn’t finish, Alonso II only takes points off Vettel twice (in Australia and China) and Webber four times (Canada, Germany, Belgium and Italy), for an overall reduction in RB’s Constructors’ World Championship score of just 14 points.
So the CWC scores change enough to put Ferrari well ahead of Mercedes (I’ve not recalculated the Merc scores) with 432 points but they still trail RBR’s total of 582. That’s six race wins in today’s money.
In terms of the Drivers’ World Championship, Alonso II’s 191 points puts him third in the rankings, just ahead of Webber – who drops to 190.
Comparing Alonso II to Kimi is interesting though – and takes a few too many hypotheses perhaps but bear with me.
Alonso II takes points off Kimi on 7 occasions, but only costs the Finn 12 points over the 17 races he competed in. There are two ways to handle the comparison : 1) extrapolate Kimi’s point scoring to 19 races; 2) check Alonso II’s score at the end of round 17.
1) Kimi scores 191.11 points and edges out Alonso II by confusing fractions. Essentially either Kimi would have beaten Alonso or he wouldn’t, we obviously can never know.
2) Alonso II was on 171 points when Kimi ended his season, the Finn remains ahead by 12 points.
So there you go. I’m not sure what’s worth taking away from this, probably that trying to use basic stats to interpret the comments of Montezemolo really isn’t worthwhile, but I found it interesting and I can now go and get on with my real job.
Jem,
Now, THAT is why I love the internet. A super-nerdy analysis that I’d love to have done myself, but was just far too lazy to carry out. Thanks to you.
Bernie’s probably worried they’ll replace him with Adam Parr, which to my mind at least, might move the sport forward a bit.
CVC Capital Partners is in a jungle it does not understand.
Donald McKenzie admitted as much in court this week……
Could he say much else given the claim that CVC bought their shares at a reduced rate as a preferential bidder? Anything else could suggest guilt on Eccleston’s part and that wouldn’t do them all any favours at all.
But CVC has made a pretty good return on their investment, have they not? I fear that they may have drained any value out, though, which will make the eventual sale price less than satisfactory.
Is that about right?
Bernie replaced by Adam Parr would be poetic justice.
I do find it laughable that Ferrari thinks F1 would not exist without them. Many great teams have come and gone but F1 is still around. Its this arrogance that puts me off the team and their cars and most of the people that buy them.
Reality check is in order. If was in charge I would recognise their heritage and commitment to the formula but I wouldn’t let them run it!!!
I don’t want to sound pedantic, but Ferrari is an institution that doesn’t fit easily in the world we have today, for many reasons. Let’s say they are about self made excellence and quality, not popular or useful sentiments these days… I guess McLaren and Williams are of a similar pedigree in some ways and to a lesser extent.
Montezemolo is charismatic enough for the job and probably not easily replaceable. He was big enough to swallow humble pie and take back Raikkonen, and that will be vindicated 109 days from now.
As you can tell, I’m hugely impressed, and yes I’m a bit of a Ferrari fan…..
You believe that the Alonso-Raikkonen pairing will not end in tears?
I think the situation will suit RAI more than ALO. Unless ALO can dig deep and be the one to triumph.
Joe, do you reckon we’re in for a tearful outcome?
I fear so.
You may well be right. Either way it’s great for those of us watching!
That said I think FA has grown up a bit from his old ‘toys out of the pram days’ More of a quieter brooding sulker now, or perhaps it’s because he drives for a big sulking organisation now that his own antics are put in the shadows 🙂
Hi Joe, thank you for being informative and interesting during what was otherwise a rather dull year on track. Apparently, there is a view amongst some Enstone engineers who have worked with both Alonso and Raikkonen, that Alonso will come out top. Have you heard anything of this nature from the paddock?
Can’t decide on if it’s going down as “Ehm Fernando? Kimi is faster than you …” – or the other way.
It might not be the case on the inside, but I suspect the tears on this end will be from laughing so hard. I’ll be amazed if the pairing works out.
Not tears, but black eyes and missing teeth! LOL
There’s a gentleman in Woking, Surrey who would ‘fit the bill’ to take over from Bernie, now that he no longer runs their Formula One team.
He has the experience, knowledge and connections to take the helm at FOM.
Can’t see any conflict of interest, after all Bernie owned Brabham when he was running FOCA.
I cannot see that either.
Joe; I agree that it’s highly unlikely however, I think that the ‘gent from Woking’ would make a terrific helmsman at FOM. Patrick’s suggestion is certainly better than Bernie’s!
patrick,
You got me curious… who are you thinking about?
Williams? Dennis? My apologies if I seem blind…
Yes, my money’s on Ron Dennis to take over.
He has the perfect CV, is well known and respected to all from pitlane to paddock, place de la concorde, princess gate and the great viewing public.
The ‘spygate’ affair is a more complex, human and historical issue.
It shouldn’t be included in the equation during the decision making process to appoint him….yes we know what you’re thinking?
What we don’t want, with all respect, is ex grocers or underwear salesmen!
Oh lord. They’re incredibly clinical and sophisticated. But can be the source of some fantastic comedy. You’ve suggested a name that hadn’t been thought about. Would be so beautifully poetic if Ron Dennis ended up heading the body that was the reason for his exit from the F1 team in the first place.
So Luca did not include the fact that Ferrari get more money from Bernie than anyone else.
It would do Ferrari good to compete on equal terms financially and to loose their veto. People loose respect for historical values when they are rammed down their throats: a little humility might endear Ferrari’s current plight to more fans.
So next year we shall see the clash of ego and nonchalance, it could be early ice creams again.
Joe – there is an interesting parallel occuring in Australia with the V8 Supercar series. It was acquired by a private equity firm of the type that previously considered itself one of “the masters of the universe”. However, things have gone so badly that the team owners are considering buying back the sport.
So we now have the man who’s head of Ferrari and carrying Italy’s F1 hopes and dreams going on TV and outlining his company’s stature and failures of 2013. ( Please give the man some respect and credibility.)
He has rightly questioned the failings of his own team but questions the FIA and (my words “a year of tyre fiasco”) and slight manipulation by RBR. (The Italians don’t mind a little bit of “Blame” ).
But what comes screaming out of your writing Joe (one always has to try to read what you “don’t” say) is that Luca sees only himself as the Natural successor as Head of F1 (as he can carry Ferrari into F1 and the future) and that he wants the FIA to assist him on that route.
Well ! that’s what I read.
I can see a huge controversy in today’s F1. What do you think is it good for any sport to have a participant -and only 1 out of 11- give the right of veto? I don’t ask if you think it is right or not, just because your answer will be affected by your emotions about Ferrari. A fan of them will say yes, a hater will say no. I am not a fan, while not a hater. I know its F1, different from any other sport, even from many motorsports. But its just makes its worth less. Much, much less. In my eyes it sees as F1 starts to being a single participant’s sandbox in a very expensive and insatiable kindergarten. Thus F1 tends to being not a sport anymore. No sport may give veto rights in this way. It hurts my feeling of righteousness so badly. Regardless the reasons behind this decision, its just does not matter- only shows that Mr. E has been weakened by the bribery case. Even more I think it suggest his filthy part in it.
All in all, I am deeply disappointed and saddened.
I rate this news as the most important of the whole year.
Ok Joe I give in, I’ll just write bland stuff in future or just watch.
LDM’s comments about Christian Horner show how shockingly amateur the F1 world can sometimes be. You would think it would be highly awkward to interact with Horner after saying something so insulting about him. Maybe they’re never in the same space. Anyway, it seems it’s been popular to portray Horner as an errand boy for Marko and DM, especially after the multi-21 affair.