Ferrari - missing the big picture again

[Kicking-back]

Nine team bosses will be at tomorrow's meeting at Heathrow to discuss ways to cut costs.

Ferrari say they have "prior committments".

[garcon]

Maybe they do.

Maybe Ferrari are in full agreement with Max's proposals to cut costs and don't feel the need to meet the other nine teams in some godforsaken hotel room at an airport to argue about it.

Maybe.

[Super Tourer]

I've always believed that Ferrari are not the slightest bit interested in 'cost cutting', getting a bigger share yes - cutting back no.

Any team that expends as much as they do to maintain their 'edge' is not interested in paring costs back. It's not surprising that the issue of limiting testing is the one they have no interest in, Ferrari being the only team with TWO test tracks, one outside the factory door.

However, some people believe that F1 is all about Ferrari and the 'faction' that secures them will be the only series regarded as F1, on this basis Ferrai can sit back and see who will offer the most, the GPWC or BE and agree to what suits them.

Which is usually very little.

[Knowlesy]

Well if this is true I think ferrari need to remove their heads from their bottoms.

[Aysedasi]

I think Jean Todt needs to have one finger amputated from his right hand.........

[Marbot]

What's the point of turning up if Ferrari aren't there,nothing can be agreed upon unless all 10 teams sign up,Ferrari have known about this meeting since the Brazilian GP what could be more important at present,can't they flog Michaels car on ebay (no reserve).Paul Stoddart seems to think he can force changes through in the absence of Ferrari,good luck to him!

[Kicking-back]

Bernie will be there...

[Marbot]

Originally posted by Kicking-back
Bernie will be there...

Of course,silly me

[Gt_R]

A bunch of people condemning Ferrari without getting the full picture, nor the least bit try to even see things from Ferrari's side.

Ferrari not interested in cost cutting?

[Gt_R]

Jean Todt (26th Oct 2004): "Sorry to say it," he added, "but you can rip up that paper. We need to come to solutions where you can really reduce expenses."

Todt, also furious at the apparent pressure put on him about the fate of the French and British grands prix, insisted that Ferrari does not 'stand in the way' of historic races. "If all the teams want more than seventeen races (in 2005)," he explained, "then we all agree -- but we also have to talk about everything, not decide something without any detail, because you are reacting to emotion."

=======

Summary: Ferrari welcome cost-cutting, but correctly noted that the cost cutting measures proposed are not effective (and if anybody bother to realise, doesn't reduce the cost incurred by small private teams). Furthermore, Ferrari DOES NOT object to historic races at all, it is just that other teams try to ENGINEER a situation to force Ferrari to practically give up their test-track use. In other words, an almost despicable move, IMHO.

[Gt_R]

OCT 25th (F1-racing.net): "Ferrari spokesman Luca Colajanni, who told Italian journalists - in Italian - that the other teams did not even inform F1's champion constructor that a key meeting was taking place.

Colajanni said a test cut would not save money for small teams, because some - like Jordan and Minardi - have not even used the proposed allocation of ten days in 2004. Rather, he said the letter is a deliberate attack on Formula One's dominant outfit."


Summary: Or rather, big corporate teams like Williams and Mclaren are using this opportunity to use the "small private teams" and "cost-cutting" as a disguise to try erase Ferrari's test-track capability. Apparently, team like Williams tried to plan for a test track...but failed.

[Gt_R]

Oct 25th : After Ferrari - Jean Todt issued statement that Ferrari WAS NOT invited to the meeting, and subsequently revealed that small teams do not benefit from the aims set by the proposal to "CUT COST"

""But, despite the document's title (Teams Present Initiative for Substantial and Tangible Cost Savings in Formula One), Minardi's chief PAUL STODDART admitted that limiting in-season testing won't save a lot of money. "Nobody will actually benefit from it," he said, "however, the entire sport will benefit if there is closer racing.""

Summary: It's getting clearer isn't it? WHY suddenly, the proposal "CUTTING COST" changed to "benefit closer racing"? Why is it admitted that it isn't an effective cost cutting rule? Because it isnt. The supposed beneficiary are NOT benefitting from it.

Its real lame isn't it? But why are teams like Minardi and Jordan doing it? Hmm...engine supplies maybe (i'm jus speculating here).

[Gt_R]

This is abit more speculative 50-50 chance (from F1-racing/Autosport).

"The notorious nine-of-out-ten 'cost saving initiative' was designed to shame Ferrari into also signing up, an unnamed Formula One principal has admitted. It was reported in Brazil last month that the almost unanimous proposal, also signed by Bernie Ecclestone, is basically targeted to nullifying Ferrari's test-track advantage.


advertisement




"We believe that if enough pressure can be brought to bear on Ferrari," the anonymous chief told Autosport, "they will have no other option but to sign up."

The matter is sure to return to the headlines early next week when Ecclestone and F1 principals meet again at London's Hilton Hotel. A Ferrari spokesman, though, denied that Jean Todt will be cornered into agreeing a package he does not believe in. "We will submit our own proposals," he said. "



Subsequently, Ferrari hinted that it would be far more effective if FIA issues a standard Electronics Unit, which would effectively slash extremely high R&D cost in electronics developement (a luxury to top teams as small teams often make do with simple electronics), while at the same time hand the skills of driving back to the best drivers and levelling the field in that respect.

[Gt_R]

I'm glad that Ferrari decided to stand up against this blatant attempt to undermine and pressurise Ferrari. I'm all for them standing up for their own interest.

What the teams are doing now is not "cutting cost" but forcing upon Ferrari to take away any advantage Ferrari might have.

Why not suggest closure of windtunnel, Mr Ron and Mr Williams? Afterall, like Ferrari, you spend every day working the hell out of that wind pipe of yours...but NO, it stays because Mclaren and Williams have windtunnels.

Don't make Ferrari out as the only one that wants a larger portion of the revenue from F1. Everyone wants it, right down to Stoddart. And why else would BMW and Mercedes and Renault be part of GPWC if that is not their interest?

Of course, facts and outstanding issues doesn't matter, does it?

I am not saying that cost shouldn't be kept in check. Similarly, Ferrari had time and time again address the need to reduce cost while increasing the income for teams taking part in F1. However, what is being proposed now IS NOT COST CUTTING for the benefits of F1. It's a cheap political move. And shame on those who tried to take advantage of the situation (of the poorer fellows) for their own benefits.

[Aysedasi]

Can I just be sure, you're supporting Ferrari then Gt_R...........?

[Gt_R]

Yes. But i just don't respect the way the other teams try to pressurise Ferrari into giving in, and i don't believe in the effectiveness of the proposal.

And i doubt that the top teams sign it to "cut cost" as they so honourably proclaim.

[GTRMagic]

It just shows that a unanimous agreement is an insane method of rubberstamping change in the category huh....

Get rid of the GPWC threat... NOW!!

[Kicking-back]

Ferrari fans will obviously not be happy until every other team has pulled out.

[garcon]

K-b that is rubbish and you know it. I'd expect something a bit more intelligent from you.

It can just as easily be argued that Ferrari fans will only be happy when the other teams stop griping and trying to collude to remove Ferrari's perceived "advantage" and actually just tried to compete with us for once.

[Gt_R]

Once again, i'm sorry KB, but i take that statement as quite pointless.

Let's just be reasonable here, which many are not. They don't bother to reason nor logic, just simply snipe at Ferrari for what the press feed them.

Maybe then, you can see a different side to the coin. Majority doesn't make a bad decision good, a wrong decision right, and an aggressor into the victim.

[Gt_R]

Let's just take it one step further. I am mortified that there are non-Ferrari fans who claim that Ferrari think they ARE F1. I am a Ferrari fan for as long as i remember, but never did it cross my mind that Ferrari IS F1. And similarly, while Ferrari understands the impact of it's name in F1, it doesn't perceive itself as the definition of F1. F1 and Ferrari share a mutual relationship.

It's often the anti-Ferrari's or non-fans who insist that Ferrari have that atitude, and subsequently condemn Ferrari for it. Pretty sad.

And up until now, i've barely heard a reasonable argument about HOW the "proposal" cut cost for smaller private teams. Instead, i see shifting stands among principals, ron dennis and richards trying to taunt Ferrari, anti-Ferrari fans using this opportunity to slam Ferrari...its getting tiring.

You think big teams cares about cost cutting huh? Check out who spends big money on pointless motorhomes, or building a completely new factory just when their cars hit rock bottom, building a brand new windtunnel...do you think these big teams suddenly struggle to find money to run the testings?

Once again, this proposal MAY erase the track testing advantage, but big teams will simply move the money into simulations (double the work to achieve equivalent accuracy), while the small teams BARELY cut any cost (because they don't run 10 day testings anyway), and hence what's worse, the proposals WOULD NOT ensure the survival of small teams like Minardi.

so..what is the aim of a proposal that achieves nothing that the name suggest?

[ensign14]

According to Autosport, Ferrari's budget is so far in advance of the other teams it is frightening.

Ferrari's testing budget is £26m more than the next highest. Nearly double.

Ferrari was at the original meeting but Todt walked out when they all ganged up on him. Why did they gang up? Because instead of metaphorically measuring plonkers as per Eddie Jordan said if things do not change Jordan would go bust. Then someone from a biggie team said it was not just the little guys that were in trouble.

The best way forward is for all teams to have the same budget. Impossible dream. But imagine if all sponsorship was handed to the FIA, to dole out to all the teams...Ferrari would still win, but it would be a lot closer and not a redwash.

However, this is not about testing/cost cutting, this is about the GPWC. The manufacturers are against Bernie and against the cost-cutting measures proposed. Ferrari is against the proposed measures. Ferrari is in bed with the GPWC????

[Kicking-back]

Originally posted by garcon
K-b that is rubbish and you know it. I'd expect something a bit more intelligent from you.

Tongue was in cheek at the time.

But the reality is that there are times when a dominant player needs to "take a hit for the team".

[Glen]

It's fair to say, I think, that McLaren (and indeed other teams) would e inclined to pick the strategy which not only aims to achieve the wider objective but which also disadvantages the main competition the ost. To suppose that McLaren (or Williams... whoever) aren't keeping half an eye on what's good for themselves is more than a little naive - they CERTAINLY don't look at proposals purely in terms of what is good for the sport as a whole. No team does.

Ferrari have suggested some vrey good ways to cut costs that the others don't like: Standard electronics would be somethig that they would go along with, for example - but the big car manufacturers aren't interested in that. They also were trying to work out a combined reduced number of engines/reduced testing regime, whereby the number of engines is limited not only for the races but also for testing - again, i haven't head the others going along with that, probably because they know their own engines aren't as durable and that they would therefore be at a disadvantage... Mercedes/BMW/Honda/Toyota etc could "take a hit for the team" by agreeing to it (a very big cut in costs would result) but they won't because it doesn't suit them.

[kdr]

Originally posted by Gt_R
Let's just take it one step further. I am mortified that there are non-Ferrari fans who claim that Ferrari think they ARE F1. I am a Ferrari fan for as long as i remember, but never did it cross my mind that Ferrari IS F1. And similarly, while Ferrari understands the impact of it's name in F1, it doesn't perceive itself as the definition of F1. F1 and Ferrari share a mutual relationship.

It's often the anti-Ferrari's or non-fans who insist that Ferrari have that atitude, and subsequently condemn Ferrari for it. Pretty sad.

i disagree with this Gt_r. perhaps to "true" f1 fans there are other teams/drivers to get behind, support, show interest in, etc etc. but to the casual viewer/reader/man on the street...f1 is ferrari. i have no axe to grind with ferrari, my interest in this branch of motorsport is professional and cursory...but do you honestly believe the worlds media(and with them the sponsors who pay the bills)would pay thru the nose to show a series with renaults battling against hondas?

as for ferrari skipping the meeting...well lets face there'll be another one along pretty soon...i mean how else do you keep the sport in the headlines during the winter?!