FOTA starts a breakaway series

[kilcoo316]

OMG!

Do you even remember how much crap you just gave me over saying that same thing? Is that what you do? Argue until proven wrong, and then steal the argument for your own?

Christ. I take it you mean this post right here?

remember guys, as it is now Bernie and co. take about 50% of the teams monies.
If the teams create new series, they will have that much more to spend

Not if Bernie has them under contract, and pursues it in court.

So the teams make token entries to fulfil the contract.

They are obliged to provide 2 cars for 18 races - no mention of how competitive they are.

What does the poison dwarf do then?

Anything else you need explained?


Or any other idea you want to claim?

[ISLAMATRON]

FErrari have already lost in court, what is so difficult to understand?....

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/75442
Ferrari loses legal bid against FIA

By Jonathan Noble Wednesday, May 20th 2009, 12:11 GMT

Ferrari has lost its legal bid to lodge an injunction against the FIA's plans for a voluntary budget cap in Formula 1.

The Maranello outfit was told by French legal authorities on Wednesday that it did not have a valid reason to block plans for a £40 million voluntary budget cap.

The move means that next week's entry deadline for the 2010 championship will go ahead, leaving current teams a few days to resolve their opposition to the regulations.

Ferrari had gone to the Tribunal de Grande Instance in Paris because it believed that the FIA's introduction of the regulations had been in breach of a technical veto that the team has over future technical rule changes.

The FIA argued, however, that the veto was no longer valid - and that Ferrari had also not used the available opportunities to impose its right.

It was also suggested to the court that imposing an entry deadline of next week was important to help secure the future of new teams in the sport - who need as much notice as possible so as to get their entries in place.

Ferrari has joined several other teams in saying that it will not lodge an entry to the 2010 world championship unless changes are made to the rules for next year



Ferrari missed their chance to use their veto, that did not void their contract with the FIA or FOM, and seeeing that RBR didnt have any similar veto than their contract is equally valid

[kilcoo316]

The FIA’s lawyers have now examined the FOTA threat to begin a breakaway series. The actions of FOTA as a whole, and Ferrari in particular, amount to serious violations of law including (1) wilful interference with contractual relations, (2) direct breaches of Ferrari's legal obligations and a (3) grave violation of competition law. The FIA will be issuing legal proceedings without delay.

Lets examine this statement a bit.

(1) Interference with contractual relations: None of the other FOTA teams bar (maybe) RBR & STR have any contractual obligations (strictly speaking, I think any obligations were with FOM, not the FIA).

Sponsors? We aren't there yet. Either way, most of the sponsors are contracted to the teams.
Tracks? Not there yet either. Also, that is FOM's remit, not the FIAs.

(2)Ferrari's contract has been nulled by the FIA's actions. While Ferrari made a procedural error in submitting their earlier protest to court, the court did state Ferrari had a veto.


(3)Regardless of (1) and (2) FOTA can make a good case for monopolistic anti-competition practices by the FIA in surpressing any genuine competitor to F1. If the FIA are going to try and pursue Ferrari on anti-competition grounds, they are on some seriously dodgy territory... in fact, I would put it as FOTA territory (i.e. an argument FOTA will try to bring before the courts, not the FIA).



The legal threat is weak, both as a threat to FOTA, and a response to FOTA. They have Max and Bernie by the balls, and the pair of crooks know it.

[void]

well i dont think legal matters can save max.
the new series can have masaritti(fearri) lexus(toyota) mini(bmw) renault probally have another company as well. they are different legal entities so they can do what they want.

worst case they may have to participate in F1 doesn't mean they have to compete!

this years car made from cheep materials and with drivers just sober enough to see.
that will cost them dam all.
hell get one of the mechanics to drive,he can set the car up himself, he wont have to do any pit stops as the car will run out of fuel before then.
so fly the mechanic around on ryan air and dhl can post the car everywhere else.
sorted!

If FIA wins on courts, why the Teams runs with 2009 chasis with modifications to 2010 rules, and with another name (Ferrari as FIAT, or maybe as Ferrari-B) in F-1 and with the famous name in FOTA Championship?

[xpensive]

Like a travesty of Michael Madsen in Reservoir dogs, "What court, this court?".

[ISLAMATRON]

@ kilcoo... Yes Ferrari have a veto, but they did not use it within the correct time period, remember that any changes to the rules less then 1 year away must be unanimous. Ferrari, not using their veto in the correct time period did not void their contracts with the FIA & FOM... read the court ruling.

[kilcoo316]

FErrari have already lost in court, what is so difficult to understand?....

The ruling by the Tribunal de Grande Instance, which is open to appeal, did not focus on the merit of the regulation changes but on Ferrari's right to block them.

The Italian team had sought an injunction on the grounds that a 2005 agreement gave it veto power over regulation changes decided by the international racing federation FIA.

Ferrari later indicated that it was ready to appeal and in a statement said the court had recognised in its ruling that it was not qualified to decide on the validity of its veto power, which was thus a matter for the civil courts.

FIA has maintained that not only had Ferrari's veto expired when it joined the newly formed Formula One Teams Association (FOTA) last year, but Ferrari failed to exercise its veto when the changes were discussed at meetings of FIA's governing World Motor Sport Council in March and April.

You have to be in the WMSC to use a veto? Get real [note - that is directed at the court - not you islamatron].

[kilcoo316]

@ kilcoo... Yes Ferrari have a veto, but they did not use it within the correct time period, remember that any changes to the rules less then 1 year away must be unanimous. Ferrari, not using their veto in the correct time period did not void their contracts with the FIA & FOM... read the court ruling.

If Ferrari file in an Italian court that the FIA has defaulted its terms of the contract... what way do you see that going?

[FGD]

@ kilcoo... Yes Ferrari have a veto, but they did not use it within the correct time period, remember that any changes to the rules less then 1 year away must be unanimous. Ferrari, not using their veto in the correct time period did not void their contracts with the FIA & FOM... read the court ruling.

I'm not sure what you're arguing here. How does the FIA ruling prevent Ferrari from competing in FOTA F1?

[Conceptual]

Why is that kilcoo?

Sorry to dissappoint your ego, but the reason he is bad is the lift of money the little scrote takes for doing very little.


As mentioned elsewhere, FOTA have problems with monies they are due from FOM. So I'm not so sure they'll want to get back into bed with Ecclestone.

And the fact that Autosport is reporting this means nothing?

It is one thing for your "opinion" be crammed down the board members throats as proof, but now you are arguing with a news article? With MORE opinion?

Does it ever stop?

[Conceptual]

Anything else you need explained?


Or any other idea you want to claim?

Funny how you point out the part where I asked a question instead of the line by line response picking apart my post that equates to exactly what you stated later in this post.

Not only inconsistant, but just as much spin as the rest of them.

[Shaddock]

Think back to the last days of Arrows under T Walkinshaw. They use to send a skeleton crew to the race meets, and deliberately not qualify for the race, as they were broke.

Ferrari or any FOTA team who feel they have to race due to legal reasons just needs to turn up with a car that doesn’t pass scrutinering (2008 spec car or one of their production cars) and then go home again.

[Conceptual]

Does anyone care to guess where this is going to leave 2009?

With Brawn and Button on the runaway, wouldn't it be smarter to stop 100% F1 development, and concentrate all remaining 2009 resources on setting up the 2010 championship?

[j4kwan]

Does anyone care to guess where this is going to leave 2009?

With Brawn and Button on the runaway, wouldn't it be smarter to stop 100% F1 development, and concentrate all remaining 2009 resources on setting up the 2010 championship?

Agreed.
Will Button's championship be as glorious knowing that teams aren't even trying anymore?

[donskar]

Nobody is banned for the quality of his posts, kilcoo, but I take the opportunity to give some explanations you and everybody deserve:

"Da rulez" say:

"Flaming or abusing users in any way will not be tolerated and will lead to a warning."

A couple of members have received warnings recently, WB was the only one that ignored the many pleads we sent him to behave in a different way.

I won't take side in the many disputes some members sustain here, never ever: the more inflamed people is, the more quiet moderators should be, but I can say I'm tired of editing posts with clear "flames", no matter how smartly written they are.

This is not a place to win discussions but to share knowledge.

Either you enjoy what you write or, probably, moderators won't.

As a side benefit, I hope sincerely this serves "pour encourager les outres" (to encourage the others), as (I think) Rosseau famously said when asked why he was sending people to the guillotine.

I repeat my mantra: attack the post, not the poster.

WhiteBlue ban ends tomorrow. The fact that he was banned temporarily is not a license to abuse him, btw. I've known him for years, I consider him a friend and I think he is simply "carried away" sometimes.

I hope he will be able to correct his style and concentrate in the threads. I also hope other members, who are used to insult him and others, will learn: long PMs from moderators, asking to behave, will be less in the future. If you haven't received one of those PMs, you should not be worried at all.

Many people in this forum has said to us, mods, that they're tired of threads with no substance, no research, no links, no reflections, no tact and no prospective thoughts. It's about time to change a bit, don't you, guys, think?

If you wish to argue endlessly, giving only your opinions, you always can go to your local pub. However, drunkard arguments are boring as hell.

There are plenty of forums devoted to that "drunkard-opinionated-pal style", but this one tries hard to be a different one in the F1 forum landscape, because you, the members, are a different kind of people (or so I think, watching the many beautiful, considerated, good humoured, full of knowledge and well researched posts that adorn this place).

Now, let's go back in peace to the thread, shall we?

[/quote]
Well said, Ciro. I hope MANY of us (myself included) can do better in future.