COTA Austin - construction and infrastructure

[hairy_scotsman]

Just fyi, construction equipment is returning. I've heard it could take up to 7 or 8 more days to get it all back out there:





Also, here are a couple of new articles about recent events:

http://houston.culturemap.com/newsdetai ... -on-track/

http://www.statesman.com/news/local/for ... 19279.html

[peteskar]

Very excited that the Austin GP is back, thanks for the pics o the construction equipment that makes me happy

[WhiteBlue]

http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/ ... s-at-cota/

Founding partner Bobby Epstein suggested that while Wednesday's news is good for the event, it was also a victory for Ecclestone.

"Mr. Ecclestone is a masterful negotiator. He fights hard for his company's best interests," he said.

Well, that sounds pretty much as predicted.

[Mr Alcatraz]

(which btw I blame on Michelin for not anticipating the demands on the tires at that venue but that is another topic altogether).

??

Only the 6 cars using Bridgestone tires participated in the 2005 USGP because the Michelins were failing in practice, and they were considered too dangerous to use in the race.
Total fail on Michelins' behalf for not providing a tire sufficient for the demands of the USGP venue!!

[strad]

Couldn't have been the team using non recommended tire pressures and the BS promulgated by Ralf.

[Pup]

...but that is another topic altogether.

Which you just couldn't help but introduce. Really, how long has it been?

Just...let...it...go.

[Mr Alcatraz]

...but that is another topic altogether.

Which you just couldn't help but introduce. Really, how long has it been?

Just...let...it...go.

You're mistaking me for someone that has a fixation over this matter. My point was that it gave f1 a black eye yet the fans still came back in mass. But let me apologize for giving the reason for the debacle.

[Scorpaguy]

If BE and Tavo orchestrated a fake "lets push Tavo out" tiff....leading Epstein to think, "Heck, I dont need Tavo with his zero dollar contribution, I'll negotiate with BE myself...I've got the cash".....then:

1. Tavo gets his race...with no outlay
2. BE gets his real cash....embellishes his nefarious rep/negot skills...and gets to stick it to the "Yanks" (which he really wanted to do since he had already secured his preferred NY skyline venue)
3. America gets its GP / F1 a new fan base

...I guess there are no losers sans Epstein. IF IT IS TRUE...an afterlife of fire and brimstone is nothing compared to Epstein's current plight of having to read/reread his checkbook balance.

[FW17]

(which btw I blame on Michelin for not anticipating the demands on the tires at that venue but that is another topic altogether).

??

Only the 6 cars using Bridgestone tires participated in the 2005 USGP because the Michelins were failing in practice, and they were considered too dangerous to use in the race.
Total fail on Michelins' behalf for not providing a tire sufficient for the demands of the USGP venue!!

Michelins did not got to test on the new track surface as Bridgestone did. Alternatives to a 6 car race was proposed by the teams but the FIA and Ferrari thought them laying down the rule and winning a race in 2005 was more important than the fans sitting in the grand stand.

[Mr Alcatraz]

(which btw I blame on Michelin for not anticipating the demands on the tires at that venue but that is another topic altogether).

Michelins did not got to test on the new track surface as Bridgestone did. Alternatives to a 6 car race was proposed by the teams but the FIA and Ferrari thought them laying down the rule and winning a race in 2005 was more important than the fans sitting in the grand stand.

Precisely, Michelin went with a sidewall that after they did run in practice and had several failures, they could not guaranty the FIA 16 racing laps per set.The Bridgestone Company got it right. The idea of going with a chicane, that changes their options as well have to waste all data they had going in. Plus it has to count as a win. I wish that Kimi Button and Alonso would have gone on out and just drive around the issue they can maintain. But they held out.
Sorry chums ya' ‘awl boys got whipped, but its cool!
BTW I run Michelins on my bike.

[FW17]

Only reason Bridgestone got it right was they got the data from Firestone.

Let MS have his win but why not have a race with a chicane. Indy was as much to blame as Michelin for the change in track surface.

[dren]

Agree. But, I have to give Michelin credit. They refunded all of my tickets and gave me free tickets for the following year's race.

[Pup]

If BE and Tavo orchestrated a fake "lets push Tavo out" tiff....leading Epstein to think, "Heck, I dont need Tavo with his zero dollar contribution, I'll negotiate with BE myself...I've got the cash".....then:

1. Tavo gets his race...with no outlay
2. BE gets his real cash....embellishes his nefarious rep/negot skills...and gets to stick it to the "Yanks" (which he really wanted to do since he had already secured his preferred NY skyline venue)
3. America gets its GP / F1 a new fan base

...I guess there are no losers sans Epstein. IF IT IS TRUE...an afterlife of fire and brimstone is nothing compared to Epstein's current plight of having to read/reread his checkbook balance.

Exactly. But I don't think Tavo really has to be involved. Just Bernie taking advantage of the situation to renegotiate the deal, and being willing to screw his "longtime friend" in the process. Of course, it would certainly help to have a friend in a position to default on the contract for you.

People can try to keep spinning this as Epstein screwing up Tavo's special-buddy deal with Bernie, but really - when have we known Bernie to offer a favor to anyone? If they'd take a step back and look at the personalities involved and who stood to benefit, I think they'd reach the same conclusion as you and me.

[strad]

IF they had changed the camber settings and changed the pressure they could have raced.
It was pure Bull.

[WhiteBlue]

If BE and Tavo orchestrated a fake "lets push Tavo out" tiff....leading Epstein to think, "Heck, I dont need Tavo with his zero dollar contribution, I'll negotiate with BE myself...I've got the cash".....then:

1. Tavo gets his race...with no outlay
2. BE gets his real cash....embellishes his nefarious rep/negot skills...and gets to stick it to the "Yanks" (which he really wanted to do since he had already secured his preferred NY skyline venue)
3. America gets its GP / F1 a new fan base

...I guess there are no losers sans Epstein. IF IT IS TRUE...an afterlife of fire and brimstone is nothing compared to Epstein's current plight of having to read/reread his checkbook balance.

Exactly. But I don't think Tavo really has to be involved. Just Bernie taking advantage of the situation to renegotiate the deal, and being willing to screw his "longtime friend" in the process. Of course, it would certainly help to have a friend in a position to default on the contract for you.

People can try to keep spinning this as Epstein screwing up Tavo's special-buddy deal with Bernie, but really - when have we known Bernie to offer a favor to anyone? If they'd take a step back and look at the personalities involved and who stood to benefit, I think they'd reach the same conclusion as you and me.

This is the strangest theory that I have read in a long time. The known facts make it completely clear that until the Korean GP (Oct. 16th) Hellmund and Ecclestone applied no active control over the process. This went on for three months. Epstein could have provided advance finance for the first race fee. Normally that would have been only for one months until the METF money would have been payed out. This would probably have cost just $100k. And even if the METF had been delayed as it is now it would have cost him perhaps $1.5m to put the 25m up for 13 months. Compared to a 300m price tag for the total investment this is pocket money. So why did Epstein refuse to finance the fee and failed to close the preferential deal thereby?

The only reasonable explanation that I see is greed on behalves of Epstein. Apparently he wasn't contractually obliged to pay. So he thought he could reach a modification to the internal contract between Hellmund and the investors. Most likely he was out for cutting Hellmund completely out of the contract. This is the sensible explanation. Until the middle of October Bernie and Hellmund did not take any action that degraded the business options. All of this changed around the Korean GP when Bernie started to talk about the problem of not getting payed and about a dispute between the Austin partners.

So how would have Hellmund and Ecclestone constructed a "trap" for Epstein? It sounds like pure fantasy to me. Both men must have been very surprised that such a small finance request was turned down by Epstein for several months. If there was any bait it probably was the apparent finance structure of the business. The original deal with FOM and the METF would not have required any finance to pay the race fee. The gap between later race fees and the METF money would have come out of the ticket sales of the previous years race. So most likely there was no provision for any finance by the investors in the contract between Hellmund and the investors. I guess this was the trigger that baited Epstein into renegotiating the contract instead of just providing the small finance volume without further demands.

Apparently Epstein completely underestimated the relationship between Ecclestone and Hellmund. He must have thought that Ecclestone would not care who he would be dealing with as long as he got his money. Epstein did not recognise that Bernie - as he usally does - already had his Plan B and C in place. He also missed to realize his own vulnerability. CotA already had invested some $40-50m into the circuit and that money would be a total loss if there would be no F1 contract. Bernie already had New Jersey lined up in he final stage of negotiations and was also looking at Mexico in case Austin went wrong.

With hindsight Epstein looks like a fool who completely misjudged his negotiation position. That became quite clear in November when Bernie published the New Jersey deal and tore up the Austin contract. Epstein suddenly had no BATNA (best alternative to negotiated agreement). Naturally the old rascal realized the fact and upped the ante. He issued a new contract without the finance package to CotA and made some public comments that scared Susan Comb the Texan who controlled the METF. Comb promptly withdrew her finance offer saying that it was linked to the original contract that was now torn up. She was busy covering her ass because the circuit opposition had criticised the plan to finance an F1 race with public money. She opted to pay only after the economic impact was completely proven.

So what can we conclude from this analysis? By the change of the race date Hellmund was forced to make a finance request to Epstein with a net cost of $100k - $1.5m. Epstein could have simply paid and demanded to be repaid later when Hellmund had made some money. But he elected a course that will now cost him and his fellow investors up to $80m over the course of the 10 year contract. This is a very costly error when you compare the figures. The main mistake was the hard nosed attitude towards Hellmund who was considered a friend by Ecclestone. When Epstein ran into his own trap of having no alternative Ecclestone retaliated with the same attitude. Take it or leave it. Epstein had to take it as we know.