Ferrari have been in Formula One longer than any other team. When someone mentions F1 today, one of the first things people think of is Ferrari. As a result, the Italian Stallion has enjoyed a particular relationship with the sports administrators – both in the past and in the present. Now, with the recent “settlement” that has been reached between Ferrari and the F.I.A. regarding the technical investigation into Ferrari’s 2019 power unit, it has left fans wondering if Ferrari are really accountable to the rules of the sport.
On the 4th March 2020, seven of Ferrari’s rivals, spearheaded by Mercedes and basically all the teams that aren’t Ferrari customers, issued a joint statement expressing their “surprise” and “shock” at the decision by the F.I.A. and asked for a full disclosure
IN RESPONSE TO THE SEVEN TEAMS, THE F.I.A. RELEASED A STATEMENT SAYING,
“The FIA has conducted detailed technical analysis on the Scuderia Ferrari Power Unit as it is entitled to do for any competitor in the FIA Formula One World Championship.
“The extensive and thorough investigations undertaken during the 2019 season raised suspicions that the Scuderia Ferrari PU could be considered as not operating within the limits of the FIA regulations at all times.
“The Scuderia Ferrari firmly opposed the suspicions and reiterated that its PU always operated in compliance with the regulations. The FIA was not fully satisfied but decided that further action would not necessarily result in a conclusive case due to the complexity of the matter and the material impossibility to provide the unequivocal evidence of a breach.
“To avoid the negative consequences that a long litigation would entail especially in light of the uncertainty of the outcome of such litigations and in the best interest of the Championship and of its stakeholders, the FIA, in compliance with Article 4 (ii) of its Judicial and Disciplinary Rules (JDR), decided to enter into an effective and dissuasive settlement agreement with Ferrari to terminate the proceedings.”
“This type of agreement is a legal tool recognised as an essential component of any disciplinary system and is used by many public authorities and other sport federations in the handling of disputes.
“The confidentiality of the terms of the settlement agreement is provided for by Article 4 (vi) of the JDR.”
Basically, they couldn’t be bothered to investigate any further because of the amount of time, energy and paperwork it will take. (Feel free to jump into the comments with your thoughts on the statement).
So, the seven teams won’t get any more information about it and, historically speaking, no-one in the F1 community will be surprised and things will just move on – but should they? With the F.I.A. admitting they weren’t able to prove if Ferrari’s engine was legal or not and were unable to reach a conclusion, then shouldn’t more be made of this? If this isn’t looked into further, what’s to stop other teams in the future attempting similar things and how will they be policed?
Ferrari get a larger proportion of the annual revenue, enhanced by a historical bonus, which is said to be worth up to $100 million – an amount similar to the entire season budget for one of the smaller teams in the paddock. What’s more is that this money is paid up front before the racing even starts.
Additionally, whilst tobacco brandings were effectively outlawed during the early 2000’s, (though thanks to lobbying and use of legal loopholes it was the end of 2006) Ferrari are still allowed to get away with their on-going relationship with Philip Morris, which has been running since 1984. They even share board members between the two companies - Ferrari’s Chief Executive Officer, Louis Camilleri is also non-executive Chairman of Philip Morris International (PMI), even former team boss Maurizio Arrivabene came from PMI, the team are even officially entered in F1 as Scuderia Ferrari Mission Winnow.
In the interests of fairness, it should be noted that McLaren also have a sponsorship arrangement with British American Tobacco and their “Better Tomorrow” and “Vype” branding – part of BAT’s “potentially reduced-risk products.”
Both using the trusty old friend – the legal loophole which, it seems, the sport’s regulators seem more than willing to turn a blind eye to.
But what if, one day, Chase Carey, Jean Todt (ex-Ferrari) and the rest of them suddenly decided that enough was enough?
Ferrari famously do not advertise their products yet are probably one of the best known brands in the world – they would possibly take a (small) initial financial hit from not being in Formula One, but a couple of limited number special editions would probably soon balance that back out.
A bigger question or just a more difficult one to answer is: What would Formula One look like without Ferrari on the grid – even if we worked on the assumption that Haas and Sauber/Alfa Romeo would continue in some form?
Ferrari have ‘threatened’ to walk away before and an accommodation to keep them in the sport has always been made but the sport is, or at least should be, bigger than any single team.
The proposed budget cap would be more easily introduced (Ferrari are one of, if not, the biggest spenders) and the remaining teams revenue share would increase – the availability of a fair slice of the pie might even entice other manufacturers into the sport and kick the tyres - so to speak - back into F1 as outside manufactures see the sport as a more level playing field.
I should point out that I am a big Ferrari fan, but I am a fan of the sport more. As a fan, you love it when all the teams are fighting for the same positions and there’s no way of knowing who will come out on top – think Germany and Brazil last year. I accept that some will argue (quite possibly correctly) that, without Ferrari to keep them in check, Mercedes could continue to dominate in the hybrid era. Although hopefully, the more level field provided by the budget cap will mitigate this possibility and the dissemination of the Ferrari team personnel across the remaining teams would raise the levels of some teams.
Basically, they couldn’t be bothered to investigate any further because of the amount of time, energy and paperwork it will take. (Feel free to jump into the comments with your thoughts on the statement).
So, the seven teams won’t get any more information about it and, historically speaking, no-one in the F1 community will be surprised and things will just move on – but should they? With the F.I.A. admitting they weren’t able to prove if Ferrari’s engine was legal or not and were unable to reach a conclusion, then shouldn’t more be made of this? If this isn’t looked into further, what’s to stop other teams in the future attempting similar things and how will they be policed?
Ferrari get a larger proportion of the annual revenue, enhanced by a historical bonus, which is said to be worth up to $100 million – an amount similar to the entire season budget for one of the smaller teams in the paddock. What’s more is that this money is paid up front before the racing even starts.
Additionally, whilst tobacco brandings were effectively outlawed during the early 2000’s, (though thanks to lobbying and use of legal loopholes it was the end of 2006) Ferrari are still allowed to get away with their on-going relationship with Philip Morris, which has been running since 1984. They even share board members between the two companies - Ferrari’s Chief Executive Officer, Louis Camilleri is also non-executive Chairman of Philip Morris International (PMI), even former team boss Maurizio Arrivabene came from PMI, the team are even officially entered in F1 as Scuderia Ferrari Mission Winnow.
In the interests of fairness, it should be noted that McLaren also have a sponsorship arrangement with British American Tobacco and their “Better Tomorrow” and “Vype” branding – part of BAT’s “potentially reduced-risk products.”
Both using the trusty old friend – the legal loophole which, it seems, the sport’s regulators seem more than willing to turn a blind eye to.
But what if, one day, Chase Carey, Jean Todt (ex-Ferrari) and the rest of them suddenly decided that enough was enough?
Ferrari famously do not advertise their products yet are probably one of the best known brands in the world – they would possibly take a (small) initial financial hit from not being in Formula One, but a couple of limited number special editions would probably soon balance that back out.
A bigger question or just a more difficult one to answer is: What would Formula One look like without Ferrari on the grid – even if we worked on the assumption that Haas and Sauber/Alfa Romeo would continue in some form?
Ferrari have ‘threatened’ to walk away before and an accommodation to keep them in the sport has always been made but the sport is, or at least should be, bigger than any single team.
The proposed budget cap would be more easily introduced (Ferrari are one of, if not, the biggest spenders) and the remaining teams revenue share would increase – the availability of a fair slice of the pie might even entice other manufacturers into the sport and kick the tyres - so to speak - back into F1 as outside manufactures see the sport as a more level playing field.
I should point out that I am a big Ferrari fan, but I am a fan of the sport more. As a fan, you love it when all the teams are fighting for the same positions and there’s no way of knowing who will come out on top – think Germany and Brazil last year. I accept that some will argue (quite possibly correctly) that, without Ferrari to keep them in check, Mercedes could continue to dominate in the hybrid era. Although hopefully, the more level field provided by the budget cap will mitigate this possibility and the dissemination of the Ferrari team personnel across the remaining teams would raise the levels of some teams.
Both using the trusty old friend – the legal loophole which, it seems, the sport’s regulators seem more than willing to turn a blind eye to.
But what if, one day, Chase Carey, Jean Todt (ex-Ferrari) and the rest of them suddenly decided that enough was enough?
Ferrari famously do not advertise their products yet are probably one of the best known brands in the world – they would possibly take a (small) initial financial hit from not being in Formula One, but a couple of limited number special editions would probably soon balance that back out.
A bigger question or just a more difficult one to answer is: What would Formula One look like without Ferrari on the grid – even if we worked on the assumption that Haas and Sauber/Alfa Romeo would continue in some form?
Ferrari have ‘threatened’ to walk away before and an accommodation to keep them in the sport has always been made but the sport is, or at least should be, bigger than any single team.
The proposed budget cap would be more easily introduced (Ferrari are one of, if not, the biggest spenders) and the remaining teams revenue share would increase – the availability of a fair slice of the pie might even entice other manufacturers into the sport and kick the tyres - so to speak - back into F1 as outside manufactures see the sport as a more level playing field.
I should point out that I am a big Ferrari fan, but I am a fan of the sport more. As a fan, you love it when all the teams are fighting for the same positions and there’s no way of knowing who will come out on top – think Germany and Brazil last year. I accept that some will argue (quite possibly correctly) that, without Ferrari to keep them in check, Mercedes could continue to dominate in the hybrid era. Although hopefully, the more level field provided by the budget cap will mitigate this possibility and the dissemination of the Ferrari team personnel across the remaining teams would raise the levels of some teams
one of the things they've got right
