Pirelli will take Bridgestone's place after 2010

[xpensive]

I get the firm impression that RBR is concerned to keep status quo in every respect, xcept for engines of course.

[Chaparral]

Whiteblue wrote

From a commercial point of view the Pirelli deal was always the better deal.

Why??

[ISLAMATRON]

Cheaper for the teams and they did not demand competition like Michelin has.

[WhiteBlue]

Whiteblue wrote

From a commercial point of view the Pirelli deal was always the better deal.

Why??

Cheaper for the teams and they did not demand competition like Michelin has.

Plus they also offered twice the amount of tyres as Michelin did. Suspiciously Ferrari, McLaren and Renault kept favoring Michelin saying that the quality of the tyres would be better or the technology more up to date. Mercedes initially sides with the other manufacturers but went over into the independent camp after listening to their points.

The strange thing is the inability of a 9:3 majority to close the deal. The F1 Commision normally decides with a 70% majority, but due to the short time line it may require unanimity. In that case the FiA may simply have pulled rank on the teams to avoid the stalemate.

[bill shoe]

One of the fundamental constraints to any high level racing series is tire supply. There is an upcoming 3-way F1 power/money struggle for ~2013 onwards. Each of the three factions (FIA, Bernie, teams) will need a plausible tire supply in order to have a credible threat of leaving the current system to start a new system. They will use the credible threat to try and get more power and money from the current system.

I believe the difficulty of selecting the 2011 tire supplier is that this process determines who the tire company is legally contracted to in the future. In 2013 can the tire supplier legally walk away from the FIA, or Bernie, or the teams? Each of the three factions will want to make sure they have their finger legally inserted in the tire supplier's pie.

[WhiteBlue]

Bill shoe, this talk of F1 factions makes no sense. The FiA as governing body , the commercial rights holder FOA/FOM and the team's representation FOTA are separate functional entities and not factions of a homogenous body. I see no point in disregarding the different purposes and agendas of these organizations. They are natural and not artificial.

[lebesset]

it is pretty obvious that pirelli are just as capable of producing a suitable tyre for F1 as michelin ...possibly they might go the route that bridgestone have followed this year and make a tyre which is a little too conservative , but so might michelin come to that

so what goes here ? can hardly be arguing about the price , pirelli have already offered a sensible deal , and no way will they move on that

is this just todt saying I'm in charge ? or is he just trying to promote french interests in the usual french way ?

[ISLAMATRON]

maybe another piece to the puzzle

http://adamcooperf1.com/2010/06/11/eccl ... vertising/

[xpensive]

There is little dout that Jean Todt as just as French in his sentiments as most of his countrymen, there is a simple way of solving this problem however, let the two suppliers compete and slash downforce to compensate for the increased speed.

This is what Michelin wanta anyway, no?

[Jersey Tom]

it is pretty obvious that pirelli are just as capable of producing a suitable tyre for F1 as michelin

How is it obvious?

[mkw0101]

Lewis Hamilton will win the race> he's a loco boy in britain and so is Jenson Button.

[lebesset]

because pirelli are currently used in various racing formulae , and are used on many of the world's fastest road cars
except for bridgestone who have withdrawn , who has recent experience of F1 tyre production ?
let me put it the other way , is there any reason to suggest that any other company can make better F1 tyres than pirelli ?

[WhiteBlue]

.. there is a simple way of solving this problem however, let the two suppliers compete and slash downforce to compensate for the increased speed. This is what Michelin wanta anyway, no?

It may be simple to do but it would make him popular as a social disease with the teams and the manufacturers. The teams hate the cost and uncertainty of a tyre war and the manufacturers would question the investment in F1 if the tyres once again become the central issue. Michelin would be happy and his life would be hell.

[ESPImperium]

Personally i can see a new tire war happening, i can see a split of teams going to Michelen (McLaren, Red Bull, Mercedes, Renault, Force India) and the rest to Pirelli.

I think the argument of what manufacturer can be ready isnt whats going on, i think its down to 2 aspects, one Martin Whitmarsh had touched on with the BBC; Technichal Risk, on whitch Michelen is the better option as they can just pull their technology more or less from their 2006 archives and their involvement in Superleague Formula and the now defunct A1GP "Ferarri-era". The other aspect is comercial rights, and this is where Pirelli has the advantage over Michelen, as i think that Pirelli has taken the decision to pay teams to use their rubber, its not exactly the $10million that Bridgestone give every team each year, but arround $1.5 million.

I personally think that the only way its gonna be resolved is by a good old tyre war, and the only way i can see this happening is by using the mooted end of season week long test at Yas Island about 2 weeks after the season has officially finished (for the last race) or the week after they are rumored to be testing the young guys from the Tuesday after the last race of the season.

Its gonna come down to it then...

Ill put it this way, if we want closer racing, a new tyre war may be the only way. Ive said this for a while, but i think people are seeing what ive been on at, and DC alluded to this in the F1 forum at Canada.

This story aint over at current.

[ISLAMATRON]

you allways come up with the wildest stuff