About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.

What needs to be done with the FOM profits

Reduce ticket prices for the races viewers
45
37%
Pay more money to the teams according to old distribution
25
20%
More support for new teams
18
15%
Support grass root motor sport world wide by the FiA
15
12%
Build new and upgrade traditional F1 circuits
12
10%
Give it to CVC or any other bank owner
1
1%
I don't care
7
6%
 
Total votes: 123

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

Last year FOTA, FiA and FOM signed a new Concord agreement which is running to the end of 2012. It basically keeps the old distribution of FOM profits which means about $ 500 mil each will go to CVC and the FOTA teams. It was a big dissappointment for FOTA that they could not increase their 50% share to something like 85% which is their target but five teams including Ferrari had previously signed deals with Bernie which had confirmed the lower figure.

Ecclestone has now come out with very robust attacks on FOTA and FiA.
Bernard Ecclestone wrote:It (FOTA) will never work because it is made by teams that fight against each other on the tracks. When the teams examine rules, everyone tries to get an advantage. The teams wanted to divide F1, but now they understand that it is good to give importance to the money that they get (from FOM). There is no space for FOTA...
Bernard Ecclestone wrote:I'm not happy with the performance of F1's new teams. To put a stop to F1's unstable rules we maybe need an independent body, independent from the teams and the FIA writing the regulations. There are enough people out there who could do it. Whether a 13th team will join the grid next year we will have to see. We have told them that if they can't put 16 million in now we don't want them. If they can't find that now there is no way they are going to run. It will take at least a few years before new outfits backed by car manufacturers will re-enter the sport. Nevertheless there is no need to reduce team budgets because people will spend what they have got.
I came across a pretty good comment in Joe Saward's blog. Joe is one of the most experienced observers of F1 politics.

Joe Saward wrote:Bernie Ecclestone .. has planted the suggestion that there might be need for an independent rule-making body for the sport. This is clearly a dig at the FIA, which – lest we forget – is already the independent rule-making body for the sport. This is a fairly transparent manoeuvre. Bernie knows that in a few months from now the negotiations for the next Concorde Agreement must begin and he understands that this is going to be a huge challenge for him as the teams and the FIA are now in a situation where there are natural allies, as the commercial rights holders (CVC Capital Partners), whom he represents, are not going to get the same kind of terms from the teams as they have managed in the past. Taking 50% of the profits of the sport has been a great bonus for these folk but they have to face up to the reality that the future number will have to be more like 15%. The game now is to try to split the teams and undermine the federation. The problem is that after years of this sort of thing the teams have learned that being divided is to be conquered. In the old days Ecclestone had Max Mosley in the Place de la Concorde and so had a pretty solid alliance against the teams. This is no longer the case.

It will be fun to watch the negotiations, but hopefully this time they will not lead the usual brinksmanship. The wisest route forward would be for CVC to either take the money and run, selling the rights to someone with a less aggressive need to make profits and then the teams will get more, the FIA will get more, the commercial rights holders Will be amply rewarded (rather than overly rewarded) and the sport as a whole will benefit from more money staying in it and stability.

I have long believed that the best solution is for all the parties involved to establish some kind of trust to look after the commercial matters and keep the money-grabbers out. Whether that can be negotiated is another matter, but with a strong FOTA, allied to the FIA this is entirely possible.
The game plan for Bernie is clearly to attack the FiA at every possible angle and make life difficult for FOTA. To execute that strategy he will try to promote the different interests of rich and poor FOTA teams and kill off as many of the new teams as he can. Only divided and weak teams will allow him to keep running the sport to his own agenda and exploit race goers and tax payers for bank profits.

The first thing that he will try to kill is the resource restriction agreement (RRA) which was put in place to stabilize the teams in the economic crisis. Ferrari is the obvious weak link in FOTA. They have already betrayed the GPMA/GPWC once in 2005 and Bernie is making overtures to them once again.
Bernard Ecclestone wrote:The only two things in the business worth having are the name Formula One and Ferrari.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

Saribro
Saribro
6
Joined: 28 Jul 2006, 00:34

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

How about a share for the race organisers so they don't keep turning huge losses without state/region/... subsidies?

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

I kind of included that in question1 and 5. If the hosting fees go down the circuits, tax payers and race goers are better off.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

Some more voices in the FOM/FOTA debate.
Bernard Ecclestone wrote:I'm not on a collision course with FOTA, they're on a collision course with each other. Competitors will never be together. You can't expect 12 race teams to all be together on everything. The teams were putting sponsorship on property that belongs to us. I explained to them that's fine and maybe we wouldn't have a problem with that if we could put some things on their cars. I like achieving things and I see myself as something of a firefighter and I never get tired of it. And if there are no fires, we light a few of our own.
Adam Parr, Williams wrote:I think Bernie sometimes wakes up on a Wednesday morning and says to himself 'I'm going to yank a few chains'. 99 per cent of the time, we resolve these things without any blood being spilled.
Martin Whitmarsh, FOTA wrote:I think we're looking forward to working with Bernie and making the sport better, not slugging it out with him.
Yep, Bernie setting up some fires for his entertainment. I think the guys who matter know what to make of this.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

Dukeage
Dukeage
0
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 21:28

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

Teams in a league can't work together Bernie? Go and talk to Roger Goodell and the NFL owners ...

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

James Allan wrote:Flavio Briatore recently visited Ferrari’s Maranello headquarters, toured the Gestione Sportiva with team principal Stefano Domenicali and went across to meet chairman Luca di Montezemolo. It is unlikely that Briatore went to Maranello simply to have a coffee. He could have been there to sound out Montezemolo on behalf of Ecclestone. However the converse is also possible and he could even have been talking about a role in a future F1 without Ecclestone and let’s not forget that Briatore and Montezemolo were all for FOTA starting an alternative racing series last season.
Three posts above we see Ecclestone making overtures to Ferrari. So personally I find plan A more probable with Briatore suitably experienced in machiavellian politics to switch to plan B any time.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

autogyro
autogyro
53
Joined: 04 Oct 2009, 15:03

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

Why anyone gives Briatore any credibility escapes me.
Getting involved with him is a sure route to losing ones reputation.

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

It appears that Montezemolo and Ecclestone don't care.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

Spa worried about Belgian GP future post-2012
Motorsport.com wrote:Organisers of the historic Belgian Grand Prix are concerned about the future of F1's popular Spa-Francorchamps round beyond 2012. Whilst revealing this week that 40,000 tickets have been sold so far for the forthcoming August 29 event, the officials said Spa is under increasing pressure from international venues who have more money to spend. "The ticket sales for this year are relatively good," said spokesman Christian Lahaye. "We hope to reach the figure of 2007, with 65,000 tickets sold, to allow us to achieve a balanced financial position," he added.

According to the Flemish newspaper De Morgen, Spa's F1 future could depend on the new Concorde Agreement post-2012 expanding the annual calendar to up to 25 races. With the influx of new international races promising much higher annual promotion fees, the report said Spa-Francorchamps' race organisers are worried. "There is no shortage of candidates (for grands prix)," Spa-Francorchamps circuit boss Andre Maes is quoted by Belga news agency. "Even France doesn't have a Grand Prix," he said.
I have suspected for some time that the question of more than 20 races is now in the 2013 CA package of issues. The first time I realized it was when Bernie agreed with Martin Whitmarsh in June that there should be only 20 races. That was a strange position considering that he has more than 20 races approved, including Austin. So something must go. It looks like the race number is a bargaining position by both sides which they can use to overcome a stall situation.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

25 races, perhaps MrE has talked a bit too much to the France family while spending time in Austin?

Think about it, two races at Bahrain and three in Singapore, why not?
Last edited by xpensive on 12 Aug 2010, 18:17, edited 1 time in total.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

User avatar
Mafia
0
Joined: 02 Aug 2008, 22:40

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

I am trying to picture the F1 without manufacturers involvement. it doesnt look nice to be honest. I think many wont agree here with me but, who here thinks, HRT, Virgin racing and Fake Lotus are doing any good to F1? is F1 better now then it has been when Toyota, BMW and Honda were around?
Fuel Minimum, Engine power Maximum, Comittement Off the scane

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

The 2013 CA coincides with the new 2013 engine formula. I believe that the new formula will make F1 more attractive to manufacturers. If the rumors are correct we will not have an I-4 but a V4 engine so that some companies like VW are not so likely to compete. But I would not rule out that some Japanese companies will come back. Honda for instance have a great deal of experience with V4 racing engines.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

User avatar
Mafia
0
Joined: 02 Aug 2008, 22:40

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

WhiteBlue wrote:The 2013 CA coincides with the new 2013 engine formula. I believe that the new formula will make F1 more attractive to manufacturers. If the rumors are correct we will not have an I-4 but a V4 engine so that some companies like VW are not so likely to compete. But I would not rule out that some Japanese companies will come back. Honda for instance have a great deal of experience with V4 racing engines.
Funny you should mention that Gugz, Coz i heard, out of 14 applications submitted for next year entry, one of them was from a Japanese manufacturer.. i wonder who that will be... or may be its not true, but i read it few months ago somewhere.
Fuel Minimum, Engine power Maximum, Comittement Off the scane

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

Mafia wrote:I am trying to picture the F1 without manufacturers involvement. it doesnt look nice to be honest. I think many wont agree here with me but, who here thinks, HRT, Virgin racing and Fake Lotus are doing any good to F1? is F1 better now then it has been when Toyota, BMW and Honda were around?
This is a very good pount mobster, the new teams were of course the making of MrM and have so far been a joke, let alone the fourth one which we by the grace of the Good Lord don't have to behold on a race-track. Imagine a field filled with that kind mixed up with the odd Mercedes, McLaren and Ferrari?

Formula one has certainly been devaluated itself considerasbly only since last year, oh I wonder why.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

monkeyboy1976
monkeyboy1976
2
Joined: 12 Jan 2006, 17:00
Location: Midlands, UK

Re: About the 2013 Concord Agreement

Post

Some comments on a few of the points above.
1) Teams getting money - why do people think they deserve more (25% of the vote at the time of writing)? The teams job is to attract sponsorship and fund their activities from that. If they need to have more from the rights fund then put up the prize money.
2) Manufacturers exit - they were not forced out. The credit crunch happened and they could not justfy the spend or appearnce on extravagance whilst line workers being laid off. Did MrM (despite all his other failings) see this coming and try to fill the gaps.
3) New teams - give them chance please. It's only been 6 months and they are compared directly (unfairly IMHO) with fully focussed and experienced teams such as McLaren and Ferrari. Has anyone seen pics of the MTC?
4) F1 now campared to before - I do not beleive that F1 is any "less" now than it ever has been. Surely all we care about is a close race for the championship? This year sees the closestsince I can remember (20 years of watching). If there are guys at the back then that is fine as it provides a prooving ground for young talent (drivers as well as tech staff)