Did Bernie lie?

[GitanesBlondes]

It is an chicken and egg type problem. Do you have manufacturers come and go because the constructors and Bernie run unfriendly policies or do they run unfriendly policies to reduce the competition from manufacturers? I suspect the latter is correct.

I don't believe it is a chicken or egg argument.

The manufacturer dominance outside of Ferrari was done by the early 1960s when it became obvious their antiquated way of thinking was no match for the ingenuity, and outside-the-box thinking of people like Colin Chapman and the rest of the so-called garagistes.

Which also was long before Bernie had any influence and power within the sport.

The manufacturers were better off as engine suppliers because that was where their focus was at it's best. They were never really suited for the evolving, dynamic world of F1 in which decisions needed to made on the fly. Not really a good policy to have to consult one's board for every potential move and future plan in an organic environment.

[marcush.]

Quote :"We Live by this Principle: We Do not Give or Take Bribes.

We do not do business at any cost. We only want to win contracts in a fair and legal manner. The Daimler Group does not tolerate unethical or corrupt behaviour by its employees or business partners and will take action against it. Decisions based on corruption are immoral, distort competition, harm the company’s assets and reputation and go against the common good."

So I wonder who else but MBSA ( or their business partners ) gave a certain politician here ( Tony Yengeni) a massive "discount" on his M Class Merc as part of our so called Arms Deal in late 1990's !
Yengeni got a 5 year prison sentence this ( being released after a few months for being a loyal cadre and for taking some of the heat )
MBSA still supply these luxury vehicles at "tender" prices to the high and mighty politicians

let´s make no bones about Daimler was totally corrupt not too long ago and a lot of the old guard is still in charge but rest assured there is NO absolutely no fishy things going on too long and as soon as a problem is detected the board is acting .See Daimler severing ties with some important Russian dealerships .

[xpensive]

If we consider 2014 without the three-pointed star directly involved with the team, what would they be named?

Wolf has been used before, but how about Lauda GP? Naah, I doubt if the name Lauda would fly very far, but Petronas GP?

[GitanesBlondes]

If we consider 2014 without the three-pointed star directly involved with the team, what would they be named?

Wolf has been used before, but how about Lauda GP? Naah, I doubt if the name Lauda would fly very far, but Petronas GP?

Here's a thought. Assuming they could get the ok from the Owen family to use the name, given Lauda's history, and the British location of the team, perhaps we could see a resurrection of the BRM name?

It'd be a good way to try and generate support among the British fans of F1 by trying to pay homage to the days of yore from a marketing perspective. When you had a cast of drivers for BRM at one time or another that counted among them, Jo Siffert, Graham Hill, Dan Gurney, Jo Bonnier, Pedro Rodriguez, Jackie Stewart, John Surtees, and many more....that's pretty marketable I have to think.

[WhiteBlue]

If we consider 2014 without the three-pointed star directly involved with the team, what would they be named?
Wolf has been used before, but how about Lauda GP? Naah, I doubt if the name Lauda would fly very far, but Petronas GP?

Obvious choice would be AMG.

[xpensive]

I think that's a no-no, when I believe that AMG is a part of Daimler, no?

[WhiteBlue]

It is an chicken and egg type problem. Do you have manufacturers come and go because the constructors and Bernie run unfriendly policies or do they run unfriendly policies to reduce the competition from manufacturers? I suspect the latter is correct.

I don't believe it is a chicken or egg argument.

The manufacturer dominance outside of Ferrari was done by the early 1960s when it became obvious their antiquated way of thinking was no match for the ingenuity, and outside-the-box thinking of people like Colin Chapman and the rest of the so-called garagistes.

Which also was long before Bernie had any influence and power within the sport.

The manufacturers were better off as engine suppliers because that was where their focus was at it's best. They were never really suited for the evolving, dynamic world of F1 in which decisions needed to made on the fly. Not really a good policy to have to consult one's board for every potential move and future plan in an organic environment.

Selective recognition seems to be at work here. We had Mercedes, Renault, Ferrrari, Toyota, BMW, Honda and Jaguar not so long ago with works teams under Ecclestones control of F1. They almost all went away because they were pissed off by the Concord cartel. No reasonable chance to convert power train expertise into victories or good points and total restrictions in power train specs and design.

[GitanesBlondes]

It is an chicken and egg type problem. Do you have manufacturers come and go because the constructors and Bernie run unfriendly policies or do they run unfriendly policies to reduce the competition from manufacturers? I suspect the latter is correct.

I don't believe it is a chicken or egg argument.

The manufacturer dominance outside of Ferrari was done by the early 1960s when it became obvious their antiquated way of thinking was no match for the ingenuity, and outside-the-box thinking of people like Colin Chapman and the rest of the so-called garagistes.

Which also was long before Bernie had any influence and power within the sport.

The manufacturers were better off as engine suppliers because that was where their focus was at it's best. They were never really suited for the evolving, dynamic world of F1 in which decisions needed to made on the fly. Not really a good policy to have to consult one's board for every potential move and future plan in an organic environment.

Selective recognition seems to be at work here. We had Mercedes, Renault, Ferrrari, Toyota, BMW, Honda and Jaguar not so long ago with works teams under Ecclestones control of F1. They almost all went away because they were pissed off by the Concord cartel. No reasonable chance to convert power train expertise into victories or good points and total restrictions in power train specs and design.

I know it feels more cathartic to blame the "Concorde Cartel" as you put it, but manufacturers are subject to a lot of other forces than a private team is...such as a shifting economic situation globally. Motorsport usually is the first thing to get axed when costs need to be contained.

[Richard]

The financial meltdown and panic selling/closure of entire brands and divisions might have had an influence? Just a hunch.

The second reason is failure to have brand impact ie win races.

Running costs will be in the mix.

F1 politics probably comes way down the list, that's just a mere implementation/operational issue.

[SectorOne]

The financial meltdown and panic selling/closure of entire brands and divisions might have had an influence? Just a hunch.

Bingo.

Although what is interesting is that the Mosley news came out in the middle of all of that. Perfect timing as the world is so focused on other crap. I bet if it came out tomorrow it would have a bigger impact.

Same thing when Donald Rumsfeld in a press conference said they cannot track 2.3 trillion dollars. As if they went up in smoke.
The day after was 9/11. Not a single person on this planet wondered about the 2.3 trillion the day after.

[GitanesBlondes]

Just a friendly reminder of how bad Bernie has been for F1...and some stories cannot be told without Max Mosley's involvement because Max made a lot of things possible for Bernie.

http://forum.b92.net/topic/44465-pazi-ovo/?p=2033161

[GitanesBlondes]

Just a friendly reminder of how bad Bernie has been for F1...and some stories cannot be told without Max Mosley's involvement because Max made a lot of things possible for Bernie.

http://forum.b92.net/topic/44465-pazi-ovo/?p=2033161

Use this link to read it where it was originally posted.

http://web.archive.org/web/200804191406 ... mosley.htm

[GitanesBlondes]

I always loved Max's fondness of the phrase "bringing the sport into disrepute." I never even saw that bit thrown about really till he came along.

It must have killed BMW to have to even waste their time on that 2009 season though?

Here's the real thing, what provides a better ROI for the German manufacturers anyway from a purely marketing perspective, F1 or the DTM? Does Bernie tell Mercedes there is going to be some sort of sensational marketing return on their involvement in F1?

The old adage of what wins on Sunday sells on Monday isn't even relevant any longer for any motorsport.

[Richard]

I always loved Max's fondness of the phrase "bringing the sport into disrepute." I never even saw that bit thrown about really till he came along.

It's a standard phrase in UK sport.

[GitanesBlondes]

I always loved Max's fondness of the phrase "bringing the sport into disrepute." I never even saw that bit thrown about really till he came along.

It's a standard phrase in UK sport.

Maybe it was that Mosley threw it around so much, and so often, that the whole phrase has become seared into my mind.

I find myself saying it with regards to other sports in general these days.

The legacy of Max lives on forever?

One of the things I fear from whenever this trial of Bernie's kicks off is if Max is somehow called as witness on Bernie's behalf. It's the sort of thing that I couldn't possibly see going well in general as I think he is quite capable of creating some sort of smokescreen that removes the focus from Bernie altogether.