Интервью с Максом Мосли и Берни Экклстоуном

[RedMan]

Честно говоря, просто не знал куда поместить, вроде бы и не новости и к другим темам не особо. По чуть-чуть о прошлом, настоящем и будущем.

Interview with Max Mosley and Bernie Ecclestone

07/06/2006

An interview with FIA President Max Mosley and FOM President Bernie

Ecclestone, conducted by Michael Schmidt of Auto Motor und Sport

In May 2001 GPWC declared war on the Formula One Establishment. How do you

see the last five years?

Bernie Ecclestone: Let me speak about the commercial aspects. We have agreed

the commercial terms, agreed on everything we are responsible for. In the

end everyone was very helpful and wanted to get the job done. Mr. Dassas

from Renault was the one who accelerated the process. I can't speak for the

FIA.

Max Mosley: Firstly, we never thought in reality there was ever the

slightest prospect of a rival series being set up. All we want to do was

make sure that the rules were fair and equal, and that the cost-level was

such that we could get a reasonable number of teams which were able to

compete on equal terms.

The difficulty was that when we invited the teams at the start of 2005 to

discuss the rules for 2008, a number of them didn't turn up. In one way,

this was a pity, but in another way it made it easier for us to decide what

we thought was right.

Do you feel like winners now?

MM: I don't think you can ever talk in terms of winning. There are cliches

one could use, that it was a victory for common sense, but I would say that

what has now finally happened is in the best interests of the sport and the

outcome was inevitable from the start.

BE: I don't think there are any winners I think we are all losers. We've

done a lot of damage to Formula One.

The FIA is a loser, because they were forced to adopt a position. We are

losers because we were forced to defend our position. The manufacturers and

the teams have suffered more than anybody because the sponsors started

putting a question-mark against Formula One where there had never been a

question mark before.

We destabilised a sport which had been one of the very few which had been

really stable.

Was it necessary to have this aggravation over five years. Wasn't there a

shortcut?

BE: The shortcut would have been for them not to have had this silly fight.

From the financial point of view they would have got more than they'd ever

got. From the FIA's point of view, all they tried to do was to keep the

teams alive and well.

MM: Bernie is right, obviously from a commercial point of view everybody

lost. But from an FIA point of view what we and also the teams lost was a

lot of time. That time could have been used for doing something

constructive.

The manufacturers argue, that they won, because they got 50 percent.

BE: Maybe they would have got even more if they had acted differently.

What broke the ice finally?

MM: Mr. Dassas from Renault broke the log-jam. He saw that there was nothing

to be gained by going on and much to be gained by stopping. He then pushed

the others into stopping.

Were you ever concerned that it could have gone the wrong way?

MM: No, because I know the practical difficulties of trying to set up a

rival championship. It would have been possible to set up a rival series,

but that would not have had the same credibility.

Perhaps I am oversimplifying it but to me it's very simple. When they first

wanted to set-up a structure they got two groups to give them quotes. Both

groups, IMG and iSe, said that the success of their entire plan was

contingent on having just one championship. Their assumption was, that they

could simply take over Bernie's business so that he could not guarantee to

us the 20 cars necessary to run the Formula One World Championship. That was

obvious nonsense.

They could have set-up a rival series but there still would have been a

Formula One World Championship. At that point they would have got into a

position, where Bernie had all the contracts with the promoters and the TV

companies. The promoters and TV people may not have been happy with that,

but there were contracts in place to respect. So then the manufacturers

would have asked the promoters and broadcasters, will you run a race for us

and will you televise it? In both cases the promoters and the TV companies

would have asked them to pay, with the argument that these were huge car

manufacturers who were using racing to market their products.

At that point the entire business plan would have collapsed, because it was

predicated on the assumption that they could generate not only the income

Bernie had, but actually improve on it. The whole thing could not possibly

work unless the manufactures were prepared to put up jointly approximately a

billion dollars a year until the whole thing got going. I didn't think there

was the slightest chance of them doing that.

BE: One thing I would like to add. In one of the meetings we had, the

manufacturers told us that they could not commit for more than two years.

Ferrari at first said ten years, then Luca called me and said that he could

only commit to four years but why should he commit for four when the others

were only committing to two?

Imagine you are going to start a brand new championship, and you go to the

promoters and TV companies and tell them, 'small problem, we can only

guarantee that we are going to be doing this for two years. After that I'm

sorry we don't know what's going to happen'. Can you imagine the promoters

and the TV people saying 'that's alright don't worry about it'?

Another small thing. Max and I, a hundred years ago, tried to start a rival

championship to run against the FIA, when perhaps Jean-Marie (Balestre) was

the only one at the FIA who was very strong. We decided not to do it. Can

you imagine what chance the manufacturers had trying to do that now?

You were dealing all the time with Presidents of world wide companies. Are

you surprised, how they misjudged the reality?

MM: I don't think the Presidents of the companies were ever involved. If

you're running a huge global concern like BMW for example, if you're the CEO

or even someone like Mr Goschel, you have a very limited time to think about

it and so you listen to the competition manager. The only time it went to

the big bosses was when someone would go to them and say can we sign for

five years? Then they said no because it would have been a contingent

liability on their balance sheets and probably half of the board is against

Formula One anyway so there was no chance of getting it through.

BE: We do not know what kind of information the CEO's of these companies

were given. They may have been asked to give a decision based on information

which could have been completely wrong.

Why didn't the manufacturers buy the Formula One business? It would have

been the easiest way.

BE: Absolutely. That's what they should have done.

MM: When we were doing the famous $300 million deal with Bernie for the

TV-rights over the next 100 years, I got a call from Mr. Cantarella, who was

at that time in charge of GPWC. He told me that they were interested. I

said, sure, make a bid. If they were prepared to offer more, we would have

been obliged to look at it.

We had a meeting in June, where Cantarella told me, that they were not able

to make a decision before September. I then said to the World Council 'we

have Bernie's firm offer on the table, or we can wait until September and

maybe the manufacturers will offer more, but we can't be sure'.

We weren't talking about a billion dollars a year for five years. If they

had offered $400 million, Bernie would have either had to match it or we

would have had to take it. The thing is, that they could not even agree to

offer $400 million to buy all the rights from 2010 to infinity.

More recently some of the number two people in these companies would then

try to tell me that they could run outside the FIA structures. I asked them

how they were going to do that? How they were going to get the circuits?

They said that they would buy the circuits. Well at that point you just give

up. To be fair none of the CEOs ever talked like that, but some of the

number two people did:

The key seemed to be the signature of Ferrari on the new Concorde Agreement.

How did you convince Luca di Montezemolo, who in the early days was one of

the GPWC's biggest supporters?

BE: I've known Luca now for 30 odd years, and he has always been the biggest

supporter of what is good for Ferrari.

MM: Whatever Luca did or didn't do with Bernie it was always in the

interests of Ferrari. There is also a fundamental tradition in Ferrari to

never run outside the Establishment. They would always be with the FIA.

Sooner or later it was bound to end in the way that it has. The only

question was the amount of time and aggravation it took.

Does Ferrari deserve any extra-rights?

BE: That's what was agreed. Whether they deserve it or not doesn't make any

difference. The bottom line is that is what was commercially agreed and it

is completely fair. The company that bought the commercial rights is happy

and certainly the teams should be more than happy.

But the manufacturers wanted to have 60 percent of the income. You gave them

only 50 percent.

BE: The offer of 60 percent had been made on the assumption that the

manufacturers signed as manufacturers. But they didn't want to do that and

they sent their relevant teams. The new owners are business people who have

to value the risks. For them a signature from BMW is worth more than the one

from BMW-Sauber. They could have had 60 percent at any time, had they signed

in their own names. But they didn't, they said that they couldn't make the

commitment.

MM: Because they couldn't even commit for the next five years, or even for

two. With everything clarified: with only one championship, no split, no

division, even then they couldn't sign with Bernie for the extra 10 per

cent. For me that provides conclusive proof that they could not run their

own series.

How far away is the Memorandum of Understanding from the final Concorde

Agreement?

BE: From our commercial point of view everything is clear. Now it's up to

the regulator, the FIA.

MM: The entire structure is now in place. We may or may not end up with

another Concorde Agreement. Probably we will in the end but we have a deal

with Bernie that he will show up with 20 cars. Bernie has a deal with the

teams that they will come with 20 cars. We have a deal with Bernie that we

regulate the championship in the traditional way, so at the moment the

entire structure is in place so we don't have to have a Concorde Agreement.

We may need one because at the moment there is a championship in 2008 with

regulations which everyone has entered. Those teams do not have to enter in

2009. Equally we could change the regulations completely after 2008

consistent with our deal with Bernie. But then Bernie has a deal with the

teams that they will enter after 2008. So we could leave it as it is but we

will probably do a longer term deal.

BE: I guarantee if you walk down the pitlane and speak to all the team

principals, and the managers for that matter, and ask them questions about

the Concorde Agreement, they wouldn't be able to answer you. Because they

haven't read it and it's so out of date now that we do very few things that

the Concorde Agrement says we should do.

You wanted to modify the decision making process, is it too dangerous to

give too much power to the teams?

MM: The ideal is that we should have to consult with the teams but the idea

that the teams should be able to make the rules is crazy, because they can

never agree. And they only think of the teams, whereas we have to think of

the promoters, the rightsholders, we have to think of everybody. We should

consult with the teams closey but they should not have the right to dictate

what the rules are.

Do you expect further problems until the rules for 2008 are finalised?

MM: The rules are finalised. The only thing that can happen is somebody can

propose a change and we may or may not change it. If all the teams proposed

a change unanimously and there were no fundamental problems for the

promoters or the commercial rightsholders, I am sure we would do it but

that's unlikely.

At the moment we have the rules, people can make proposals but there are

different conditions for different things to be changed. Technical

regulations require unanimity. A sporting regulation that changes the way

the cars are built, after the 30th of June, requires unanimity. A sporting

regulation that does not affect the cars, could go right up to October 2007

with a simple majority.

BE: And then everything has to go to the Formula One Commission and the

World Council.

MM: Both of them have the right of a veto.

BE: And ultimately the General Assembly.

MM: Exactly. He knows the structures better than I do.

In the old payout system the succesfull teams got more money, which made the

strong teams even stronger. Will you stick with this system?

BE: It's been going for 30 years. If you do well you get rewarded.

MM: In my opinion we ought to have a system where everyone gets the same

money and ideally a little bit more for the ones at the back.

BE: We do that Max in Column One. In Column One the same percentage of prize

money goes to each team. So Toro Rosso gets the same as Ferrari. The Column

Two money is based on results. People who score more points, get more money.

That is only fair.

MM: And also the travel, the teams get the same refund for their travel

expenses. You're right, that is relatively new and came in with the current

Concorde Agreement. Up to 1997 it was much more complicated.

Are you in a way responsible for the five year long battle? You invited the

manufacturers to enter Formula One. You gave them all sorts of presents, for

example you allowed electronic driver aids, because high technology was

attractive for the car companies. Perhaps you gave them too big a taste of

power?

MM: I don't think that's entirely fair. The regulations were the regulations

all the way through. Then at the end of 1993 we started to get worried by

the electronics. In fact I got a Christmas card from Senna, saying, that you

must get rid of electronic driver aids. Which we did for 1994. We even asked

for the right to read their source codes. That was accepted by the

manufacturers at the time. Since then we haven't cut back in any significant

way. We just allowed the traction-control to come back in order to stop the

allegations, that someone was cheating with it. There remained always some

doubts.

Now we start to cut the costs, because there is no way that they could go on

like this. It would put them out of business. If we want a successful

series, we have to make it possible for Bernie to turn up with 20 cars. The

manufacturers were never lured in they came in with the regulations as they

were.

Now they say, that you want to get rid of the manufacturers by imposing a

low-tech formula and freezing all developments.

BE: Rubbish. Why would we do that?

MM: Complete nonsense.

BE: I would lay down and die to keep them in. The manufacturers are the

people who have the money and spend it for the good of the sport. Midland

don't spend much money and Toro Rosso aren't spending a fortune. We need the

BMWs and Hondas.

MM: If you look at what's happening at the moment they are collectively

spending more than a billion euros a year in order to make the engines run a

little faster each year. It's impossible for that to be sustainable. Some

manufacturer has got to be in ninth or tenth or eleventh or twelfth - only

one can be first.

The price has to come down to a point where it's worth it even if you are

going to be fifth and sixth or seventh and eighth. At a billion euros a year

it's not worth it. Sooner or later the Board will stop it.

The way to get rid of the manufacturers is to let it continue as it is. The

only way to keep them is to get the costs down.

BE: Just looking at what I do with broadcasting. Broadcasting today is

completely different compared with ten years ago. It's the same with the

technical regulations. Who had heard of traction control when we were

running teams? Our traction control was what kind of rear springs we used.

Things have moved on and you have to keep in line with what's happening.

From the FIA's point of view they have to ask what could happen in the next

five years. If you don't adapt you can be caught out very easily.

The other allegation is that the problem only started when Bernie sold the

Formula One business to the banks.

BE: I didn't sell anything. If I had control over our family trust I never

would have sold it.

When the trust realised, and I have nothing to do with the management of the

trust, that perhaps I had to have a heart operation they started to get a

bit nervous. They asked, what would happen if I die. So we better get out

and sell some shares, because if he does die, maybe the shares wouldn't be

worth as much. They did a deal and it was a good one as it happened at the

time, but they put themselves into a position they never thought they would

be in. Where it was more than 50 per cent that was being sold. They couldn't

foresee that Kirch would take over the shares from the banks and that he

would take another 25 percent option. That's what caused all the problems.

MM: Again these were two or three billion dollar deals. The manufacturers

could have bought all the rights for less than 400 million dollars back in

2002. But they didn't. The truth of the matter is that they came into

Formula One because they thought it would be good for their marketing and

good for their company and it was completely immaterial whether Formula One

was owned by Bernie or the banks or whoever. It was a good thing to be in.

Just like when they advertise on television they don't care who owns the

television company.

The truth of it is that some of the number two people in these companies

started to see themselves replacing Bernie, they all saw themselves sitting

in the motorhome behind the smoked glass running the show. When that got

less likely because they realised the banks had bought it they started to

resent it.

BE: I would never disclose the numbers, but the manufacturers could have

done the deal before CVC came. They could have done a super deal. They

should have done it, it would have put them in control and they could have

fired me. They could have done all the things they say they wanted to do.

MM: They could have done all of it for a fraction of what they are spending

every year on engines just to make them run a little bit faster.

Another complaint from the teams is that Bernie takes too much money out of

the sport?

BE: Years ago I offered to the teams that we all share the risk. I would run

the company and take 30 percent out of the profit. Everyone without

exception said, "you do what you want. You take the risk and the money as

long as we get a guaranteed amount back. We are racers and all we are

interested in is to race our cars."

Once it turned out to be a profit centre, all of a sudden they wanted to

have a much bigger share.

One thing I would like to point out, the teams always got paid exactly the

money which was agreed. I sometimes was left with no money, when Brazil

forgot to pay for example. And Watkins Glen still owe us money.

MM: It is like somebody else develops a business on your land and when he

turns it into a success you come along and tell him that you want his

business. That's not correct.

Now you have given them twice as much money. With the new rules the cost

will come down. What will they do with so much? Is there the danger that

they will just buy bigger boats or jets?

BE: What difference does it make? Nothing wrong with it. If all the

mechanics come in a private plane what difference does it make to us. It's

none of our business.

MM: The problem at the moment, if you take BMW's engine department as an

example, they are spending each year more than 50 percent of what they give

to their shareholders. So if we save the big car companies money they should

give it back to their shareholders or spend it on interesting new

technologies that we may allow into the rules - but that's another story.

What kind of budget will be necessary to fight for the championship in 2008?

MM: I would guess, 150 million euros should be more than enough.

Do you ever see the possibility in the future, that a private team like

Williams or Red Bull can win a race?

MM: If you have a really good team manager, a well run team, a good driver -

and there are several - with a reasonable budget, then there is no reason

not to.

BE: Let's take McLaren. They have got, in my opinion, the best looking team,

always incredibly well turned out. They've got a very very experienced guy

who runs the company, Mr Dennis, who has been around a long time. They've

won a lot of championships so he's got a good CV. They've probably got as

good an engine as most of the others, and now they've got a guy that's won

the world championship, Alonso.

I cannot understand why they are fighting to get more technology than

Renault are fighting for. They've got all the ingredients they need plus the

one that Renault had to win the championship. Why do they need more?

MM: I completely agree with that. The other interesting thing that you

notice is that people who are asking for more technology are the people

behind. But the moment they get the technology what are they doing? Losing.

So they've got more chance of winning if they don't have it.

One point of discussion is the engine homologation. Your critics argue that

freezing the development for three years is like telling Real Madrid to play

for three years with the same players.

BE: They can change their staff if they want to.

MM: It's more like saying that the players have to wear the same type of

boots for three years. I don't think the public is interested in the

development of football boot technology. They're more interested in goals.

But a good engine will stay a good engine, and a bad one a bad one. Are you

not afraid that the ranking will stay the same?

MM: At the moment they are all on more or less the same level. Therefore we

have to freeze them as quickly as possible. If we give them time, than the

people with a lot of money will have the opportunity to pull out a bit of a

lead.

BE: I'm becoming a Ron Dennis supporter. Ron always wants to have a level

playfield. What Max wants to create, is exactly that.

Do you remember the day when you first met?

MM: I think we met in 1968, when Bernie was looking after Jochen Rindt and

ran in a Formula 2 team called Winkelman. I was a driver at the time. But we

first really got together when Bernie bought Brabham.

What was your impression?

MM: To me he was a really capable businessman which was like a breath of

fresh air in those days. You've got to understand that before Bernie took

over, the team owners all went together to the organisers to negotiate the

terms. They took me along because I was a lawyer and they thought I could be

helpful.

When I was sitting there, I just couldn't believe that a world sport was run

like that. When Bernie appeared in 1971, we suddenly had someone who

understood how the world works.

BE: I'll give you two examples of how it was in those days. When I started

to talk to the Canadian organisers, I was asking for three free hire cars

per team. They all said that it was impossible because they had never had

that before.

The other example is when John Surtees wanted to have a basket of

currencies - whichever currency was going up at the time, we should go for

it.

MM: When it was the Swiss Franc, we would make the deal in Swiss Francs, if

it was the dollar in dollars.

BE: That would have meant that we would have had to change the contracts

every month.

MM: We used to have a joke about one of the main negotiators at the time.

Somebody would say to him 'I'll give you $500' and he would reply 'no, make

it $490'.

What would Formula One be without you?

MM: Without Bernie it would probably be still like it was in 1969. Something

less successful than

Sports cars, in the best circumstances something like the World Rally

Championship.

In 1969 in some of the races only thirteen cars entered and five out of them

were only interested in getting the start money. Sports car racing was

massive in that period with Porsche, Ferrari and Alfa. In 1970 Porsche gave

us 30 percent of our total Formula One budget in order to take Jo Siffert

for March. They only wanted to prevent Siffert going to Ferrari. Formula One

was nothing. But look where sports cars are now compared to Formula One.

BE: Before Max became the FIA President, the authority was very weak. I

remember, that we solved most of the issues amongst ourselves.

In Kyalami once, Colin Chapman told me that the McLaren front wing was

illegal. We had a little arguement with Teddy Mayer, who refused to change

the wing. Finally Colin and I jumped on both sides of the wing and cracked

it. We told Teddy, "you see, it's not legal now."

There was no FIA as such then. The scrutineering was done by local

officials, who didn't understand very much about it. Without a strong FIA it

would be anarchy today.

You were both racing drivers and team principals. Does that help today?

MM: Enormously. When people are telling you things you know exactly when

they are telling you complete rubbish.

BE: For 30, 40 years we have served an apprenticeship.

Are you friends?

BE: I would trust Max with whatever I have. He could have an open cheque

from me. That's about as much as I can say.

MM: I tell my family, if I fell under a bus and if you have any problems

then go and see Bernie. Not to get anything, but for advice.

To what extent does the one need the other?

MM: We have different talents:

BE: :and common interests.

The worst thing is that the teams don't understand that they have the same

interests that we do. They behave like a person who goes to a doctor about a

medical problem but refuses to take any advice.

They need to be looked after. What has Max got to gain by doing anything bad

to a team? Zero.

Max, are you jealous of Bernie's money?

MM: I have different objectives in life. What I do, is more political. For

Bernie politics are a nuisance. The fact that some people in Formula One

make a fortune doesn't bother me. I am happy for them. For me it's important

to say that the whole machine runs well. Money doesn't mean too much for me.

I have inherited a little bit but I'm nothing like as rich as many of the

Formula One people.

BE: I wouldn't say that, not according to some of the things I've heard.

From my point of view money measures your success. For business people once

they have achieved what they wanted it has nothing to do with money any

more.

Would you like to be the FIA President?

BE: No way. I don't have the patience Max has and which is necessary for

that job.

The common opinion in the paddock is, that the combination of Max and Bernie

is a 'kind of Mafia', which controls everything. Wrong or right?

BE: Wrong. We are not 'a kind of Mafia'. We are 'the Mafia'.

MM: If the teams had to sit down and agree on anything there would be

paralysis. The fact is, that professional racing teams are in this sport

because they want to win the championship.

BE: The teams need somebody to tell them that these are the rules because

they would never ever be able to agree otherwise.

Jean Todt argues that the decision makers in the sport, including the team

principals, are getting too old. Is he right?

BE: When Max announced that he was going resign two years ago, at first

everybody said "thank God, we've got rid of Max." Then they started to look

around and came to the conclusion, "Christ, who is going to do the job now?"

Bring one of these young guys to me and let them tell me what we are doing

wrong and I would change it immediately. The trouble is that everybody seems

to know what is wrong but nobody knows what is right.

In 1980 and 1981 we had the same kind of story as the one which has just

came to an end. What are the similarities, what were the differences?

MM: In those days the private teams and Bernie wanted to run their own

championship. On the other side were the FIA, badly organised, and the

manufacturers.

BE: Not quite right, Max. Nothing was written down by contract. We had

grabbed some land which others didn't use. We were the only ones who did

anything.

MM: That' s right. Nowadays there is a structure in place, binding

contracts, much more money involved and far fewer amateurs around. Today

it's much more difficult to run outside the system. If we couldn't do it

in1980, there was even less chance of anyone doing it today.

How was the conflict solved back in 1980?

MM: We had no money, no sponsorship, no tyres and the whole Establishment

against us. Over the winter we were skiing in Kitzbuhel, Colin Chapman,

Teddy Mayer, me and some others.

At a dinner we saw a painting on the wall of the restaurant which had a cow

in it. The cow was being painted by a group of people. Chapman asked the

waitress what it was all about. She told him about an ancient siege and that

the villagers were left with only one cow. So to give the impression that

they had plenty of food the people painted that cow in a different way every

day and took it to a place, where all their enemies could see it.

Chapman suddenly said, "that's it, that's what we need to do. Let's organise

a race."

We all went up to my room and telephoned Bernie to tell him about our idea.

There was a long silence on the other end:

BE: :It was in the middle of the night and I could hear that they were all

pissed.

MM: Which we were, but we still liked the idea the next morning.

We decided that Bernie should give us tyres from his old Avon warehouse.

Then we put on a press conference in the hotel Crillon just next to the FIA

in Paris to announce that there would be a race in South Africa.

Immediately Renault started panic. They called Balestre and then the FIA

started to get worried. If Balestre had come to see us at breakfast at the

Crillon and waited one more month we would have surrendered.

BE: Balestre would have seen what poor shape we were in. There was Mo Nunn

from Ensign, who had mortgaged his house. I had to pay the airfare to Paris

for Ken Tyrrell. I doubt that we were even able to pay the bill in the

Crillon.

MM: It was a big bluff.

Did history repeat itself. It looks like the 2008 entry list, just open for

one week, was a good way of making the manufacturers worry?

BE: No way. I have to defend Max here, not that he needs to be defended. But

the reason is simple, for the teams to have some say in the regulations they

had to be in the championship. Otherwise the people who had already signed

would have been the only ones to discuss the rules and the people outside

would have complained that they had no vote.

Can I test you both on how well you agree and where you disagree. Qualifying

format, another change or stay the same?

BE: Let's knock off 5 minutes from the last 20.

MM: The same.

How much technical freedom, none, a little bit or full?

BE: The ideal situation would be defining 'a box' in which you can do what

you want with your car. Unfortunately we cannot afford that technical

freedom anymore.

MM: As far as the engine is concerned, absolute maximum is the freeze which

has been proposed in the Maranello agreement. On the chassis side there is

still quite a lot to do.

Sixteen or twenty races?

BE: It's good to have twenty races, provided we spread them out over a

longer period. These back to back races are a killer. And provided that we

put on races in places which are good for the people who compete. I was

called a lunatic to run races in China or Turkey. I put these Grands Prix on

because they are good for the manufacturers.

MM: We should get rid of the back to back races apart from outside Europe,

where it makes sense for logistical reasons.

Spa or Shanghai?

MM: Both of them. I like the extreme at one end of Monaco and at the other

end of Spa. With all respect to Mr. Tilke, some of the modern circuits are a

bit too similar. But he understands this as well.

BE: That's why we tried to do a modern Spa in Istanbul. It took us four

years to find the land for it.

What should the maximum be for test kilometres per year?

MM: The real question is trying to get the cost per kilometre down. If we

achieve that, certainly not more than 30,000, probably 20,000 is about

right.

BE: I do not test. I mean, the problem is when forcing testing out, then

people start using their simulation tools and test-rigs. Then the gap

becomes even bigger, because the haves can use that more than the have nots.

Are grandstand tickets too expensive nowadays?

MM: If the grandstands are full then the price is right. If they are empty

it's too expensive.

BE: Providing we put on a good show, the value for money is right. Try to

think about how much it costs to put on a Grand Prix compared to other

sports.

As a show is Formula One attractive for everyone?

BE: It is important to get more female interest. It used to be 80 percent

males amongst the spectators, now it is more like 50:50.

MM: Counting the e-mails we receive, we are getting about 50 percent from

women, which I find extraordinary. And they are very knowledgable.

Michael Schumacher will he carry on or retire?

BE: Carry on. No reason for him to stop. If he doesn't win the championship

he has to continue. If he does win he has to as well.

MM: I am not sure he knows himself at the moment.

BE: I believe he knows.

Should the new owners of Formula One float the business?

BE: We tried to do it and it didn't work. I don't think, personally, that I

could work for a public company.

MM: It would have to be a completely different structure.

Which era did you enjoy most in Formula One?

MM: For me 1971. March ended up third in the constructors championship and

our driver Ronnie Peterson second, for a much smaller budget than our

competitors.

BE: The 70's. In those days we had a much weaker federation, which allowed

me to stop two races that March won. I did not stop them to prevent March

winning. I stopped them for safety reasons like Austria 1975, when there was

too much rain.

MM: The biggest risk of the day was, that our driver Brambilla would crash.

What he finally did. We had taken a bit gamble on the set-up. We set the car

up for full wet, although the forecast said, that it would dry out later. In

fact it never stopped raining. Then Brambilla was in the lead and Bernie

came down the pitlane and said, it can't last like this. Do You want me to

stop the race now for half points? I said: Done.

BE: In those days there was no control, which was not correct. But it was a

great time. When you had an engine problem, somebody else helped you out. Or

a competitor borrowed you a gear. It was a much nicer atmosphere.

MM: We were all going on the same plane, staying in the same hotel. It was a

big family. Once at the pool of the Sheraton in Buenos Aires we had an

underwater swimming competition and Jochen Mass swam four lengths of the

pool under water. By that time Bernie had stopped playing backgammon and

said that he could do five and did anybody want to bet? After everybody had

put their money on the table, Bernie said to me, right, where's my snorkel.

BE: Once Colin Chapman bet $1000 that Mario Andretti wouldn't push me into

the pool.

MM: Mario went up to Bernie and whispered to him, why not share the money?

BE: We had a little fight and we both jumped into the water and then, both

went to Colin to ask him where was our $500?

MM: There was a much higher level of trust.

BE: We didn't have any scales in those days, so we didn't know whether our

cars had been under the weight limit. Frank Williams next door knew that we

would run under weight as much as he would.

MM: There was the famous occasion, when Frank's team manager saw the Brabham

guys putting some ballast in the car before scrutineering. He told Frank,

but Frank was very relaxed. He just told his manager, don't worry that's our

lead, Bernie's just borowing it.

Who is your all time hero in motor sport?

MM: Enzo Ferrari. Because he was around since day one and he was a very wise

man.

BE: Colin Chapman and Enzo Ferrari. More so Enzo Ferrarri probably. I once

met him in Maranello and he said to me, "here pointing to the top of the

table, here is the sport. Then his finger went underneath the table and he

said, "and here, here is where we do business."

[Ден]

BE: Wrong. We are not 'a kind of Mafia'. We are 'the Mafia'.

Золотые слова

[MAMA]

А можно, если не секрет, хотя бы в двух словах узнать о чем идет речь. А то с английским туговато

[Dragon]

А можно, если не секрет, хотя бы в двух словах узнать о чем идет речь. А то с английским туговато

Да скоро переведут и появится перевод

Вчера пресс-служба ФИА распространила большое (огромное) интервью с Максом Мосли и Берни Экклстоуном, которое взял у первых лиц Формулы-1 корреспондент Auto Motor und Sport Михаэль Шмидт. В ближайшее время мы опубликуем это интервью полностью.

[Ден]

Да скоро переведут и появится перевод

Кусок есть уже:

В мае 2001 года GPWC объявила войну истеблишменту Формулы-1. Как вам видятся эти пять лет?

Берни Экклстоун: Позвольте сказать о коммерческих аспектах. Мы пришли к согласию в этом плане, согласились по всем вопросам, по которым несем ответственность. В итоге, все были полезны и стремились сделать эту работу. Мистер Дассас (Dassas) из Renault был одним из тех, кто ускорил этот процесс. За ФИА я говорить не могу.

Макс Мосли: Во-первых, мы никогда не воспринимали всерьез даже малейшую возможность возникновения конкурирующей серии. Все, что мы хотели, это убедиться в том, что правила справедливые и равные для всех, и уровень расходов таков, что позволит иметь достаточное количество команд, способных конкурировать на равных.

Трудность была в том, что когда в начале 2005 года мы пригласили команды к обсуждению правил на 2008-й, некоторые из них даже не пошевелились. С одный стороны, это было печально, но с другой, для нас было легче принять решение по тому, что мы считали правильным.

Чувствуете ли вы себя победителями сейчас?

MM: Я не считаю, что вообще можно говорить в таких терминах. Есть клише, которым можно воспользоваться, как будто это была победа в общем смысле, но я бы сказал, что случившиеся в итоге – в лучших интересах спорта, и результат был предопределен заранее.

БЭ: Не думаю, что здесь есть победители, думаю, все мы проиграли. Мы сильно навредили Формуле-1.

ФИА – проигравшая сторона, потому что их вынудили смягчить свою позицию. Мы проиграли, потому что были вынуждены защищать свои позиции. Автопроизводители и команды пострадали больше всех остальных, поскольку спонсоры начали ставить под сомнение Формулу-1, где раньше никаких сомнений не было. Мы дестабилизировали спорт, один из очень немногих, где была стабильность.

Насколько необходимо было это противостояние на протяжении пяти лет? Не было ли более простого пути?

БЭ: Простым решением для них было бы не затевать эту глупую борьбу вовсе. С финансовой точки зрения, они бы получили денег больше, чем когда-либо у них было. С точки зрения ФИА, все, что она пыталась сделать, это сохранить команды в добром здравии.

MM: Берни прав. Очевидно, что в коммерческом плане потеряли все. Но с точки зрения ФИА, и мы и команды потеряли слишком много времени. Это время можно было бы потратить на что-то конструктивное.

Производители говорят, что они выиграли, потому что получили 50 процентов.

БЭ: Если бы они действовали иначе, они могли бы получить даже больше.

В конечном счете, кто нашел выход из тупика?

MM: Мистер Дассас из Renault сдвинул процесс с мертвой точки. Он увидел, что продолжая в том же духе, ничего не добьешься, а получить можно только остановившись. И он надавил на остальных, чтобы те остановились.

Вы когда-нибудь сомневались относительно того, что все пойдет по неверному пути?

MM: Нет, потому что мне известны практические трудности при создании конкурирующего чемпионата. Было бы возможно создать альтернативную серию, но она не имела бы такой же состоятельности. Возможно, я чересчур упрощаю, но для меня все выглядит очень просто. Когда они впервые попробовали учредить (новую) структуру, у них было две (финансовые) группы, которые делали оценку для них. Обе группы, IMG и iSe, сказали, что успех всего их плана зависит от того, будет ли чемпионат единственным. Их предположением было просто перехватить контроль над бизнесом Берни таким образом, чтобы он не мог обеспечить нам 20 машин в чемпионате Формулы-1. Но это очевидный нонсенс.

Они могли бы учредить другую серию, при действующем чемпионате Формулы-1. В этом случае они оказались бы в ситуации, когда у Берни на руках все контракты с промоутерами и телекомпаниями. Промоутеры и телевизионщики, возможно, и не вполне этим довольны, но контракты заключены, и их нужно соблюдать. Так что производителям нужно было спрашивать их, будете ли вы продвигать наши гонки и транслировать их? И в обоих случаях промоутеры и телекомпании предложили бы им платить, аргументируя это тем, что эти автогиганты используют автогонки для продвижения на рынок своей продукции.

В этот момент весь бизнес-план рушился бы, потому что он был основан на предположении, что они не только смогут заработать больше, чем Берни, но и увеличить доходы. Весь этот проект просто не смог бы заработать, пока производители не выкладывали бы в сумме примерно миллиард долларов в год до тех пор, пока дела не наладятся. Я не думаю, что у них был хоть малейший шанс на то, чтобы это сделать.

БЭ: Я бы еще хотел добавить одну вещь. На одной из наших встреч, производители сказали, что не могут гарантировать нам участие больше, чем на два года. Сначала Ferrari сказали десять лет, затем мне позвонил Лука (ди Монтеземоло) и сказал, что может согласиться на четыре года, и почему он должен согласиться на четыре, когда остальные соглашаются только на два?

Представьте, что вы собираетесь начать совершенно новый чемпионат, приходите к промоутерам и телекомпаниям, и говорите им: «Небольшая проблема, мы можем гарантировать вам, что это продлится два года. После этого, к сожалению, мы не знаем, что произойдет». Вы можете представить, что эти люди скажу вам: «Все в порядке, не волнуйтесь об этом»?

Еще одна маленькая деталь. Сто лет назад Макс и я пытались запустить альтернативный чемпионат, в пику ФИА, когда только Жан-Мари (Балестр), пожалуй, был единственной сильной фигурой в ФИА. Мы решили не делать этого. Можете ли вы представить, какие шансы был у производителей на реализацию такой попытки сейчас?

Вы все время имеете дело с президентами транснациональных компаний. Удивляетесь тому, как они неверно интерпретируют действительность?

MM: не думаю, что в этом когда-нибудь участвовали президенты компаний. Если вы управляете огромным глобальным концерном вроде BMW, например, если вы CEO или даже кто-то уровня мистера Гешеля, у вас очень ограниченное время подумать об этом, так что вы слушаете менеджера по спорту. Единственный раз, когда это доходит до больших боссов, это когда кто-нибудь приходит к ним и спрашивает, будем ли мы подписываться на пять лет? Они говорят «нет», потому что это условные обязательства на их балансе, к тому же, вероятно, половина совета директоров против Формулы-1 в любом случае, так что никаких шансов протолкнуть это нет.

БЭ: Мы не знаем, какого сорта информацию получают CEO этих компаний. Их могут попросить принять решение на информации, которая может быть совершенно ошибочной.

Почему бы автогигантам не купить бизнес Формулы-1? Это был бы самый простой путь.

BE: Совершенно точно. Именно это им и следовало бы сделать.

MM: Когда мы с Берни заключали известную сделку на $300 миллионов (в год) по продаже телевизионных прав на 100 лет, мне позвонил мистер Кантарелла (Cantarella), который в то время возглавлял GPWC. Он сказал мне, что они заинтересованы. Я сказал, конечно, делайте заявку. Если бы они были готовы предложить больше, мы были бы обязаны это учесть.

У нас была встреча в июне, когда Кантарелла сказал мне, что они не могут принять решение до сентября. Тогда я информировал Всемирный Совет, что «либо у нас есть предложение Берни, либо мы можем подождать до сентября, когда производители, возможно, предложат больше, но мы не можем быть уверены».

Мы не говорили о миллиарде долларов в год на пять лет. Если бы они предложили $400 миллионов, то или Берни нужно было бы сравнять ставку, или нам нужно было принять предложение производителей. На самом же деле они не могли согласиться даже на $400 миллионов, чтобы выкупить права с 2010 года и до бесконечности.

Уже недавно кое-кто из вторых лиц в этих компаниях пытался сказать мне, что они могут действовать вне структур ФИА. Я спросил их, каким образом они собираются это осуществить? Как они собираются получить трассы? Они сказали, что они бы купили трассы. Да, в этот момент можно сдаться. Если честно, никто из CEO никогда о подобном не говорил, а вот вторые лица – да…

Похоже, ключевым стало подписание Ferrari нового Договора Согласия. Как вы убедили Луку ди Мотнеземоло, который раньше был один из главных опор GPWC?

БЭ: Я знаю Луку тридцать с лишним лет, и он всегда сильнее всего поддерживал то, что хорошо для Ferrari.

MM: Что бы делал или не делал Лука с Берни, это всегда было в интересах Ferrari. Кроме того, в Ferrari существует фундаментальная традиция – никогда не идти вне истеблишмента. Они всегда бы были с ФИА. Рано или поздно это должно было прийти к завершению, так и произошло. Единственный вопрос в том, сколько времени и ненужных усилий это займет.

Заслужила ли Ferrari какие-то преференции?

BE: Произошло то, на что согласились. Заслужили ли они их, или нет, не имеет значения. Была подведена черта под тем, на что согласились в коммерческом плане, и это было совершенно честно. Компания, которая купила коммерческие права, довольна, и определенно, команды должны быть довольны еще больше.

Но производители хотели 60 процентов дохода. Вы же дали им только 50.

БЭ: Предложение о 60% делалось исходя из того, что производители подписывались как производители. Но они не захотели этого, и отправили свои команды. Новые собственники – бизнесмены, они должны оценивать риски. Для них подпись BMW стоит больше, чем подпись BMW-Sauber. Они могли получить 60% в любое время, если бы подписались своими именами. Но они не сделали этого, заявив, что не могут дать гарантии.

MM: Потому что они не могут дать гарантии на следующие пять лет, или даже на два. При том, что все прояснилось: есть только чемпионат, никакого разделения, никаких расхождений. Даже при этом они не подписали контракт с Берни на дополнительные 10%. Для меня это окончательное доказательство того, что они не смогли бы создать свою серию.

Насколько далек Меморандум Взаимопонимания от окончательного Договора Согласия?

БЭ: С нашей коммерческой точки зрения все ясно. Теперь вопрос к регулятору, ФИА.

MM: Теперь выстроена полностью вся структура. Можно завершить или не завершать это Договором Согласия. Вероятно, мы дойдем до этого, но у нас уже есть договор с Берни о том, что он выставит 20 машин. У Берни есть договор с командами, что они выставят 20 машин. У нас есть договор с Берни о том, что мы регулируем чемпионат традиционным образом, так что на данный момент вся структура выстроена, так что Договор Согласия необязателен.

Он может понадобиться, потому что на данный момент есть чемпионат 2008 года с (новыми) правилами, в который все вступили. Эти команды не обязаны подавать заявку на 2009 год. Также мы можем полностью поменять правила после 2008 года, придерживаясь нашего договора с Берни. Но тогда Берни должен иметь договор с командами, что они вступят после 2008-го. Так что мы можем оставить все как есть, но вероятно, заключим более долгосрочный договор.

БЭ: Я гарантирую, что если вы пройдете по пит-лейн и поговорите с руководителями команд и менеджерами по этому вопросу, зададите им вопросы о Договоре Согласия, они не смогут вам ответить. Потому что они его не читали, и прошло уже столько времени, что мы исполняем очень незначительное число вещей, которые предписаны Договором Согласия.

Продолжение следует…

© Auto Motor und Sport

© FIA

© Перевод Берни.Ру. При цитировании данного материала гиперссылка желательна.