Daily #F1 News and Comment: Tuesday 5th November 2013

This page will be updated throughout the day.

Please if you are on Twitter press the tweet button below. If you re-write and tweet individual story headlines don’t forget to include #F1.

You may not realise how significant this is and has helped grow our community significantly in the past couple of months – thank you.

Lotus investor wrangling continues (09:30)

Magnussen set to replace Perez? (10:00)

Prost says Hamilton must change (12:15)

Raikkonen penalty wrong (14:23)

Russian Police nothing to worry from F1 journo’s (15:05)

Alonso injury and conjecture (17:01)

Lewis congratulates Sebastian (17:14)

Caption Competition (17:26)

Toto the self righteous (17:58)

Lotus investor wrangling continues

TJ13 reported back in June the dubious history of Mansoor Ijaz, yet it appears Formula 1 in the form of Lotus is about to embrace another influential character of disrepute. Ijaz seized the opportunity presented to him in Abu Dhabi when Kimi went public with his “I’ve not been paid a euro” sob story. He claimed to have smoothed troubled waters with Kimi and his manager – amazing seeing as Quantum are nothing to do with the team yet.

For smoothing troubled waters, read, made some promises that may of may not be fulfilled depending on whether Ijaz get Genii to bow to their demands.

Comfortable on his new F1 platform, Ijaz assured all Lotus fans, “We as incoming owners and shareholders have made it very clear what our preference is. I wish the transition had been smoother between Kimi and the next driver, who we believe will be Nico Hulkenberg, but sometimes in life things don’t happen so clearly and as nicely as you would like them to.”

So Lotus are about to receive unfathomable riches from the depths of the Sultan of Brunei’s treasure chest, and yet they’ve been talking to Pastor Maldonado – who we all know would only be preferred to Hulkenberg if his stash of oil dollars were necessary.

Genii are not comfortable with Quantum’s proposal, and Mansoor Ijaz has demonstrated this weekend exactly why Gerard Lopez has to date been cautious in pursuing their offers.


Magnussen set to replace Perez?

Whatever happens to Nico Hulkenberg, his response to an asinine question asked following the Korean GP rings true above all the nonsense talked about drivers doing their chances no harm for next year. Hulkenberg held of a bevy of world champions in Mokpo to finish 4th and the universal paddock acclaim was predictable.

Yet Nico stated that this drive wouldn’t affect those looking to recruit his services for the future, but in fact their decisions would be based on his drives from earlier this year and also in previous years when he did well for Force India and Williams.

Checo managed P5 in India, and the paddock drivel begins again – ‘that won’t do you any harm in McLaren’s thinking for next year, will it Sergio?’.

Martin Whitmarsh has for some time been talking up the imminent F1 fortunes of McLaren young driver, Kevin Magnussen. He won this years Formula Renault 3.5 which Whitmarsh described as, “a much higher quality championship than GP2”. When you consider some of the competitors in this series, Stoffel Vandoorne, Antonio Felix da Costa, Sergey Sirotkin and Carlos Sainz Jr, Whitmarsh point is more than fair.

Magnussen has been scheduled for quite some time to to test for GP2 team DAMS today in Abu Dhabi, though his management pulled him at the last moment. This will cost DAMS some 20,000 euros for failing to field 2 cars. No explanation has been offered for Magnussen’s

One has to question the reason for this 11th hour change of plans for Magnussen.  Could it be Kevin would be in a car he doesn’t know, on Pirelli tyres he has not used, running against competitors who have been driving GP2 all year? He would hardly look competitive after merely 1 day in the car.

Were a certain F1 team then to sign him for 2014, they would be open to criticism that other GP2 drivers had out performed Magnussen during the Abu Dhabi tests.

Whether it’s McLaren, Force India or Marussia, Magnussen is indeed knocking on the door of F1. By comparison, for the winner of this years GP2 series, Formula 1 is – “as far away from Leimer as the moon” – according his fellow compatriot, Swiss F1 journalist, Roger Benoit,

Magnussen was heard to comment in Abu Dhabi, “For me, if I can get a competitive seat in the first year I would prefer that. It’s true there is a bigger risk in going to a top team because if you don’t perform then you’re out of Formula One. But for me, if I get to a top team and don’t perform then it means I’m not good enough,”

Mmm…. Are these words both a summary of Perez’s 2013 experience and a prophecy of who Magnussen’s future employer will be?


Prost says Hamilton must change

TJ13 penned an article yesterday suggesting Lewis may need to look at his driving style and technique if he wants to compete for race wins and world titles. Hamilton is described by some as a ‘pure racer’ and by that they infer he prefers to drive the car to (and beyond) its limits – for as much of a race as possible.

The man they called ‘the Professor’, who duelled on track with one of F1’s greatest drivers, was wheeled out by Renault to explain some of the finer points of change we are likely to see in 2014 with the new engines.

Alain Prost is a champion of the cerebral over brute force and ignorance, and was a defender of the Pirelli tyres Mark 1 earlier this year. He believes resource management has always been a part of the intelligent F1 driver’s tool kit and that the new regulations for 2014 will favour drivers like fellow four-time champion Sebastian Vettel over a driver like Lewis Hamilton.

“The way Sebastian works with people in the team, we know that he is doing little things different to the rest. That gives him an advantage and makes him more confident. On the other side, there is a guy like Lewis, who is more of a pure racing driver. I consider Lewis as one of the quickest drivers – maybe one of the best – but is he using his full potential? Maybe not.”

The Prof says Hamilton will need to change his approach to driving if he is to challenge Vettel who he believes will relish next season’s changes. “Maybe next year he [Hamilton] will find another motivation, but at the moment he is finding it very hard to beat Sebastian, and I think he should change a little bit. Before, you had the car in your hands, it was a raw package,

But now it is a package that will suit someone like Sebastian. Now you are not driving by yourself. You are going to have all this computerised equipment behind you and you might get a different reaction. Maybe when we meet in March, maybe we will say something different but, at the moment, I have to say that the new regulations will suit Vettel and not Hamilton”.

This of course assumes dear professor, that Renault deliver an engine capable of competing with Mercedes and Ferrari. Current reports are Renault refused to commit more than 250 bodies to the new Renault V6 Turbo – whereas in true Mercedes style – they have deployed more than 400 to the task.


Raikkonen penalty wrong

F1 throws up all kinds of weird and wonderful scenarios which keep us all on our toes guessing whether events were connected. Following Kimi’s militancy towards his team, it was strange his car should fail and FIA scrutineering test sending him to the back of the grid.

Of course Kimi then doesn’t make it past turn 2 in the race and some question whether he crashed out deliberately as an act of revenge on the team. Well for a man who stands to gain 50,000 euro’s per point this would appear a nonsensical argument. Yet who knows?

Maybe it was the divine retribution on the Finn from the F1 gods or simply the case that the iceman was not so cool calm and collected as we expect and he made a poor decision to stick the nose of his car in a gap that was always going to close.

Yet the team could have made the decision to start Raikkonen from the pit lane, as did Vettel in 2012. They could then have adjusted the gearing ratios and aerodynamics on the car making it an overtaking machine as was Sebastian’s RB8.

Boullier rejects this was a mistake by the team stating, “We don’t regret it. If you want to gamble a bit on an aggressive strategy you have to be on track. It was obvious for us to start on the track. The couple of seconds – perhaps as much as three to four – that you gain by doing so could be exactly the ones you need at the end of the race.”

Of course Eric it is indeed obvious, assuming that in the melee that is the back of the grid nobody crashes into your world champion driver – or he doesn’t have brain fade and think the track is wider than it is.

However, Lotus’ analysis of the car following Kimi’s on track qualifying incident which they claim damaged the car and caused it to fail the deflection test appears to conclusively prove the FIA was wrong to issue the penalty to Raikkonen.

Boullier is unhappy with the FIA and states, “You have the video footage and you have the data, and you can see that during his lap there is a peak of 21G and that the sensors stop so everything is destroyed below. So I am a bit personally not very happy with the rationale behind the decision. It was a normal incident.”

Kimi’s zero point weekend may prove costly to Lotus. Ferrari are now 26 points ahead of the Enstone team, yet Raikkonen starting from where he qualified would surely have delivered at worst a 5th place – mitigating the differential between the two teams by at least 12 points.

The difference between the prize money for finishing 3rd or 4th in the constructors’ championship may be similar to the amount Kimi will receive as his entire annual remuneration. There is therefore no sensible attributable motive that would see Lotus attempt to impede their Finnish driver’s opportunity in Abu Dhabi. It would therefore be also inconceivable that the F1 gods would be so capricious in their verdict of Lotus’ main man.

Kimi on the other hand… who knows?


Russian Police nothing to worry from F1 journo’s

At times the F1 travelling fraternity of journalists can be a little touchy, fragile and out of touch with reality. They are used to a fairly comfortable life, with access to the same old faces in the bubble that is the paddock on an F1 weekend.

It may be interesting to see how they feel about the treatment handed out by Russian police to Oystein Bogen and Aage Aunes, reporter and cameraman respectively of Norway’s TV2. They were visiting Sochi in advance of the 2014 Winter Olympic Games for the media outlet in Norway that will broadcast the event.

They report being detained and harassed, being stopped 6 times and arrested on 3 occasions – all in the space of 2 days by Russian police. They were interrogated over their work plans, sources, personal lives, educational backgrounds, and religious beliefs. One official threatened to jail Bogen.

Jane Buchanan of Human Rights Watch says the International Olympic Committee should demand a full explanation from the Russian authorities about the “intimidation and harassment.” She adds, “Thousands of reporters will visit Sochi for the games and it is one of the central requirements of hosting the Olympics that they can report without interference and intimidation.”

Press freedom may be protected under the Olympic charter, yet the Russian authorities’ treatment of the journalists would suggest Moscow has no idea about its responsibilities and has contravened the Olympic commitment to protect freedom of the press.

Still, the F1 writing fraternity are hardly likely to ask questions which may get them into trouble as they dash from airport to 5 star hotel and back again. Either that or they’ll be penning reams that resound with undying support for a wonderful regime that rules a wonderful country, with wonderful organisation and a clean bill of health on all human rights issues.


Alonso injury and conjecture

Apparently Ferrari wish to minimise Fernando’s apparent injury and have suggested the impact was well below the 25G that Kimi encountered, due to faulty sensors. Alonso appeared for his regular media duties with the ‘reversed cap’ looking nonchalant, though drinking copious amounts of water.

We were told later by a Ferrari spokesperson that Fernando had gone for a medical check up as a mere ‘precaution’. Alonso actually was admitted to hospital, not the medical centre at the circuit.

Alonso’s manager, Luis Garcia Abad, then set the cat amongst the pigeons by tweeting a photo of the 32-year-old in hospital, attached to a spinal board and covered with a space blanket.


Ferrari later commented Fernando is “fine”.

Then yesterday Fernando appeared on twitter, “Hello! Thanks for all the support messages! The night was so so, I will do more tests this afternoon and try to be 100% as soon as possible!”

More tests eh? Not so fine then?

Following the additional tests on Fernando, a Ferrari spokesperson told the BBC, “He’s ok, just some pain and nothing more. The check up was fine,”

Abad then spiced matters up when asked whether Alonso would be fit for Austin. “We are not talking about Austin. We need to check everything’s ok. It is nothing more than normal control of the situation,”

Ooer… ‘the situation’???

‘How to create a monster of a storm which is easily avoidable’ – is a manual written by Ferrari.

What would have been wrong with, “Fernando has some bruising”, or, “X-Rays have shown no spinal damage”, or “Fernando has minor vertebrae misalignment”.

Thin lipped, curt explanations, devoid of insignificant and inconsequential detail is bound to lead to speculation and conjecture!!!

Alonso has not taken to the twittersphere at all today. The last time this didn’t happen when extensive global travel was not involved was 29 days ago….

Oooerrrr……. INDEED!!!


Lewis congratulates Sebastian



Caption Competition

Yesterdays was the best we ever had. It was indeed Mika in Australia – flying through the air.

So Here’s todays. Lewis tweeted this picture with the message, “Roscoe and Coco sleep on the bed next to me and this is them waking up first thing!”



Toto the self righteous

Mercedes fans may well flinch when they realise this man is soon to replace Ross Brawn and become the voice of Mercedes AMG F1. Toto hasn’t realised yet that it is the job of the media to bait him and so he blurts out his honest opinion when at times discretion would be the best part of valour.

“Of course it’s not a good sign, drivers not being paid, or employees and suppliers not being paid,” says Wolff. “It’s not what we want to see. It’s a matter of how you manage your business, and for me it just seems strange. I’ve never had any similar situation in all my life, I’ve never seen any similar situation, and I just wonder why the hell people are not paying their staff. Is it true or is it not true, I don’t know. If it is true for me it’s just incomprehensible.”

Take note you reprehensible scum bags of Sauber and Lotus!!!

Amidst some slight repetition, the sermon according to Toto continues…

“On the specifics of a top team like Lotus struggling, of course it’s not nice to hear that a front running team isn’t able to pay the bills. But for me it’s a matter of how you manage your company. Without wanting to be too hard, because I have no knowledge about how the team is being run, you operate on the budgets you have available, and this is how any other normal company functions”.

Mr. Lopez beware! With Mr. Mansoon Ijaz on board, the lick of Toto’s self righteousness is likely to rise in intensity and come to lambast you even more over matters of integrity.

We need to pick out way carefully through Toto’s final comments on the matter.

“I think [there is] speaking too much about is F1 in bad shape or not, yes the whole world is in bad shape, the whole environment is in bad shape, and we have to all look about how we finance our operations. The same applies to us, you can’t overspend. It’s damaging for F1 to hear those stories, and it’s not good.”

Mmm. Imagine you get an opportunity once a week to say something worthwhile and have it reported across the F1 world…..

Lauda and Wolff huh? Take away Brawn – and it will be like opening all the locks on a canal simultaneously.


43 responses to “Daily #F1 News and Comment: Tuesday 5th November 2013

  1. I read that Magnussen was offered a torro rosso drive but turned it down on the advice of McLaren. Which suggest they may have decided to field him. Ok. They can afford to gamble next year, can’t get much worse than this year. And perhaps that’s why Martin was taking up the hapless button this weekend, who couldn’t make Q3 then crashed. Whilst his junior team mate, with a difficult car scored points. What might Jenson and his politicking do to a rookie next year? Give Kevin a run by all means , but keep Checko. I doubt my view will be popular but I can’t really understand Whitmarsh’s love fest with button.

    • I agree with you Anna. Checo got into the McLaren maybe a bit early and needed more experience but he is getting better and I hope he becomes a champ in the future.

      Button is overrated in my opinion however he is consistent (I’ll give home that even if it is consistently slow – in a bad car). For next year McLaren will need all the experience they can get to develop for 2015 and Honda so that is Button safe…

    • Totally agree with you Anna. Keep Checo (although I don’t rate him highly) and give young Kevin a chance.
      Whitmarsh’s love fest with Button will be the end of them both. Button was his choice so he was doing all he good to keep him happy and as close to Lewis as possible.
      Maybe Button should run for office after he retires 😉

    • Agreed with keeping Perez, I think I been given a big handicap in this years offering from McLaren. When the car is ok he is doing the job he’s paid for. All drivers need a decent car to get decent results, that’s not to say some are better at it than others (Alonso) but I think that Checko as any driver needs a year to adjust to a new environment and a different way of operating. McLaren and Sauber are leagues apart in terms of they way the operate, Sauber don’t even have a simulator. I would like to see Perez have 1 more season to show his worth and Magnusson have a season at Force India to learn the ropes of F1 under supervision from McLaren. Then for 2015 they can make a more informed decision. I really belive that learning to negotiate the pack is better prep than going straight in a the front. If I were McLaren I would save Magnusson for when Honda come in so they increase the odds of the near immediate success Honda are looking for.

      • Stop being so sensible! You leave me nothing to say. Except, of course, I agree. Either ditch Button or give Magnussen a year at FI. Perez has done fairly well with a dog of a car, with the added handicap of being in a new team and deserves another year.

    • I’d hold button and gate cheko, personally.

      Next years car type will suit button far more. He’s less aggressive in his throttle response which will suit high torque engines from next year.

    • Magnussen is more likely to go to another seat, such as Force India, but not McLaren.

      The signals have been pretty clear that Perez has another year at McLaren, and Button is already signed.

      Given that those signals of Perez at McLaren for 2014 come from Whitmarsh, Jonathan Neale, and the drivers, it would be highly surprising to see something different.

      Concurrently, today, Jonathan Noble reported from un-named team sources that “Perez (is likely) to be handed a single-year extension to his deal, with strict performance clauses against Button that he must fulfil if he is going to have a chance of staying for 2015.”

      That is consistent with the thinking that has come out of McLaren under Whitmarsh for awhile. They want to see talented young drivers have a season or two of F1 before being in a McLaren seat.

      The story from Tom Cary in the Telegraph has the earmarks of the McLaren leaking a story to help drive final negotiations with Perez (or an associated sponsor) to McLaren’s favor.

  2. checo’s first season at mclaren in comparison to his ex-world champion team mate i think stands up relatively well when i recall raikkonens first season with dc as his team mate over a decade ago, the field is more competitive now (supposedly)

    • On the surface, their first seasons at McLaren look comparable, however:

      Perez had 2 years at Sauber, Kimi had 1.
      Perez spent some time in GP2, Kimi came straight from Formula 2000.
      Perez and Button have finished around the same number of races. In 2002, DC had 4 DNFs and Kimi had 10!

      In any case, in my opinion, Perez is just not as fast as Kimi (although Kimi seems to have lost some of his speed since he came back to the sport; but he has matured as a driver to get consistent results).

      • your are right checo doesnt look like he is a potential raikkonen matcher at the moment despite kimi i think crashing four times on his first visit to monaco with mclaren when martin brundle, i think, said kimi looked out of his depth, although as i pointed out, dc wasnt an ex world champion either.

        • True, but I think that drivers like DC, JB and Webber are quite similar in the sense that they’re not in the cream of the sport, but good enough to win a WDC in a dominant car with a not first-class driver in the other side of the garage. I’m sure DC would have won a title if he had a dominant car.

          • Yes, and when Newey’s McLarens were good he was outperformed by Mika. Then Ferrari have started spending big, got in bed with Bridgestone and FIA, Ron restricted the freedom that Newey usually thrives in, and…the rest is history.

          • He was outperformed by anyone in the same car as himself. Not a good trait for a WDC candidate.

      • However, I note that in 2001, Kimi had 14 separate tests during the season. Pretty sure Checo didn’t get as many kilometers in this year. Apples, Oranges that whole thing.

  3. Hi all,

    Not sure what the big downer is on Button, he’s pretty much handled any team mate he’s had (bar fisi)and he’s not bad at overtaking, and when was the last time he dropped the car.

    On a seperate note, Lewis and Nico remind me a lot of jpm and ralf. Similar in terms of speed as team mates, but you knew which one could provide a bit of magic sometimes.

    • That’s not fair to Nico, your comparison. Nico is an intelligent guy, which is a contrast to Ralfy.

  4. This silly season will drag on until Australia. And maybe even longer.
    – will Enstone survive?
    – and Sauber?
    – Force India?
    – Caterham?
    – Marussia?
    I think we’ll end up with customer cars before we know it.

  5. Prompted by Prost’s comments let’s have it out and debate on what people prefer to see: Pure out-and-out racing OR More cerebral racing.

    Without even starting to debate for one or the other, it is obvious that a pure racing formula would have people glued to their telly. A more cerebral one does not allow people to see what happens behind the scenes, the days before, how a driver thinks, all of that is just not visible.

    It’s a bad analogy but it’s like watching a duel between two expert swordsmen (see Alonso vs Hamilton in ’07) or an expert sniper with a devastating weapon and days of prep decimating the opposition (Vettel).

    I know what would have me glued for hours on end!

    • similar theme in the guest article I just posted – good to continue the debate there – its called “Fool’s Gold: Pirelli and F1”

      though its not Pirelli limited…

    • We saw an excellent example of Lewis’ “pure out-and-out racing” last Sunday in the Abu Dhabi GP. It’s not obvious to me that Lewis’ “pure out-and-out racing” style in Abu Dhabi will keep people glued to the television.

      On the other hand we saw cerebral racing from Vettel and Alonso, and candidly, it was beautiful and entertaining.

  6. Adrian Newey has said in an interview that Ferrari and Lotus were just ‘lucky’ that their cars’ suited the original 2013 tyres..


    “We had a big change over the winter, an unexpected change.So that tyre change hurt us and helped some other people, such as Lotus, Ferrari perhaps. For me that was purely luck.
    I think Lotus and Ferrari are making making noises about how clever they were over the winter to read that far. But to be perfectly honest they were just plain lucky, we were a little bit unlucky, and of course the the politics take over. So it’s been a challenging year but a very rewarding one.”

    • Newey… “We had a big change over the winter, an unexpected change……..”

      Mmm… change of tune…. The RB9 was trailed extensively by Newey et al as EVOLUTION… not REVOLUTION…..

    • Tires were good for Lotus b/c they were designed on a Lotus chassis. Pretty sure Pirelli designed the tires to specifically mess with RB dominance as best they understood it. Lack of tire testing has hurt the racing tho, and I hope they get it sorted for next year. Not enough split/ different strategies to make the racing interesting.

    • Right! Mr. Newey says unlucky about version 1 of the 2013 tires.

      In racing it’s not unusual to hear, “it was just unlucky” when a team is not properly prepared and they lose. When a team wins we are likely to hear “it was hard work and smart planning”, etc.

      He is a proud man.

    • I don’t see how that can be the case, as they test next seasons tyres at the last race, so they kinda know what is coming. If the 2014 tyres are rock solid at brazil then they know on this years data how the tyres will be for next year. Pre season tests will then show how the 2014 cars differ from 2013 cars.

      Raikkonen’s penalty I didn’t like.. Their reasoning being “you’ve used this excuse before” sounds petty, and robbed Kimi of a podium chance. He was 0.5 sec faster than Romain in Q3, who finished 4 seconds off second place, i.e. possibly Vettel’s closest challenger. Hamilton could’ve slowed Vettel from turn 1 onwards too if not for his suspension failure.

      However talks broke down with Honeywell etc. I think they should have accepted any value for the sponsorship, even if below market card rate. Any income being better than no income. But maybe it didn’t come down to something like that.

      It was obvious that RB were going to dominate the rest of the season from Spa onwards, so they could’ve switched to 2014 earlier if they wanted to. But with their budget advantage they can pretty much do all year round development and not be hindered on 2014 anyway I would imagine. Hence Brawn saying today he thinks they could still be out front in 2014.

      James Allen calculated Vettel’s current race pace advantage at 0.8 sec per lap, or 6 months worth of development! Interesting that Webber can’t get this out of the tyres, soft in particular, after peak grip, via driving style (EBD) or set up, and admitted as much recently.. Hard to see him winning again.

  7. “Mansoor Ijaz has demonstrated this weekend exactly why Gerard Lopez has to date been cautious in pursuing their offers.”

    It’s more than generous to use the term “cautious” to describe Mr. Lopez’ dealings with Mr. Ijaz and Quantum. The correct term is foolish.

    Mr. Lopez and Genii have made a series of foolish decisions, and they continue to blame circumstances. For two seasons Genii has failed miserably in securing quality sponsorships / partnerships while their team fights for podiums each weekend. Lotus’ financial problems are due to the competence of Genii.

    Given that Genii will remain majority owners after they sucker Quantum and Mr. Ijaz out of some money, it’s worthwhile to focus on how Mr. Lopez and Mr. Lux ended up here in the deep end, thrashing about beyond their abilities, and what future options lie before them.

    • Good points, well made. Genii have been poor at landing the big fish.

      I think investors are seeing good value in F1 at the moment, but are trying to drive the price they’ll pay downwards as much as possible.

      On the other hand, the risks of investing are high due to Bernards problems.

      There is money out there, there always is, but a reluctance to spend.

      I always wonder at why anyone would want to Invest money in a non profitable F1 team apart from brand, or profile, building. There are much easier ways to make money if you have it in the first place

    • “For two seasons Genii has failed miserably in securing quality sponsorships / partnerships while their team fights for podiums each weekend. ” —- This is a great point and I really would like to know what the problem is, if it’s Genii overvaluing the sponsorship (that is, demanding too much $$ for a title sponsorship in comparison to what is offered by McLaren, for example), or their not even pursuing proper title sponsorship b/c of how the envision their ‘exit’ strategy from the team (if there is one), or not wanting to dilute the value of their ownership share in terms of access and prestige (perhaps thinking they’d give up too much control and prestige if they brought aboard a proper full title sponsor) or… ???

  8. Curious if there’s any link between the Magnussen withdrawal and the Mexican race being off the menu next season – money too tight to mention?
    Mr Slim and Bernie having a standoff leading to Checo being ousted.
    Baby and bathwater perhaps, can’t see Button being much use sorting 2014 car given the BAR efforts.

  9. Judge, I’m not sure why you’re down on Toto’s refreshingly frank comments!? (You write, “Mmm. Imagine you get an opportunity once a week to say something worthwhile and have it reported across the F1 world…..”)

    I actually think it’s great to hear a nominal team boss call out F1 teams for their poor business practices! After all, the first step towards resolving the problem is admitting that there is one! (and although I’m a huge fan of Dietr Rencken’s work, and I do think CVC is siphoning off obscene profits, the teams are failing to function effectively as businesses – although this is partly attributable to unrestricted spending by the horrible RBR, who killed the cost-cap!).

    Carry on…

    • Its re-hashed Bernie bullshit.. that’s why… Ecclestone uses this as an excuse for CVC and himself hiving off $750m a year for organising a few contracts….

      • idk…I didn’t hear Toto defending CVC and Bernie – was there a longer interview this is excerpted from? If Toto said what he said as part of justifying CVC’s unholy extraction of massive profits that, as a percentage of revenue = way more than in other proper sports, I’d agree w/ you.

        • No he wasn’t defending CVC et aL

          …but you get what I was suggesting… this view is the same point Ecclestone makes when he is asked about questionable prize money distribution or the Niagra Falls-esque cascade of cash leaving F1 for CVC/himself….

          The point was – why is Toto lecturing Lotus at all???

  10. Re- Lewis congratulates Seb

    I didn’t know Lewis was dyslexic….. Lovely jumble of upper and lower case letters there, sign of a highly (un)intelligent mind. LOL

    Maybe it’s in response to Alain Prost’s insinuations that he is not a ‘thinker’!

    Before any Lewis fans form an angry mob, I like Lewis a lot, as a driver and a person.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.