Bernie

[D-Type]

Nobody will dispute that motor racing has been transformed by Bernie Ecclestone in his progression to becoming "Mr Formula 1". But do people feel that the 'World of Formula 1' he has created is an improvement on what it was or an improvement on what it might have been?

(And no rants please)

[philipbain]

Its interesting to think about an F1 universe without Bernie! Bernie's genesis in terms of his rise to the ownership of the sport in many respects was in essentially unionising the negotiations that teams had with the organisers to determine starting money, this had previously meant that different teams would ultimately get whatever they managed to negotiate from the organisers under the umbrella of FOCA back in the 70s when he was owner of the Brabham team. Bernies genius was to realise that if he negotiated on behalf of the teams as a block it gives him a lot of bargaining power with organisers, fail to make terms with Bernie and you won't have the majority of the cars on the grid at your event! Bernie then redistributed these increased revenues to the teams minus his 5% commission! This grew and grew until FOCA became at loggerheads with the FIA in the early 80's about the commercialisation of the sport and who owned the rights to F1's output. The dispute was settled when it was agreed that FOCA would manage the commerical aspects of the sport whilst the FIA would deal with the governance, technical and sporting side of the sport, giving Bernie free reign to extort countries and promoters for races, charge whatever he could get away with for the rights to televise the sport around the world and make the sport richer and richer. The main issues that have occurred over time are that a lot of the money generated was not being redistributed to the teams, initially with Bernie's various corporate entities coining it (long after he sold his team, FOCA TV coverage started in 1981, Bernie closed Brabham at the end of 1987 to concentrate full time on a much more profitable business than being an actual participant! Then there was the 13 year rights to F1 bought from the FIA without a hint of an open tender at a low price which was then compounded when this was extended to 113 years, which I believe was to assist F1's aborted flotation on the stock exchange in the late 90s, but just ended up being an asset that Bernie could then sell on to a massively corrupt over-invested, over-stretched German media conglomerate that went belly up at the first sign of economic trouble in Europe at the turn of the millenium. This resulted in 3 creditor banks owning F1 unwillingly for some time and rather uncomfortably to say the least, this stake being bought eventually by CVC Capital Partners in circumstances that are still being investigated, Bernie having been indicted on bribery allegations in Germany over the affair, the alledged bribee is already serving time in prison for his part in the whole affair, but paying dividends to external stakeholders only exacerbated the teams not benefiting from F1's increased revenues throughout the 00's. Now post "economic crisis" we live in a different world fiscally than the one before it, CVC have already sought to reduce their shareholding and floatation is still being bandied about from time to time.

So, given this history, what if there was no Bernie, well, F1 teams may have continued to seperately negotiate thier deals with promoters / commerical rights holders, so really not much different to now really!!

[555-04Q2]

Lets get this straight. He's a tough old b@st@rd, shrewd and ruthless! But, I think without Bernie F1 would not be anywhere near the pinnacle that it is. He sat down with the then team owners back in the 70's or 80's and took the plunge with establishing his authority over F1 and pulled one over all the teams. It was that tenacity and his sheer determination that has made F1 what it is today, a massive global show.

He may be a bit of a tw@t, but he's got my vote for how he has developed the sport.

[steveaki13]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....

I cant decide yet. I think he built F1 into a fine sport through the 70s, 80s and 90s. However the direction all changed in 2003 when the first raft of anti Ferrari winning rules came in. From then on F1 has chopped and changed far too much and now its on a downward spiral for me.

So if I could have stopped Bernie at the year 2000 I would have.

Where F1 would have gone if that had happened, is anyones guess.

[D-Type]

@steveaki13,
Can you please clarify what you mean by "anti Ferrari winning rules"?

[steveaki13]

Just the fact that after years of F1 having a pretty consistant layout, the format was tweaked because Ferrari had dominated so much in 2001 and 2002.

It was the first radical move towards improving the "show" that we see today. I seem to remember the one lap qualifying and race fuel onboard was to try and spice up the grids and to stop Ferrari just dominating every weekend.

After that it was changed again and again over the years, but it all seemed to descend from 2003 and trying to mix things up a bit. Which although provided some fun races seemed a bit harsh on Ferrari considering what a great job they did in 2002.

I may be remembering wrong, but I am sure when Bernie spoke on TV he would quite often say they needed to stop the Red Cars always winning. Or something along those lines.

[D28]

My impression is that Bernie is in charge of the commercial end of F1 and the sporting/technical side would be the responsibility of FIA. That is what I gather from
philipbain post above. Far be it from me to support him, but not all F1 changes have been his decisions.

[555-04Q2]

Just the fact that after years of F1 having a pretty consistant layout, the format was tweaked because Ferrari had dominated so much in 2001 and 2002.

It was the first radical move towards improving the "show" that we see today. I seem to remember the one lap qualifying and race fuel onboard was to try and spice up the grids and to stop Ferrari just dominating every weekend.

After that it was changed again and again over the years, but it all seemed to descend from 2003 and trying to mix things up a bit. Which although provided some fun races seemed a bit harsh on Ferrari considering what a great job they did in 2002.

I may be remembering wrong, but I am sure when Bernie spoke on TV he would quite often say they needed to stop the Red Cars always winning. Or something along those lines.

100% correct! The aim was to weaken Ferrari or rather give the other teams a chance to catch up. All it did was the opposite for a while (remember the dominance of the 2004 Ferrari). In the end, all they did was make teams have to spend more money to redesign their cars each year and then they turn around and say F1 teams are spending to much money on development and need to cut back on costs. WTF? Sometimes I wonder how the monkeys that make the decisions in life manage to climb up the tree at all, let alone secure a grip on a branch and shout from the top branches

[555-04Q2]

My impression is that Bernie is in charge of the commercial end of F1 and the sporting/technical side would be the responsibility of FIA. That is what I gather from
philipbain post above. Far be it from me to support him, but not all F1 changes have been his decisions.

You would be correct sir But Bernie's influence has, and always will be until he retires, been a huge influence on how F1 actually runs.

[D28]

[quote=555-04Q2][quote="You would be correct sir But Bernie's influence has, and always will be until he retires, been a huge influence on how F1 actually runs.[/quote]

Fair enough, he has had way too much influence IMO. Still there is enough blame to go around.