How to Write Letters and Influence People
Max has put pen to paper once again, and started the New Year with a missive sent to the President of the FOTA, Luca di Montezemolo, copying in all team principals. The letter is a simple update on the cost cutting process, but contains a lot of insight.
Mosley starts by listing some general points, encouraging everyone to remember that Formula One could not continue as it was. He also makes a point of saying that “having recently invested in an expensive facility is not an argument for retaining it.” This seems like a very odd start to a letter, and I’m curious if that’s aimed at anyone in particular?
He moves on to some specific rulings, concentrating on the 2010 season when the really big changes are going to happen. Here’s a quick rundown:
- No major changes on the engine front, rev limited and frozen until 2013.
- Testing restricted to 15,000km including Fridays.
- Standard gearbox, and a standard (or frozen) chassis aside from a list of parts that may be developed.
- KERS remains optional, but Max lists out some very specific development ideas the FIA have got. Suddenly batteries aren’t feasible in Formula 1 and they’d prefer teams to make KERS devices that will be road relevant.
- The FIA are very keen on the idea of a budget caps, and see it as a fair way to limit costs. They want teams to discuss how it could work.
Here is the most important excerpt though:
The main complaint from race fans is the lack of overtaking and wheel-to-wheel racing…
We intend to seek FOTA’s help to investigate the use of moveable aerodynamic devices. If sufficiently radical, these could give a car following another car a performance advantage by virtue of being behind.
Firstly, Max has started listening to the fans complaints? Surely this can’t be right. Secondly, moveable devices could now be allowed! We were already aware of the prospect of a fiddly front wing supposedly helping overtaking for next year, but this seems like a lot more could be on the cards. Presumably it would all be discussed, agreed upon, limited to certain areas of the car, and certain movements. Nevertheless, this seems to go against everything the FIA have been regulating for the last few years. Expect Ferrari to have an advantage in this from the off.
I’d love to hear your thoughts on the letter, the bits I’ve picked out or anything I may have missed. The teams are meeting in London today, what will they make of the above, and just exactly where is Formula 1 headed for the future?
You shouldn’t let him...
Both, and add happy to the mix as well.
January 8th, 2009 at 15:30 #1 - F1Wolf said:
well, this part caught my attention:
January 8th, 2009 at 15:56 #2 - me said:
mmm. i like before that he says:
“The FIA itself would not be financially disadvantaged by a collapse of Formula One”
really? even after all the money the claim from superlicence fees and commercial rights? what hogwash.
the teams will see right though this won’t they?
January 8th, 2009 at 16:03 #3 - Alenyaa said:
Oh Max… get out of Winter Wonderland already.
January 8th, 2009 at 16:08 #4 - Ian Lockwood said:
I guess the investment piece is largely aimed at those who have commissioned 100% Scale wind tunnels (Honda/Ferrari/BMW/Renault to my knowledge but probably others). Car test rigs and perhaps even simulator development could be other areas for limitation?
I still fail to see how a budget cap could work. F1 teams are famous for trying to bend rules and this is an area that will be ridiculous hard to police. In true FIA style, they will introduce a rule, allegations will come out that people are circumventing it, forcing the FIA to decide to remove the rule.
Even if a cap were to be agreed, what is to stop a F1 manufacturer using some design software, manufacturing facility, computer time, or just staff knowledge from their parent car manufacturer – either for free or “internal re-charged” at a rate well below market value. This would instantly put the independants at a disadvantage.
January 8th, 2009 at 16:09 #5 - Alenyaa said:
I just read the letter and am surprised to say that for the first time there is little of Max’s view I disagree with.
That, and the fact he actually took the survey results on board.
I’m scared… Could the universe be coming to an end?
January 8th, 2009 at 16:22 #6 - me said:
ages ago i wrote this suggestion as a means of helping fans to help teams:
http://www.sidepodcast.com/2007/10/25/part-of-the-answer/
i’m thinking now, teams might like to consider this as a means to circumvent yet more fia sanctions.
January 8th, 2009 at 16:29 #7 - F1Wolf said:
well and now read what David Richards had to say when he ruled himself out of the Honda game:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72672
He sounds like reading from Mosley written script
January 8th, 2009 at 16:31 #8 - me said:
good grief! almost word for word:
“I would regard those as modest inroads if I am honest with you,” he said. “When you make changes to thing, and you have to make a radical shift to get back to a sustainable level, you make that one-hit, one cut very quickly to get it done and then move forward from that point.”
January 8th, 2009 at 16:36 #9 - me said:
in fairness to max, one of his plans seems to be going very well:
MotorSport Vision boss Jonathan Palmer says the relaunched Formula Two field will expand from 20 cars to 24 due to a huge level of interest in the category.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72670
could make a couple of f1 teams sit up and take notice. especially with red bull’s participation.
January 8th, 2009 at 17:27 #10 - Journeyer said:
Well, probably because they’ll collect all of that from the newly-recognized independent series?
If I didn’t know better, I’d say something fishy is afoot…
January 8th, 2009 at 17:28 #11 - Journeyer said:
In the same Autosport article on DR & Honda, they’re saying that the leading contender is… Greek shipping tycoon Achilleas Kallakis.
This could end up being as disastrous as Midland was.
And why is it that all the shipping tycoons seem to be Greek? :-/
January 8th, 2009 at 17:48 #12 - Steven Roy said:
“Mosley starts by listing some general points, encouraging everyone to remember that Formula One could not continue as it was.”
Erm. Who was responsible for getting it into that state?
“Suddenly batteries aren’t feasible in Formula 1 and they’d prefer teams to make KERS devices that will be road relevant.”
This should be translated as Max knew nothing about KERS but decided he would have it in F1 as a knee jerk reaction. Now that he realises they are not using 9 volt batteries and that electricity can be dangerous he thinks it is a bad idea. MORON.
“We intend to seek FOTA’s help to investigate the use of moveable aerodynamic devices. If sufficiently radical, these could give a car following another car a performance advantage by virtue of being behind.”
The reason people want overtaking is because we used to have it and now we don’t. When we had it we did not have moveable aero therefore we don’t need it. Moveable aero is a very bad idea and in time will go the same way as grooved tyres which were going to improve overtaking but didn’t. On the day they were revealed everyone said they wouldn’t work. Same goes for moveable aero.
January 8th, 2009 at 17:48 #13 - Steven Roy said:
Yep
January 8th, 2009 at 17:54 #14 - Steven Roy said:
Lots of islands to build a base from? Start of with a ferry or two and buy the competition then take on other routes and buy the competition there. I have no idea if that is correct but that is what the bus companies her did. Funny how you never hear of bus magnates.
January 8th, 2009 at 17:56 #15 - Journeyer said:
Bus magnates? Somehow, I don’t think that makes as much money as shipping.
January 8th, 2009 at 18:01 #16 - Steven Roy said:
I like what Max’s is saying about tyres in his letter. That is the closest he has ever been to talking sense.
i really don’t get how someone who was a racing driver can’t see that there is a major difference between one driver overtaking another as the result of utilising the performance of his car better and one driver overtaking another because he pressed a button that gives him an instant horsepower boost and reduces the drag from his wings.
His section on the future seems to ignore that fact that it was him and his master Bernie who went out and recruited the car manufacturers and put rules in place that meant a significant advantage could be gained by throwing money at it.
January 8th, 2009 at 18:08 #17 - Flibster said:
Yes they would. No more kickbacks from Ferrari.
Frozen chassis? No thanks.
Moveable aero? No thanks.
All they need to do with the tyres is make them harder. Make it so the soft could last 3/4 of a race and the hard a whole race if looked after, with the refuelling ban it would make it more interesting.
Do you drive hard and need to change tyres, or do you take care of them and they last the whole race?
January 8th, 2009 at 18:09 #18 - Flibster said:
Wahay! In moderation already!
January 8th, 2009 at 18:20 #19 - Flibster said:
Oh, and add to my moderated comment, he wants the mechanical 100000rpm flywheel version of kers to become the one everyone uses – thus effectively binning very many millions of dollars spent by teams who have gone down the battery route…
Nice one on the cost cutting you muppet!
January 8th, 2009 at 18:21 #20 - me said:
he coulda said that last year!
January 8th, 2009 at 18:25 #21 - Gavin Brown (RubberGoat) said:
I am astounded as to how Max has held on for so long when for years he has said and done some truly delusional things – a lot to the detriment of the sport (as listed above and mentioned before ad nauseum).
The man truly is a ‘Teflon Don’ and I hope that FOTA have the nuts to really stand up to him … sadly I can’t see that happening
January 8th, 2009 at 18:26 #22 - Gavin Brown (RubberGoat) said:
You mean the kind of KERS that’s going to fly off it’s axle and behead a driver when it gets imbalanced by all the external forces acting on it?
January 8th, 2009 at 18:34 #23 - Flibster said:
Like an accident? Thats the one.
Max ‘kinky boots’ Mosley is a muppet of the highest order.
January 8th, 2009 at 18:48 #24 - Steven Roy said:
Not necessarily the driver. Maybe a few dozen spectators. A flywheel with that amount of momentum is not going to be embedded in the first body it hits. It is going to go straight through quite a few. Forget JFK’s magic bullet. This is on a whole different scale and Max wants to make it compulsory at least until there is an accident then his safety hat will go on and he will be on his white horse in the papers telling us how he took instant action. Just like when poor Senna was killed unnecessarily.
January 8th, 2009 at 19:06 #25 - Gavin Brown (RubberGoat) said:
Senna was killed the year after Max banned all the electronic aids, which he reasoned were making the cars too fast…
I suddenly don’t have a good feeling about F1 in 2009. Missing teams, missing tracks, ugly cars and dangerous technologies… could be a disaster waiting to happen
January 8th, 2009 at 19:12 #26 - Ian Lockwood said:
I thought max only wanted technology if the public could see it working on the cars??
I don’t think I’d notice a wing moving a couple of degrees to reduce drag when approaching another car….unless of course in his next letter we are told that cars must light up or something when the aero moves.
January 8th, 2009 at 19:29 #27 - Steven Roy said:
Piquet hit the wall that killed Senna a few years before an nothing was done. Berger hit it a couple of years later and the car burst into flames with him in it. We saw it burn for at least 30 seconds before a marshall even turned up. Everyone thought he was dead. Nothing was done because there was a river behind the wall so the wall couldn’t be moved. They could have put tyres in front of it or the could have re-profiled the corner but they did nothing despite there being two very serious accidents there. Then Senna got killed and Max becomes the great safety crusader and the corner is changed completely . Had he done that before Senna did he can claim some credit. But reacting after someone has died is self protection and not something that anyone should get credit for.
January 8th, 2009 at 19:34 #28 - Gavin Brown (RubberGoat) said:
DONINGTON GETS PLANNING APPROVAL! WOO-HOO!
And… if that’s not good enough, F1 Fanatic have posted a load of pics and are reporting that these are from a mockup made in rFactor that will be released next week! I cannot wait to try that one…
January 8th, 2009 at 19:34 #29 - Gavin Brown (RubberGoat) said:
moderated
January 8th, 2009 at 19:39 #30 - Gavin Brown (RubberGoat) said:
What astounds me is that was a 200mph corner with about 10m of tarmac runoff and a concrete wall! There is no way that would be allowed today, but even back then it was dangerous!
January 8th, 2009 at 19:47 #31 - Steven Roy said:
Have you seen the circuit in Canada? There are few tyre walls in danger areas because the track would be too narrow if they were installed to quote Max? Look at Valencia or Singapore. Safety in F1 is a long way from where it should be.
January 8th, 2009 at 19:49 #32 - Gavin Brown (RubberGoat) said:
Kubica proved the circuit could do with a little bit of a safety upgrade…
I don’t follow… what do you think is dangerous about these cicuits???
January 8th, 2009 at 19:56 #33 - Steven Roy said:
Watch any video from Valencia and all you see are bare concrete walls with nothing in front of them to minise the impact of an accident.
Singapore is a complete joke and should never have been given a safety certificate. They changed the direction of the track in the run up to the race and as a result the pit entry and exit were a disaster. Remember the Trulli / Heidfeld incident. The pit exit fed into a chicane where cars could only go through one at a time. The marshalls are the worst I have ever seen. I don’t meant the worst in F1. I mean the worst ever anywhere at any level of racing. We were very lucky there was not a major accident there because someone could have died because of incompetent. Despite all the above Max’s boys gave them a safety certificate and because it was dark and sparkly the press gave them a free ride. Once the novelty of night races wears off Singapore will get pounded by the drivers and the press.
January 8th, 2009 at 20:07 #34 - Gavin Brown (RubberGoat) said:
Ah. I got drunk and fell asleep because it was so boring
I didn’t know that!
I know somebody who went and marshalled at the Singapore GP. He had no prior experience and he reported that he got very little training
Singapore was lucky because (a) it looks gorgeous and (b) the race got thrown in the mix because of a safety car. They need to change that silly turn with the monster truck kerbs and they need to give it some better overtaking places (as there’s only one good one).
January 8th, 2009 at 20:15 #35 - Christine said:
Thankfully they say they’re going to do all of that.
January 8th, 2009 at 20:20 #36 - Steven Roy said:
That doesn’t remotely surprise me.
January 8th, 2009 at 21:02 #37 - me said:
so fota’s response to the letter is pretty benign. but i was amused by this line:
All of the Teams present wished to express their support for the entrant currently known as Honda and they will agree to any name change registered.
next year the team will be simply known as squiggle.
January 8th, 2009 at 21:06 #38 - me said:
ooh, also… more surveys:
“The same approach will now be used to improve the spectacle of the sport, following the outcome of the FOTA commissioned market research.”
i predict 2009 will be a year of surveys.
January 8th, 2009 at 21:07 #39 - Dom said:
What if they want to call themselves ‘Force Russia’ or something similar. Surely then it’d be getting a bit too A1GP?
January 8th, 2009 at 21:08 #40 - me said:
January 8th, 2009 at 21:11 #41 - Jeremy said:
I’ve heard Rubber Baby Bugger Bumpers (or similar) being bandied about as the new name. Mrs C will love it!
Perhaps Corsa Di Montezemolo would be better?
January 8th, 2009 at 21:17 #42 - Dom said:
10ish months on, and still that name simply can’t be beaten.
January 9th, 2009 at 01:55 #43 - lou said:
aww, how nice of them
January 9th, 2009 at 11:47 #44 - Alianora La Canta said:
But as already stated, we will be ready to recognise an independent series should some teams prefer to go their own way. {F1Wolf – 43 comments ago}
That’s funny. I’m pretty sure Max has never said this before. In fact, he said the opposite when the GPWC attempted to break away.
January 9th, 2009 at 11:48 #45 - Alianora La Canta said:
“The FIA itself would not be financially disadvantaged by a collapse of Formula One”
really? even after all the money the claim from superlicence fees and commercial rights? {me – 43 comments ago}
Simple – they could negotiate a better deal on stuff if they had another chance. A new series would give them that chance. For example, they wouldn’t be bound by the 110-year deal on media with Bernie, which they sold for the value of one-and-a-half years of analogue TV rights. It may well be in the FIA’s interest to destroy F1 completely, depending on how subtly it goes about it.
January 9th, 2009 at 11:55 #46 - Alianora La Canta said:
Even if a cap were to be agreed, what is to stop a F1 manufacturer using some design software, manufacturing facility, computer time, or just staff knowledge from their parent car manufacturer – either for free or “internal re-charged” at a rate well below market value. {Ian Lockwood – 42 comments ago}
Very true. And that’s before we start on hidden financial instruments based in Bermuda (if it’s good enough for Tom Walkinshaw…), in-kind sponsorship from external companies (which already happens to a certain extent, but would be encouraged bigstyle in this scheme) or oddly large “personal expenditures” (which could put a whole new spin on the concept of a “pay driver”). A financial cap of any kind would be easy for every team except Williams to circumvent.
January 9th, 2009 at 11:56 #47 - Alianora La Canta said:
That, and the fact he actually took the survey results on board. {Alenyaa – 42 comments ago}
I admit to being slightly wary on that. Has Max Mosley taken them on board, or simply quoted the ideas that happen to fit in with what he thought? We did say at the time that the questions were a bit leading…
January 9th, 2009 at 12:05 #48 - Alianora La Canta said:
ages ago i wrote this suggestion as a means of helping fans to help teams:
http://www.sidepodcast.com/2007/10/25/part-of-the-answer/
i’m thinking now, teams might like to consider this as a means to circumvent yet more fia sanctions. {me – 42 comments ago}
I had a similar idea in April about how computers from the fans could be used to get round CFD restrictions. There are some issues with security of the network, but I think these could be resolved by sending the information out in small pieces and keeping the key to fitting them back together on one computer back at the factory. It would be especially effective because one could argue that the computer is doing a PR function (because the team is using it as a major connection point with its supporters) and therefore helping the sport as a whole, and that any development benefit is coincidental. It’s also worth noting that up to this point, marketing and PR have been said to be outside any mooted budget caps.
January 9th, 2009 at 12:06 #49 - Alianora La Canta said:
good grief! almost word for word:
“I would regard those as modest inroads if I am honest with you,” he said. “When you make changes to thing, and you have to make a radical shift to get back to a sustainable level, you make that one-hit, one cut very quickly to get it done and then move forward from that point.” {me – 41 comments ago}
Nice bit of veiled criticism there. Chipping away at the target as Max Mosley has done so far is counter-productive…
January 9th, 2009 at 12:10 #50 - Alianora La Canta said:
In the same Autosport article on DR & Honda, they’re saying that the leading contender is… Greek shipping tycoon Achilleas Kallakis.
This could end up being as disastrous as Midland was. {Journeyer – 38 comments ago}
Worse still, I can already see what the newspaper pun will be if it is a disaster. In much the same way that Midland got rudely nicknamed “MFI” by some websites (claiming that it had a wooden chassis with Russian self-assembly instructions), I can see this venture being nicknamed “The Achilles Heel” or some such. Especially if Mr Kallakis turns out to have a limp.
Hopefully if he buys the team, he will make a success of it. Otherwise the consequences do not bear thinking about.
January 9th, 2009 at 12:13 #51 - Alianora La Canta said:
And why is it that all the shipping tycoons seem to be Greek? {Journeyer – 38 comments ago}
Like Steven Roy, lots of shipping routes in Greece, so by the time a shipping company decides to go to other countries, it’s already larger than most other countries’ equivalents to look at expanding.
The bus situation is probably explained by the fact that passengers generally provide a lower profit margin than goods because they demand awkward things like oxygen and pay-on-boarding ticket systems.
January 9th, 2009 at 12:14 #52 - Alianora La Canta said:
Erm. Who was responsible for getting it into that state? {Steven Roy – 38 comments ago}
Err… …does he have an alliterative name, by any chance? (Though he’d probably blame Steven for no reason except he read it on a blog somewhere and didn’t check the context)…
January 9th, 2009 at 12:16 #53 - Alianora La Canta said:
This should be translated as Max knew nothing about KERS but decided he would have it in F1 as a knee jerk reaction. Now that he realises they are not using 9 volt batteries and that electricity can be dangerous he thinks it is a bad idea. {Steven Roy – 39 comments ago}
Good suggestion. Either that is the case or he decided that someone with a battery system is likely to beat the flywheel and non-KERS teams hands down (without bothering to check whether this is indeed the case).
January 9th, 2009 at 12:18 #54 - Alianora La Canta said:
Bus magnates? Somehow, I don’t think that makes as much money as shipping. {Journeyer – 39 comments ago}
I suppose Stagecoach’s boss is a bus magnate. Though given that they also do trams, he’d probably prefer to be called a transport tycoon.
January 9th, 2009 at 12:20 #55 - Alianora La Canta said:
His section on the future seems to ignore that fact that it was him and his master Bernie who went out and recruited the car manufacturers and put rules in place that meant a significant advantage could be gained by throwing money at it. {Steven Roy – 39 comments ago}
This doesn’t surprise me, since he seems to think that being more restrictive won’t have exactly the same effect as before, i.e. benefiting those who throw more money at it even more than before.
January 9th, 2009 at 12:22 #56 - Alianora La Canta said:
DONINGTON GETS PLANNING APPROVAL! WOO-HOO! :{Gavin Brown – 29 comments ago}
This is great. Now we just need to see the building work done and the money to run the event raised. Fingers crossed
January 9th, 2009 at 12:25 #57 - Alianora La Canta said:
I know somebody who went and marshalled at the Singapore GP. He had no prior experience and he reported that he got very little training {Gavin Brown – 23 comments ago}
I can’t believe that. I thought marshalls had to have prior experience at lower events, and then a day of training, before being allowed near an F1 race weekend? The FIA system of licences seems to have fallen down badly in their desperation to get the event running. Surely there were enough people with appropriate training to have enabled the event to be properly staffed? Or at least some trainers capable of getting the marshalls to a good standard if that was absolutely necessary?
January 9th, 2009 at 12:26 #58 - Alianora La Canta said:
“The same approach will now be used to improve the spectacle of the sport, following the outcome of the FOTA commissioned market research.”
i predict 2009 will be a year of surveys. {me – 23 comments ago}
The question is, will the surveys be taken into account properly or will they simply incorporate whichever statistics fit into the announcment of the 2010/2011/2012 regulations?
January 9th, 2009 at 12:27 #59 - Alianora La Canta said:
I’ve just realised that I’ve done a few more comments than I originally intended in this thread. Oops *blush*
January 9th, 2009 at 12:32 #60 - Steven Roy said:
The thing is there has not been a race meeting of any significant level in Singapore since the 60s so no way for local marshalls to be trained or gain experience. Last year we were lucky and due to the total lack of criticisn in the media I don’t expect there to be a significant improvement ths year.
January 9th, 2009 at 22:24 #61 - Alianora La Canta said:
The thing is there has not been a race meeting of any significant level in Singapore since the 60s so no way for local marshalls to be trained or gain experience. {Steven Roy – previous comment}
This is true, but have the organisers not heard of plane tickets? They could have sent the marshalls abroad to get experience – and should have done, if only so that they could see what high-level marshalling involved.
If that wasn’t possible, then the marshalls that couldn’t get high-level experienced should have been replaced with marshalls from abroad with said experience. I’m sure Malaysia and China would have obliged quite happily, and Singapore has good relations with the latter if not the former.