No End In Sight

"You do prefer it this way, don't you, as it was meant to be? No peace in our time" -- General Chang

Now take a look at the latest press release from the FIA:

"Indeed, [FOTA] were not prepared to discuss [financial] regulation at all."

"In default of a proper dialogue, the FOTA financial proposals were discussed but it became clear that these would not be capable of limiting the expenditure of a team which had the resources to outspend its competitors. Another financial arms race would then be inevitable."

While FOTA talks about governance, the FIA are still pressing on about budget caps. As I understand it, FOTA works towards cost reductions through technical measures but the FIA still talks about imposition of absolute limits to budgets. Something that the FOTA teams are absolutely against.

The point is subtle but therein lies the loggerheads. And lets not even discuss the matter of governance, something that the FIA, barring a passing mention of reverting back to the 1998 Concorde Agreement, still has not been properly addressed at all by the FIA.

Put it simply. The FIA says agree to the 2010 rules including the budget cap and we'll all then sign the Concorde Agreement. FOTA's position is sign the Concorde Agreement that governs the sport (including how the rules are shaped and made) then we'll talk about rules.

Max of course does not want this because then he'd have a very very hard time imposing the budget cap. In fact, with the Concorde in place the only way the FIA could bulldoze any rule is on the grounds of safety.

Meantime of course, Max has sent his thug, Alan Donnelly to try and break the unity between the FOTA teams which met with some stern retaliatory statements from FOTA. The fact that Mr Donnelly is also chief steward, seriously calls into question his ability to remain impartial in applying the rules at races.

Essentially Max there trying the divide and conquer strategy once more. But the teams aren't buying it. Thank God.

The differences between FOTA and FIA are subtle in form but huge in substance. And as it stands, I fail to see how this will be resolved unless one of the parties compromise.