Need More Be Said?

Well I guess you've heard it by now. All eight FOTA teams recently walked out of a meeting with the FIA on the 2010 rules. I'll leave it to you to read the articles in the Guardian and another in Pitpass. Should it come as a surprise?

By any means possible, Max Mosley wants nothing more than to impose himself on Formula 1. This has happened before and through some really sneaky chicanery and technicalities (typical of a lawyer) he's managed to exclude the FOTA teams from the rule making and instead involved the new teams Manor, Campos and USF1 plus the traitor Williams and wannabe Force India. Which was always his intention.

Shame on those who had argued for compromise. For really, there is no peace and compromise possible as long as that dictator stands as head of a long corrupt organisation. Nothing but a hard line is required in dealing with Premier Max. And for the good of grand prix racing (for the lack of a better word to signify motorsport's pinnacle) there has to be a fresh start, from ground up, focussing on fundamentals. Not this rehashing and replaying of a broken record that is the FIA Formula 1. To hell with sentiments. It was a good run while it lasted and now the time has blow away the cobwebs of entrenched and vested greed and ego. Are you listening already? The powers will do just that, try to keep their power and try to impose their will regardless of any form of process or good governance. Never mind also, that the old senile men and these old institutions spell the death of the sport as we know it.

And so precious time has been wasted in the hopes of some false peace. Time that could have been better spent planning for a breakaway series that fully caters to the needs of the teams and spectators instead.

I really grow tired of this. Tired of saying it again and again. I told you so, idiots.

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.

Funny Stories

Max Max Max. You're so predictable these days its hilarious mate! So now there's a new press release from the FIA. And in this press release the FIA claim that:

"The FIA believed it had participated in a very constructive meeting with a large measure of agreement. The FIA was therefore astonished to learn that certain FOTA members not present at the meeting have falsely claimed that nothing was agreed and that the meeting had been a waste of time. There is clearly an element in FOTA which is determined to prevent any agreement being reached regardless of the damage this may cause to the sport."

Ok so given that in that Thursday meeting the ones present were Toyota, Ferrari, Red Bull and Brawn GP, the "element in FOTA" could be one or more of BMW, Mercedes or Renault. But strange that following this meeting on Thursday you had Ferrari, Toyota and Red Bull voicing out strong opinions against the FIA particularly on the issue of governance. Seems that those present in the Thursday meeting weren't pleased with the issues as well, never mind some strange "element in FOTA."

And to this, a FOTA spokeman has responded:

"FOTA, whilst reserving its position on the specific issues, does not intend to comment the FIA press release issued on the 15th of June and to be involved in a prolonged series of polemical statements that generate confusion and does not help create a positive environment for the ongoing contacts"

Max Max. Still trying your best to divide and conquer? Are there no other strategies in the play book?

The FIA have also seen fit to respond to the ACEA statement, again driving the issue of costs and how the FIA proposals would save the manufacturers a ton of money (should be nice after years of screwing the manufacturers with constant rule changes). No mention of the FIA poor governance though. But again, Max simply couldn't resist the good old highlight on the one dissenting voice in ACEA. In this case:

"The FIA understands that Porsche did not support ACEA’s Formula One resolution and has instructed the ACEA secretariat to make this clear in response to any press enquiries"

You just couldn't resist it eh Max?

Meanwhile, Bernie has urged calm and restraint: "I would just ask everyone, instead of throwing mud at each other in public or behind each other’s backs, to just be quiet and let things settle down a bit."

In other words, help help! You are ruining the free lunch for me and my CVC Pedigree Chums. Yeah, its been quite a funny weekend alright.

The funniest story so far must be about poor N Technology who had their application for a spot on the Formula 1 grid rejected by the FIA. According to N Technology's Mauro Sipsz : "The applications have been used by the Federation as pawns to move in the fight against the teams."

Wha.. What the f...? You just knew this now? You mean you really thought the FIA would take you seriously? You poor sod or should I say cannon fodder. Autosport goes further : "Sipsz and Codignoni reveal that they were informed by the FIA about having missed deadlines for submitting financial and technical details of their teams - even though they are adamant such information was sent in on time."

Reminds me of when you send an invoice to your customer who doesn't want to pay up. But we never did get your invoice... could you please send it again? Oldest trick in the book except in this case its oops sorry you can't enter now.

Max, what sort of joint are you running here?

The State Of Play

As of today, the situation is:

1. The FIA have published the entrants for 2010. Unconditional entrants include Ferrari, Red Bull and Toro Rosso. Conditional entrants include the remaining 5 FOTA members.
2. Ferrari, Red Bull and Toro Rosso have stated that their entry is still conditional upon the FIA agreeing to terms to their satisfaction and have thrown support to FOTA.
3. FOTA have declared that they will release certain information detailing why they think the FIA's 2010 regulations stink.
4. FOTA have implored the FIA WSMC and Senate to step in and help resolve this issue, bypassing Max Mosley.
5. The ACEA i.e. the European Automobile Manufacturers Association have thrown in their support firmly behind the FOTA teams. In a statement they have called for better governance of the sport, more equitable share of the sports revenues and at the same time warned that FOTA will have to breakaway if these conditions are not met. A clear slap in the face to Max Mosley and Bernie Ecclestone.
6. Max and Bernie have so far been silent.

I am glad that the FOTA teams are showing solidarity and unity on this issue and furthermore, I am pleased to see the ACEA stepping in and hitting it where it hurts. One trump card that Max have repeatedly used thus far for his draconian measures is his claims that the board of directors in the manufacturers would be in full support for his budget cap. Well, both the ACEA and Renault's Carlos Ghosn (Le Cost Cutter himself!) have stepped in and clarified that this is not the main point. The point is his governance of the sport and the share of revenues from the sport that is in question. Processes to govern and set the rules must be transparent and clear to all and it is this that is most important to them at this time.

I wouldn't put it pass Max to get himself out of this one but it certainly would be very interesting to see how he could. His professional credibility is now called into question in the most public manner possible by some very heavyweights.

With attacks from all side, including previously cowardly journalists, Max finds himself in isolation, something that is not unknown for him. Remember the whole sex scandal thing last year? In that case he could and successfully did defend himself on the grounds of privacy, this time its about his professional competence. And that is fair game.

The Manufacturers' Voice

Well, the standoff is most definitely on. And in the wake of yesterday's published FIA entry list, the ACEA i.e. the European Automobile Manufacturers Association has issued a statement in support of the FOTA teams. The statement reads:

"Today, the members of the Board of the European Automobile Manufacturer’s Association discussed the current situation prevailing in Formula One, and have concluded that the current governance system cannot continue."

Max Mosley, please leave.

"ACEA has come to the conclusion that the FIA needs a modernised and transparent governance system and processes, including the revision of its constitution, to ensure the voice of its members, worldwide motorsport competitors and motorists are properly reflected."

That is to say, screw you Max Mosley. We're tired of you shoving arbitrary rules down our throats and not listening to us. And furthermore:

"The ACEA members support the activities and objectives of the Formula One Teams Association to establish stable governance, clear and transparent rules which are common to all competitors to achieve cost reductions including a proper attribution of revenues to the F1 teams, in order to deliver a sustainable attractive sport for the worldwide public."

In other words, screw Max Mosley, Bernie Ecclestone and CVC dogs. Give us a proper share of the revenue.

"Unless these objectives are met, the BMW, Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault and Toyota along with the other teams are determined to find an alternative way to practice this sport in a manner which provides clarity, certainty of rules and administration, and a fair allocation of revenues to the competing teams."

If Max doesn't leave then we will.

"The European automotive industry is key to the strength and competitiveness of Europe. The ACEA members are BMW Group, DAF Trucks, Daimler, FIAT Group, Ford of Europe, General Motors Europe, Jaguar Land Rover, MAN Nutzfahrzeuge, Porsche, PSA Peugeot Citroën, Renault, Scania, Toyota Motor Europe, Volkswagen and Volvo. They provide direct employment to more than 2.3 million people and indirectly support another 10 million jobs. Annually, ACEA members invest €20 billion in R&D, or 4% of turnover."

Oh yeah. Look who we are bitches!

While Max Appeases, Bernie Threatens

Well, seems like we're looking at some role reversals here. It usually Mad Max who brandishes the iron rod, whilst Bernie Ecclestone becomes the calm voice of compromise and reason. But now its Ecclestone thats pulling the threats to the FOTA teams. In this article in Autosport, he warns the teams that any attempt to organise a breakaway series will be met with stern action.

He warns the teams to stay away from sponsors, venues, television broadcasters lest they face punitive action in the courts. But I like this statement: 

"That money flows back to the teams and they spend it. It would be different when they have to provide all the venues, hire their own race people, find their own television companies – and we have the best – and promote it."

Err Bernie, I think we're all smarter than that. Some of the money flows back to the teams. Collectively we know its 50% to all teams. Then the rest is in all but legal form, stolen for you and those dogs at CVC.

As for having the best broadcasters, well many, many folk will take issue to that. In Malaysia, if we want to catch the European races live, then the only option is Star Sports (which is basically Sky Sports in the UK and elsewhere). If you thought that James Allen was piss poor you should hear the morons they have commentating. And whilst the BBC broadcast provides roaming reporters who provide inside updates from the teams, those idiots at Star Sports are absolutely clueless. Long after you can spot whats happening from the timings provided by Formula1.com, they're still mumbling inane blabber on the mike. Really, the only star in current available broadcasts is Martin Brundle and I think the FIA would not mind if he left after his scathing remarks in an article in the Times last year. So thats a bit of nonsense from Bernie right there.

Even more silliness comes from Bernie when he says: "As for the drivers, they want to win the FIA F1 world championship or some of them would be elsewhere getting more money to win a title that means less. I don't think they will get a series going."

Clearly in contradiction to statements made by the likes  Fernando Alonso, Kimi Raikkonen, Filipe Massa, Jarno Trulli and Mark Webber. I think a driver is interested in racing in the best series no matter what its called. Nothing like some good mis-information to really confuse the casual viewers and sponsors there eh Bernie?

And finally nothing like telling the teams its all their fault with this little gem: "The teams had a chance to sign the 1998 Concorde Agreement which would have protected them from Max's technical changes, but they said no." 

Thanks for pointing that out. And therefore now Bernie thinks they should commit another mistake by signing up for Max's ridiculous new rules. 

Poor Bernie. He's really so desperate now that his accounting skills seem to be affected. He warns the teams, particularly the manufacturers that their board members won't be best pleased with them spending money to set up a new series. Well Bernie, any bean counter worth his salt would argue the equation is more complicated than that. Its all about net gains. If the net gain to be had from starting a new series outweighs the net gains from joining the FIA series, guess which one the bean counter would recommend. Particularly since if they ran their own series the teams would be entitled to 100% of the commercial revenues rather than the 50% handout they receive now. Add to this, the costs of Max Mosley's constant rule changes that would now be saved by some stable rules, then you get the true picture.

I follow MotoGP from time to time. I must say, entertainment-wise on average year on year it beats F1 hands down. I just happen to prefer cars to bikes which is why I follow F1 more closely. But the rules in MotoGP are determined by the teams not by the FIM, the governing body for motorcycle racing. And look how spectacular it turns out to be. And to this end FOTA have contacted Dorna Sports SL, the MotoGP organisers to possibly run the new series. I can think of no better group of people. 

Ironically, Dorna is or was owned by CVC. After buying up the commercial rights to F1 they have had to dispose of their holdings in Dorna. If they haven't already, they most certainly will be required to by EU anti-trust regulations. What a great way of getting rid of the CVC cancer and sticking their commercial rights up their arses.

Bernie and Max's defence of their position is looking increasingly desperate. Upon examination, their arguments sound increasingly senseless. I hope FOTA are not buying the absurdity Max and Bernie are selling. Come on guys, have a backbone for a change. Just do a breakaway series already. 

A Load Of Bollocks

Max Mosley has recently written to the FOTA teams in what seems like a kindly worded reconciliatory gesture urging them to sign up unconditionally to compete in 2010. He assures the teams that should they submit, they will be invited to discuss new proposals to modify the 2010 rules (including the budget caps) in consultation with the FIA.

But first of course they have to submit unconditionally. Bind themselves in a legal contract with the FIA with no guarantees whatsoever that their voices will be heard. After all, is this not the same person whom last week told the FOTA teams to take a hike? And furthermore, the FIA have been writing the rules for the last 60 years and if they didn't like it they can form their own championship.

Remember also, that these are the words of a man who have repeatedly time and again forced rule changes down the throats of teams in contravention of the FIA's own rules and procedures in making such changes. And why should the teams now trust this Hitlerian dictator? He respects not his own rules and why should he respect the views of the teams.

Henry Ford (wasn't it?) used to say that you can have any colour (for his Model-T) as long as its black. Well, to Max the teams can have all the say so long as in the end the rules conform to his view.

FOTA have yet to respond but I hope they tell this bastard to in turn take a hike. And as Chris Balfe in this article in Pitpass has said, enough is enough. Max has gone on for far too long. The teams should stand firm and bring an end to his tyranny and greed.

Update: Whilst Mosley suggests that FOTA sign up to shape the 2010 rules, it can only be changed by unanimous decision. Whilst the FOTA teams do not agree to a budget cap, these tiny newcomers are absolutely depending on it. It goes without saying, there will be no unanimous decision to drop or increase the budget. Game over.

Hear Hear!!

I love it when the general press (as opposed to cowering racing journalists) hits hard, as did the UK Guardian in this article by Richard Williams today. Highlights:

"Those who watched the Turkish grand prix on television might be interested to learn that the people in charge of the transmission were instructed to focus their cameras tightly on the cars in order to disguise the paltry attendance.

Not everything can be obscured by green sheeting, cunning camera angles or Jenson Button's dazzling smile. Button's success ....is just about the only thing formula one has going for it during a year in which the corrosive effects of Mosley's political machinations and Ecclestone's insatiable greed have become fully apparent."

Brilliant opening salvo but there's more:

"By imposing a wholesale set of rule changes at the beginning of this season, rather than introducing alterations gradually, he made himself look like a reformer while actually forcing the teams to incur huge additional costs, not least through the addition of his vastly expensive and troublesome KERS system, already abandoned by most of the teams."

Where were articles like these years ago before the introduction of the rubbish KERS. Instead we even had some blogs and press supporting its entrance. But the article goes further and this part I like:

"So far only two teams – Williams and Force India – have switched to his camp, suffering expulsion from Fota as a result of choosing self-interest over the long-term health of the sport. The association's eight remaining members – Ferrari, Renault, BMW, Toyota, McLaren-Mercedes, Brawn, Red Bull and Toro Rosso – might very well take the view that grand prix racing can exist perfectly well without one team that won its last championship in 1997 and another that shows little sign of doing anything other than making up the numbers."

Finally someone else says these things I've been trying to get across!

"Whatever Mosley may say, his objective appears not to be making formula one cheaper, greener or more competitive. It is to retain control of the sport first by dividing and ruling the existing competitors and second by threatening the introduction of a bunch of new teams whose loyalty to him and to Ecclestone has been bought by the rewriting of technical regulations and by the promise of financial assistance."

The article concludes:

"How much better the world would seem if formula one returned to Silverstone next year and Mosley and Ecclestone did not."

Amen to that Mr Richard Williams!

And so to the wannabe racing team boss Vijay Mallya. Why don't you quit being a wannabe and take your billions elsewhere instead being a nuisance in grand prix racing? Giving it to help the hardcore poor in your country who live on the streets eating scraps off garbage would probably be more beneficial to yourself and your nation in the long run.

The Budget Cap

I hate this idea of a budget cap. I really do. Maybe because it radically changes the face of grand prix racing and I hate the idea of racing changing even further because of Max and cohorts. Perhaps I hate the fact that to my mind, its just a deceitful way arguing that the teams should not need to receive more money from Bernie and the CVC dogs. Maybe I hate the fact that Max argues there are is no technical innovation in grand prix racing and yet it was he who framed the current rules so tightly that innovation is not permitted. There are even provisions in the sporting regulations that state that any innovative advantage a team has will be removed after a year! Yeah, perhaps I just hate the disingenuousness of it all and I really want to see the end of Max, FOM and CVC.

Putting all these other bigger issues aside, I do wonder whether the budget cap in and of itself is such a bad idea. I have to agree with Mosley on one thing. If applied, it is at least ensures fairness (though I think fairness can also be achieved by other means). But whatever, on the face of things, those folk from Norfolk who want to revive the Lotus name, could theoretically be fighting on the same terms as Maranello. If you ask me, I think Maranello is afraid of this. For if everyone is on equal footing, then its down to creativity (if this is allowed as well, but I'll come to this later). Time was when Ferrari were getting beaten by so-called garagistes using only Cosworth DFV engines and old Enzo hated that. And so would Luca di Montezemolo. Ferrari builds its brand on grand prix mystique and here's a chance that the myth would be destroyed. Not good. And I would say it also applies to a lesser extent but still significantly to other car manufacturers in Formula 1.

However, we should not let ourselves get carried away. As I said before, this is only in theory. Whilst a budget cap allied to greater innovative freedom seems like a great idea here are some reasons why it would not work in the long run.

Budget caps are impossible to police

Seriously, do the teams or anyone for that fact want a bunch of FIA people to rummage through their books? And even if they were allowed, so what? Auditors have been rummaging through people's finances for ages but still you had things like Enron happening. Sarbanes Oxley? Pffft. Such regulations simply creates more loopholes for hanky panky.

When they implemented currency exchange controls, banks simply created currency swaps and derivatives on those. When it comes to money, there are very creative ways of ensuring that it gets where it needs to go and of course there are creative accounting techniques that have been practiced for hundreds of years.

Whats to stop Mercedes for instance to place their CFD and wind tunnels under Mercedes trucks or AMG for instance? In return, Mercedes High Performance Engines could do some "research" work for those divisions. After all engine expenses are spared from the scrutiny of the FIA. Whats to stop Mercedes HPE from transferring the results of such CFD and wind tunnel work back to McLaren? Nothing would stop McLaren from claiming that they innovated and "discovered" this all on a miniscule budget because of the genius of their engineers. Are the FIA going to send auditors to the entire Daimler Benz empire?

Likewise, are the FIA going to send auditors down to Nissan in Japan to investigate possible Formula 1 chassis work? In fact, whats to stop Nissan doing it out in the open? If Nissan wanted to build a grand prix car simply for pure research purposes, there would nothing the FIA could do to stop them. Nissan are not competing. Its the Renault Formula 1 team that does so. And if Renault "inherits" or is simply allowed to "view" the results of Nissan's research, does this in and of itself constitute a breach of regulations?

Both McLaren and Ferrari have road car divisions separate from their teams. In the case of McLaren this goes even further to encompass other vehicle and technological enterprises. There's no stopping either of these teams parking grand prix development expenditures to these other operations.

Such things are not confined only to the large manufacturers. Any team can practice such creativity. Lola for instance builds racing cars for other formulae and series. Who's to say what expenses are incurred for the grand prix team and what expenses are attributed to development of chassis in other formulae? Only Lola's accountants know and you can bet they ain't saying. Other teams could also set up similar situations very easily. They could for instance sell engineering services to other entities and organisations for non-financial consideration.

I'm certain the FIA will look into all of this. Max is quite a clever bastard. But he should know that budget caps will exist only in name. Teams will find even cleverer ways to cicumvent these caps. In the end, I feel that the so called cap will simply be abandoned, the way horsepower limits (300 bhp) were abandoned in rallying.

Technical Innovation Causes Safety Issues As Cars Get Ever Faster

As I said before, the only reason why there have not been any innovations in grand prix racing lately is because the regulations are framed in such ways as to prevent these innovations from happening. Max has long argued that this is for cost and safety reasons. History will show that the cost savings never materialised much. But Max could always count on safety as the reasons for killing off technical creativity. He would argue (and he would be right) that the cars would be going too fast for their own good.

As it stands, despite ever tightening regulations, engineers have found ways of making the cars go even faster. Any limits placed on them have been temporary. Eventually development catches up and cars go even quicker than ever. I suppose the FIA can argue this is possible because of the hundreds of millions that go into 24 hour development. And so they want to place this budget cap. In exchange teams get more liberal regulations.

However, if Max is correct, that with such freedoms, engineers and teams would not need the close on half a billion dollar budget to go faster, then in the end, the FIA would still need to curb their creativity and thus the speed of the cars for safety reasons. How are the FIA going to achieve this? Tighter budget caps? Would it still be considered grand prix racing when teams are limited to only say 5 million dollars or less per season? That would just be ridiculous. Sports car teams spend more. The only practical way would be for the FIA to write ever tighter technical regulations and all this will do is curb creativity. Once again, whatever monies are available would simply be spent refining existing technology rather than producing new ones.

Lack of Rule Stability Will Raise Costs Anyway

Lets face it. One of the reasons why budgets in Formula 1 have gone sky high is because bloody Max has changed the rules according to his whims every couple of years. In some cases, he's changed it year on year. Such rule instability forces teams to deploy massive amounts of financial resources for development. Now who's to say that if Max gets his way and teams sign up unconditionally, he would settle down and stabilize the rules. Especially given safety concerns. He'd keep on changing the rules and I argue that even the little teams will be complaining. What would happen I feel is that teams would argue that the budget cap be relaxed in order to properly respond to these rule changes. And there goes the farm on budget capping.

Conclusions

I believe the FOTA teams are looking to make massive cost reductions to their operations. And I believe they are in a better position to suggest more practical and economical ways on how these can be achieved. For this to happen in the long run, there must be rule stability. And this is the thrust of the FOTA argument. That rules are managed and constructed in consultation with the teams and not simply on the whims and fancies of an ego-maniacal FIA president.

If you ask me, I don't think the FOTA teams are worried about these budget caps, or at least they shouldn't be. Better spend their time in finding not only new technical innovations but also financial innovations and creative organisational and commercial structures to circumvent such nonsense. Who's to say that they aren't doing this right now?

However, as the loud mouthed Flavio has recently said, what FOTA requires is transparency and rule stability. This is an essential ingredient to cost savings and is something that Max doesnt seem to understand or realise. And if those traitors Williams and the oh so wannabe Vijay Mallya and his Force India team had the foresight they would see that unconditional surrender to Max will in the end be folly and detrimental to them in the long run. I argue that all these hopeful new entrants should also place stability and transparency conditions not just on the FIA but also the FOM on whom their lives will depend on.
I am surprised that Williams, Force India and others seemingly take such a short term view of things. In the long run, they will be back on the table arguing against the FIA once more.

As for Max, it would seem that here is a man who wants and needs to be in complete control and be able to dictate the regulations as he pleases. I do believe though that a lot of the motivation for it is commercial and even political. Commercial pressures come from Bernie and the CVC dogs. Political pressure would perhaps come from environmental lobbies and governments. To satifsfy these pressures, I think he doesn't at all mind to be seen as the ruthless dictator and perhaps he even enjoys it. In the end I feel that he simply wants to satisfy his ego as being the man who changed and "saved" grand prix racing. There cannot be any doubt that he himself is engaging in legacy building.

And so the practical way forward is to perhaps to let Max be seen in public as the victor in this standoff. After all, car manufacturers and teams are in different businesses and not in the business of politics. FOTA should perhaps capitulate and be seen to have been humbled by the great dicatator, Premier Max. Then, work with Bernie to come up with a new Concorde Agreement that this time guarantees rule stability. I'm not sure how they would get more money out of Bernie and CVC but thats a different story. In the meantime as I mentioned FOTA teams can simply restructure their organisations to circumvent these silly budget caps. In the long run they should realise that budget caps will (in substance but not form) disappear anyway. And all that would remain (if they played it smart) is rule stability guaranteed by a new Concorde Agreement.