bhallg2k wrote:(Once more: Do you have any sources for these claims? Any specific legal basis for the actions you've described? I'm not looking for opinions. I want facts.)
For argument's sake, how will the FIA prevent Ferrari from outsourcing the design and construction of its chassis to another firm under Fiat's control if that firm is not compelled by a licensing contract to disclose all figures associated with its involvement?
If, with assistance from Piaggio Aero Industries, sister company Maserati designs the F2014 and then "sells" it to Scuderia Ferrari for $1, what can the FIA do about it, especially given that it will have access to neither Maserati nor Piaggio Aero? Are they to punish Ferrari for officially finding a bargain?
Once in a while we may be allowed to use our own head based on
the published opinion of
the teams and
the FiA.
There are results of FiA working groups going back to 2008 suggesting that budget caps are workable and desirable. As recent as this summer all but one team have written to
the FiA and asked
the governing body to install a system of budget control. I trust you to have followed this thread, so you will be familiar with those facts.
I'm quite prepared to explain how
the above described problems can be solved. So bear with me and let us go through a workable system of budget control:
The first thing that would be done is defining budget cap parameters like, legal entities, maximum spending on separate items such as chassis and power trains and fines for transgressions. Those legal entities under budget control would be licensed by
the FiA and their directors would be personal licensees quite like
the team principals already are. They would sign an obligation to deal with all suppliers and sponsors at arms length and require all suppliers to be subject to that rule and to FiA audits when an official investigation is conducted.
That way any supplier or sponsor can only cooperate with a controlled legal entity under FiA rules. All legal entities would be subject to annual or quarterly auditing and obliged to report their transactions to
the auditing firms on an ongoing basis.
The personal licensees would be required to sign all monthly or quarterly transaction reports.
Particular audits would be conducted with legal entities and their suppliers on request of competitors. If a team or engine manufacturer is introducing suspicious amounts of innovations, updates or new parts
the competitors are
the first to realize that. They have a pretty good feeling how much it costs and would blow
the whistle probably more often than not.
You also have a constant exchange of personnel between teams which ensures that fishy transactions are very likely to be reported sooner or later. It would be very expensive or even
the end of
the career for
the licensee who had signed for
the transaction.
The responsible directors would put very firm guidelines in place that stipulate
the conformance with FiA rules to protect their asses.
I guess that answers your question
about Piaggio Aero or Maserati. Doing a transaction like purchasing or selling
the F2014 design for $1 would violate
the required dealing at arms length. Piaggio or Maserati would violate their contracts with Ferrari and Ferrari would violate
the terms of their license if they would engage in such a transaction. Stefano Domenicali and other responsible directors would be subject to sanctions starting with personal fines going up to life ban depending on
the gravity of
the cheat.
You are welcome to point out any systematic fault in such a system of budget control. Just for clarity we should have a look at
the objectives.
The top teams are currently spending approximately $250m compared to $450m in 2008.
The objective would be to split those values into chassis and power train and initially contain them on that level. In subsequent years
the budgets would be reduced by approximately 30%. By 2016
the combined budgets would go down to $175m. That is a massive reduction if you compare it to 2008 expenditure.
Obviously
the above figures are estimates based on available publications and subject to negotiation between parties. So don't be surprised if they change somewhat during
the discussions. According to Jean Todt chassis budget control could be introduced from next year if
the political will is there and
the 2020 CA is signed by all parties. Engine budget control could begin in 2014 again according to Todt. This is pretty much how I understand
the intentions of
the team majority. Of course all of this is subject to negotiations and there is always
the chance that someone puts a spanner into
the wheels.
The history of F1 cost control is littered with clever plans that have been shot down by selfish teams with enough political power.
