LOGO
Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 11-17-2011, 04:35 AM   #21
fedelwet

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
524
Senior Member
Default
From the Autosport link posted by Alfa Fan, Bernie talks a good line that the problems are solely the fault of the two promotion groups in Texas. Somehow I feel he is not telling us everything, I would like to hear the other sides to the story.

On Oct 30 I posted this story from NJ quoting Texas sources saying that the $25 M of public funds was conditional on Texas hosting the sole US Grand Prix, further that "the subsidy was no longer legal under state law".

N.J. hosting of Formula 1 race raises questions about Texas hosting with subsidies | NJ.com

I cannot believe that the announcement of the NJ deal for 10 years, and the halting of construction in Texas are not connected in some way.
fedelwet is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 05:41 AM   #22
SallythePearl

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
478
Senior Member
Default
And so much also for Tavo Hellmund making so much play of his excellent, long-standing relationship with Ecclestone, making him the person to bring a GP back to the United States.
SallythePearl is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 05:44 AM   #23
gopsbousperie

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
431
Senior Member
Default
It looked like such a good circuit as well. That is a shame if it never materialises.
gopsbousperie is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 06:25 AM   #24
GlictStiply

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
447
Senior Member
Default
What I keep wondering is if the track even needs to be tied at the hip to hosting F1 initially? Would it be at all possible to build a track (perhaps even a shortened version to save $$), and go ahead and host everything else like the U.S. based series, concerts, events etc? Would it be possible to eventually turn a profit if the F1 sanctioning fees were lopped off the projected costs?

If so, then they could just make upgrades if they tried again in the future. At least we'd have something good come out of all this.
GlictStiply is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 06:41 AM   #25
ronaldasten

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
629
Senior Member
Default
What I keep wondering is if the track even needs to be tied at the hip to hosting F1 initially? Would it be at all possible to build a track (perhaps even a shortened version to save $$), and go ahead and host everything else like the U.S. based series, concerts, events etc? Would it be possible to eventually turn a profit if the F1 sanctioning fees were lopped off the projected costs?

If so, then they could just make upgrades if they tried again in the future. At least we'd have something good come out of all this.
Isn't MotoGP planning on going there?
ronaldasten is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 08:24 AM   #26
Czrzftmz

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
380
Senior Member
Default
This is reminiscent of the game Bernie played with Donnington Park and Silverstone.

Donnington Park = COTA

Silverstone = NJ
Czrzftmz is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 09:07 AM   #27
Seerseraxlils

Join Date
Jan 2006
Posts
562
Senior Member
Default
As I've read everything overthe past month or two, Tavo had the connections to get the F1 race contract via his personal friendship with BE, as well as the connections to get State funding. Tavo however was essentially not a financial stake holder in the TRACK. Epstein is the circuit owner and is, well from the sounds of it, a control freak and wanted sole control and ownership of the F1 race contract. From teh sound of it, he esentially wanted it for next to nothing. There was a story published a month or so ago about Hellemund asking the State events fund if transferring the race promotion would affect the $25M state funding.... Apparently the answer was not only YES, but the guaranteed funding went from 364 days before the event to not until AFTER the race, meaning not only would the promoters have to build the track, but pay formula one up front, out of their pocket. Tavo wanted to be paid for the race deals he landed, Epstein not only wouldn't pay what Tavo wanted, but F1 also would not give Epstein the same discounted sanctioning fees Tavo had recieved from Bernie. Bernie has an ace in the hole with the race he really wanted in the New York Metro Area. Tavo has just as many connections in Mexico as in Austin from what I've read, so he could just as easily talk Bernie into moving the race to Mexico where someone like Carlos Slim can pay for a new track out of his wallet change and get whatever government pemits he needs.

My concern quite honestly would be all the nastiness going on with the ongoing turf wars between the drug cartels. As much as I love Mexico and as many times as I've been down there, I'm going nowhere near most of Mexico anytime soon..
Seerseraxlils is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 09:15 AM   #28
BliliBoopsy

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
429
Senior Member
Default
What I keep wondering is if the track even needs to be tied at the hip to hosting F1 initially? Would it be at all possible to build a track (perhaps even a shortened version to save $$), and go ahead and host everything else like the U.S. based series, concerts, events etc? Would it be possible to eventually turn a profit if the F1 sanctioning fees were lopped off the projected costs?

If so, then they could just make upgrades if they tried again in the future. At least we'd have something good come out of all this.
The developers of the track have answered that question with a firm ,YES. NO F1 contract, no track. They have no interest in building the track without the guaranteed ten year contract. Moto GP and V8 Supercars were to make some money. I suspect the MotoGP crowd in Texas would have ended up just as large as the F1 crowd. Wouldn't suprise me at all if the majority of this was a ruse to land the NY race BE really wanted.

It's a shame the track won't be built anyway, but there's huge race politics with TMS in Texas.
BliliBoopsy is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 09:26 AM   #29
GfBTWMmV

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
431
Senior Member
Default
And so much also for Tavo Hellmund making so much play of his excellent, long-standing relationship with Ecclestone, making him the person to bring a GP back to the United States.
I don't think that is the problem. Its the relationship between Tavo and Epstein, the money man. Tavo landed the deal, but hte deal was only good beteween Bernie and Tavo, not Bernie and Epstein. Epstein doesn't rate the family discount.....
GfBTWMmV is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 10:25 AM   #30
JulieSmithdccd

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
592
Senior Member
Default
Here is a link to Speedtv, which has a statement from Texas comptroller Susan Combs stating that no public funds will be paid in advance of a race. Also posted is her letter of May 2010 to Bernie appearing to say the opposite.

FORMULA ONE - F1: Combs Letter Promised Advance Payment For Austin Race

Also there is the latest quotes from Bernie similar to the Autosport story. Seem like they have about 1 week to come to terms, or there is no contract, and no race.

A complicated situation for sure. Gentlemen start your lawsuits!
JulieSmithdccd is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 01:14 PM   #31
mralabama

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
452
Senior Member
Default
if f1 racing is going to be as contrived and ****ty as 2011, i couldnt care less about ANY of the races, let alone a new one...
mralabama is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 03:01 PM   #32
ådrrraj

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
492
Senior Member
Default
if f1 racing is going to be as contrived and ****ty as 2011, i couldnt care less about ANY of the races, let alone a new one...
I know this thing gets to people but honestly, who cares what you think when the sport is easily the most popular form of motorsport in the world?
ådrrraj is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 05:32 PM   #33
glazgoR@

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
529
Senior Member
Default
If the promoters and the owners cannot be in agreement about holding this event, then it's never going to work. Chuck into the mix that funding from the State seems to be dubious and it gets worse.

I suggest Bernies ultimatum is designed to get all parties around the table and see if they can work together or whether this is a potential disaster in the making that is always going to fail.

Personally, I agree with him 100%. If the parties involved cannot get this sorted, then it's best to can it now and cut the losses.
glazgoR@ is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 06:27 PM   #34
GaryBulguihb

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
402
Senior Member
Default
Can't see how anyone's blaming Bernie for this p*ssing contest though
It's quite easy actually. I blame MS too. I don't like him either.
GaryBulguihb is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 08:11 PM   #35
Assauraarguck

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
464
Senior Member
Default


Max must have his sticky pinkeys in there as well and I wouldn't bet against ioan and Tamburello being involved either.

I read it in the Daily Male.

Assauraarguck is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 08:29 PM   #36
cialesxtr

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
465
Senior Member
Default


Max must have his sticky pinkeys in there as well and I wouldn't bet against ioan and Tamburello being involved either.

I read it in the Daily Mail.
In my mind this whole Austin-thing must be an evil conspiracy by Bernie to piss off American fans. A pure evil mastermind at work. I mean the guy takes ransoms from willing payers and gives half of of the cash to the teams. How can he cancel a race if he is not paid? Who would do that?
cialesxtr is offline


Old 11-17-2011, 10:02 PM   #37
zU8KbeIU

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
367
Senior Member
Default
This is reminiscent of the game Bernie played with Donnington Park and Silverstone.

Donnington Park = COTA

Silverstone = NJ
Gotta hand it to BCE's business acumen. No wonder he BCE signed up with NJ quickly.
zU8KbeIU is offline


Old 11-18-2011, 03:36 AM   #38
NarhozNic

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
370
Senior Member
Default
This pretty much explains it all and I can't say I blame him.

“There's nothing to save. They can't bloody well pay," Ecclestone said. "What do you want me to do: Wait until next year? To put all our cars on it, run around the circuit and everything and come back with no money? The teams want paying.

“It's not brinkmanship; it never has been with me. I've been trying to do a deal now with these people for 18 months or more. ... If they had the money, I'm sure there would be no problem.” Sexton: 2013 a possibility for Austin - Racer.com
NarhozNic is offline


Old 11-18-2011, 04:47 AM   #39
marcusdexz

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
412
Senior Member
Default
See here, latest news is a statement from the track owners that they are willing to postphone the race till 2013. No mention of any resolution to the contract dispute.

FORMULA ONE - F1: First GP Could Move To 2013 Says Austin Track Official
marcusdexz is offline


Old 11-18-2011, 07:18 AM   #40
tinetttstation

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
470
Senior Member
Default
This pretty much explains it all and I can't say I blame him.
If his version of events can be taken at face value. Easier said than done with Ecclestone.
tinetttstation is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:15 AM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity