Racing Eagles

This is why you shoot an injured horse.

This is getting embarrassing.

Why on earth would the FIA give USF1 a one-year extension? Why would the other teams allow this? How doesn't this proposal violate the Concorde Agreement? Why on earth would Bernie agree to this? Do these people read contracts? Do these people read the rule books? Do these people have calendars? I mean what the hell?

Please shoot this horse, I can't stand the yelping and cries of this wounded animal anymore.

They're Making Toasters!

According to Adam Cooper's blog (who has been the Woodward and Bernstein of the USF1 story,) the employees of USF1 have started to develop a toaster in honor of the now legendary USF1 cartoon series.

All I can say, is where can I order one?

Of the AUTOSPORT story and Cromwell

What to make of this story about USF1 in AUTOSPORT?

(*Please read linked the story before proceeding. Don't worry, I'll wait.*)

If it was most other Formula One websites, I would disregard the story. If this was the standard load of you-know-what that comes from the GMM Formula One news service, I would disregard the story. However, it appeared in AUTOSPORT. The old-gray lady of motorsports. Despite the bulk of the information coming from an anonymous source, based on AUTOSPORT's reputation, it has to be proven and fact checked. The lack of response from USF1 is extremely telling.

It has taken me an entire day to digest all of this. There was something about this article that sounded familiar to me. Then I remembered something I read on the AUTOSPORT forum about a month ago from a poster who goes by the name "CompositeKen." This is what he wrote on the board on January 10, 2010.

One year later... we finally know the answer...

"I know Ken Anderson and Peter Windsor are men of great experience, but where is all the money coming from for all this? Are they going the Jackie Stewart route and have a list of sponsors on hand to grow the team with? Do they have a group of investors? Or do they have a single investor hanging around in the shadows. Is it someone who could literally swim through their assets?

In addition to this, what are the motives of these backers and sponsors? Does USF1 really have a business model that can survive long-term? Are they depending on Max's cost cutting measures too much?

Hopefully, we will find out on Tuesday."

                                                                                           - This blog, one year ago today.

Apparently, USF1 didn't even know the answer to those questions.

I read those words I wrote one year ago and started to feel really, really depressed. How did this all go so wrong? The obvious anger that I showed on this blog space a few days ago has subsided. Now it is just remorse at both the demise of the team and how overly hopeful I was for what turned out to be a amateur effort.

So where do we go from here?

SpeedTV: Varsha on USF1 (Video)

I know a lot of this is just clearing the air sort of reporting but one thing did strike me. I think Varsha is a pretty good reporter with a decent legal mind. Yet it should be noted that with the recent Campos bailout, the Dallara chassis is not an option since it will be on the grid with a different team. That means they can't use the same chassis as another entry because that would be in violation of the FIA's sporting regulations.

Speaking of the sporting regulations, the FIA and FOM obviously are not on the same page. It sounds like USF1 was going off the interpretation of the Concorde Agreement which teams could miss races. However, the people that actually adjudicate the races, the FIA, have recently stated a team cannot.

If this is the case, then USF1 and Bernie's people were foolish not to notice this till now. People need to remember that the Concorde Agreement is a business contract between the teams and Bernie. Bernie's company (Formula One Management or FOM) is the commercial rights holder, not a rule making or legislative body.

The question for me and for USF1's future is what will the FIA do with this inconsistency? It depends how much of a influence or knowledge they had in the development of the Concord Agreement.

If the FIA was involved in the drafting of Concorde Agreement, then they violated their own regulations. If they were not, Bernie and FOM are in trouble for contractual inconsistencies between their contract with the FIA to run the commercial side of the sport and with the teams in the sport.

We might be in for some serious lawsuit action if USF1 wants to press its' case. I hope they do because the FIA and FOM needs to learn a lesson that they shouldn't write their contracts and legislation this poorly.

After all, it wouldn't be a Formula One season without some high drama court action.

Formula One Blog: USF1…a dream not worth saving

I agree with every single word.

Season Preview: Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro

 

Last year's results:

Wins: 1 (Belgium)

Poles: 0

Fastest Laps: 1 (Monaco)

Points: 70 (Fourth in the Constructors Championship)

Drivers: Kimi Räikkönen (48 points, 6th in the championship), Felipe Massa (22 points, 11th in the championship), Giancarlo Fisichella (8 points, 15th in the championship, only raced at Ferrari for final five round and zero points scored), Luca Badoer (zero points scored, last in the championship. Drove only for European and Belgian round of the championship.)

Changes:

Kimi Räikkönen - Out

Fernando Alonso - In

Felipe Massa - In - Return from injury

Gincarlo Fisichella - Out as driver, in as test driver

Grupo Santander - In as sponsors

Three Questions:

1: What will Alonso's impact be?

Ken Anderson provides a bit of clarity.

Ken Anderson spoke to the New York Times today about the woes at USF1. Worth a read but here are some highlights.

• Ken Anderson stated that the team would miss the first race and is trying to negotiate with the FIA to get an exemption. Anderson said in the interview, “We’re working with the F.I.A. to clarify how many races we can miss." However, the FIA has already issued a ruling earlier this month that missing even one race would constitute a breach in the sporting regulations. There is some ambiguity between what is in the Concorde Agreement and what is in the FIA sporting rules, but if the FIA says no.. it's bad news for USF1.

• The rumors of Windsor, Lopez, and Hurley leaving have been unfounded. Anderson stated that Lopez was free to negotiate with other teams. If Lopez was to leave, he would bring his eight million dollars with him. This is a Catch-22 for the team. USF1 needs Lopez's money to stabilized the team. However, Lopez's people aren't confident enough in the stability of the team to give them the money.

• The whole fiasco about the building being for sale is a bunch of hooey. USF1 has a five year lease with the building. The lease is sold as part of the building. As per American property rights law, the party that buys a property must respect the contract with the tenant. How problems between tenants and new owners vary from state to state. So nothing to see here. Matter in fact, the building has been for sale for several months now. The fact that it reach the light of day this week makes me think that someone that might be playing this stuff up to break the rather tenuous team. Bernie perhaps?

• I feel bad for Ken Anderson. He does sound like a real stand up guy. He had a dream and it is all in tatters. This has to be tough. I do wish he was a little more vocal because I think he does a better job with the press than Windsor because he just gives it straight without editorializing or going off subject.

• Was I a little early to say it was over? Probably. Outside of a miracle, I just don't see how this thing would be saved. If it is... then I will send four cases of my special home brew beer to Charlotte in congratulations and as a apology for ever doubting them.

Correction...

I got some feedback on the piece I wrote earlier about Peter Windsor and SpeedTV. Much of it was critical of me with the tone of the story and that I went over the line in criticism of Mr. Windsor. After reflecting a bit, that criticism is somewhat warranted.

I apologize for the tone of the piece. I went a bit too far in questioning the man's integrity. That is the sort of crap you see on nut bag political talk radio. I don't like reading that sort of stuff and feel bad that I delved into that in the anger stage of my seven steps of grieving.

Frankly, I kicked a guy when he was down and shouldn't of. That column could of waited a few days or weeks. It also could of been said in a better, more mature tone.

I know Mr. Windsor has a deep passion for this sport. He did try to set up a Formula One team to raise the profile of the sport in the United States. He had good intentions, even if it was shown now that he was incapable to carrying out the dream. I disagree with how he tried to set the team up and his public relations strategy, but calling question the man's integrity was a bit far.

For the record, I still don't want Peter Windsor to be the pitlane reporter at SpeedTV this year because of USF1. I just could of stated that belief in a better way and at a better time.

Dear SpeedTV

Dear SpeedTV,

Do not bring back Peter Windsor as a pitlane reporter this year.

I do not want to see him after leading up the failure of USF1. I don't want to be subjected to 19 weeks of excuses, whining, and crying about USF1. His crass use of American jingoism and bold face lying to American fans about USF1 has destroyed his credibility.

If he is on during the races, I will change over to a international feed. If he is on your website, I will not click to read.

He decided to go off and make this disaster known as USF1. He decided to ruin his credibility. He should have to live with the consequences of his actions.

He is not fit to serve on your network in a journalistic role.

Signed,

EVERYBODY