Bernie Ecclestone hit back at FOTA and Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo this week by reminding him that Ferrari gets more money from F1 than the other teams do. Is this fair?
Should Ferrari get more money than the other F1 teams?
- Yes (22%)
- No (75%)
- Don't know (3%)
Total Voters: 1,408
The teams are determined to force Ecclestone to hand over more money. Toyota boss John Howett, who accompanied Montezemolo to the cost-cutting discussions with Max Mosley, backed Montezemolo’s call for more money for the F1 teams:
I believe in the Champions’ League [European football tournament] it is upwards of 96-97% of revenues that is redistributed depending on where you finish in the championship, whereas at the moment we receive 50% of EBITDA [earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization]. So given the current circumstances people would like to reopen that discussion.”
However Alan Henry suggests Ecclestone will not accept any re-negotiation of teams’ earnings before 2013:
Bernie thinks that if 10 teams can’t get by sharing $450m of annual commercial rights revenue in addition to their sponsorship funding, then they’re probably not very good businessmen.
Presumably one of Ecclestone’s arguments will be that nine of the teams could have more money if Ferrari sacrificed the extra $80m they receive for, well, just being Ferrari. The extra money given to Ferrari is justified by them being the longest-standing F1 constructor, who have been in the sport since 1950.
Should Ferrari, as one of F1’s most famous teams and as much a part of the sport’s history as the Monaco Grand Prix, get extra money? Or should all the teams get equal funding regardless of how old they are? Does it give Ferrari an unfair advantage?
Cast your vote above and share your thoughts in the comments.