|
TEAM
PRINCIPALS: Flavio BRIATORE (Renault), Ron DENNIS (McLaren
Mercedes), Colin KOLLES (Midland), Jean TODT (Ferrari)
Q: A question
to all of you: we understand that this weekend is going to be a crucial
one regarding the early implementation of the 2008 engine rules; what
are your thoughts about this? Will it happen?
Jean TODT: As everybody knows, we had a Formula One Commission
meeting and over the meeting, it was agreed that the decision concerning
the future engine rules would be taken at the end of the weekend here in
Magny-Cours. Whether I’m optimistic about that, I honestly don’t
know. I know it’s very difficult to make everybody take the same line.
We have seen that, that’s why very often it’s up to the FIA to make
the final decision. The options are simple: either we find an agreement
– what we have been calling the Indianapolis agreement for the engine,
which would be implemented from January ’07 - or we don’t find an
agreement and in this case we will follow the ’08 technical rules,
from ’08, and unless other things happen, it will be the status quo
for the rules until the end of next year, and the implementation of the
rules from January ’08 with the new Concorde Agreement and the new
technical rules.
Flavio BRIATORE: I pretty much agree with Jean Todt. We had a
meeting at Indianapolis and at the time everybody was in agreement.
I’m very disappointed that there have been movements because for us it
was very good to have the frozen engine, it was really really perfect.
The cost of the Indianapolis agreement was quite important, we’re
talking about 14 or 15 million more. I don’t understand why we need to
spend this kind of money because, sure, we won’t see this on the
track. But to have an agreement from everybody, to have everybody
together, and Ferrari, Mercedes, BMW and Renault, everything, we made
the effort to agree at Indianapolis and after that, we had the Formula
One Commission again and a deadline was made for this Sunday and let’s
see what happens. Now it’s only Friday. If something happens, it
happens. As Jean said, we have an agreement for 2008, for 2007 it looks
like everybody will spend an enormous amount of money to come back in
2008 at square one. That’s completely stupid. But anyway, we have
three more days and we will probably find a solution.
Colin KOLLES: Well, my feelings are basically as Flavio said,
it’s complete nonsense to spend huge amounts of money in 2007, and I
think the proposals which have been made, especially from the
independent teams are more than fair. We are not asking for a free
engine supply. We are just asking for an engine supply at reasonable
prices, to secure the future of Formula One. It’s very simple.
Q: Are you confident an agreement will come this weekend?
CK: To be honest, it doesn’t matter for us. We are happy in any
case. If they are not coming to agreement, we will run V10 engines next
year so we are happy with this. And if they find an agreement, we will
have a good V8 engine, so we are happy, whichever way it goes. I think
that the four other manufacturers won’t be so happy so they had better
make their minds up.
Ron DENNIS: First of all, everything that Jean and Flavio said is
correct. There is a common desire for all the people who manufacture
engines to be aligned. Their alignment is so close that it’s an easily
resolved issue, which can comfortably be resolved over the weekend.
I’m not at all concerned about coming to a common position on engine
regulations. Of course there is a desire of the FIA to then have
affordable engines and again, I think there is a solution to that. But
I’m not convinced that in my own mind, that even if those two
solutions are found, that other people won’t take the opportunity of a
unanimous vote to try and seek other commercial objectives, so I’m a
little bit cynical about whether we can actually find a final resolution
or not on a unanimous agreement, but I do think we can find an agreement
on engine technical regulations and price. I don’t want to differ with
Colin here, but the dispensation for V10 engines was for one team and it
was very carefully documented, it’s not automatic that everyone else
can use them, but that’s maybe a question that’s relatively
immaterial because, as he said, the objective is for everybody to be on
the same pace. It’s more than possible, as Flavio said, for us to
resolve this by the end of the weekend, and the consequence of not
resolving it is more cost for everybody. There’s no one for whom it is
not going to cost more money.
Q: Ron, how did the Montoya thing happen? How come he stood down? Can
you just go through what happened?
RD: I’m not going to give you phenomenal detail but the first
thing I should correct is that Juan Pablo is fully contracted through to
the end of the year, and if we so choose, he will test and race again,
so that is at our option, nobody else’s. There is plenty in the press
that differs with that fact. The way that it unfolded: clearly Juan
Pablo has struggled at times and I feel that the team has always been
totally supportive of him and continues to be supportive of Juan Pablo.
You might find that difficult to believe in the circumstances but we
are. A few races ago, we had a conversation that was based on his desire
to continue with McLaren, his desire to stay in Formula One and we came
to the clear understanding that it was immaterial whether his objective
was to stay in Formula One and whether the team would keep him, or
whether he would go to another team. The objective, the best way to
achieve that was to have the best results over the latter part of the
season and that’s the way we move forward and I felt that if he was
focused on having the best end of season, then a) to use my exact words,
it would be easier for me to take a decision in the team, or b) that it
would be easier and better for him… he would get better offer, so the
common objective was ‘let’s get the best out of the balance of the
season.’ Obviously, that objective was somewhat changed when he
decided that in 2007 he would race in NASCAR, so then our objectives
became different, I think. The appropriate course of action for the team
was to let the whole thing cool off and let him sit and think about the
circumstances that surrounded his involvement in the team until we had a
very common objective for the remaining races.
Q: How long is Pedro likely to race for? Could Lewis Hamilton or Gary
Paffett drive?
RD: Highly unlikely. Their programmes are well mapped and their
programmes didn’t include racing a Grand Prix car this season, so
highly unlikely. It’s more likely that Pedro will continue in the car
but we are a team who decides how the drivers are utilised and those
drivers are all contracted to us and we chose to go down the path
we’ve gone down.
Q: Obviously you weren’t expecting to replace Juan Pablo, so it’s
still a case of never say never, presumably.
RD: Well, they are the highest paid employees of all of our
racing teams but they are just that.
Q: Colin, there may be no third drivers next year. Will that save you
money or cost you money if Friday becomes more of a test day?
CK: We agreed on this. I think it is a good agreement because I
think we can still use test drivers on the Friday testing date. At the
end of the day it will be a saving of money for us.
Q: And regarding the future of the team, is it possible the team will
be sold? What is the situation? You have a big event in Holland in
August, don’t you?
CK: Wait and see. The big event we have in Holland in August has
nothing to do with what will happen with the team. It is very important
that the team moves forward and that the decision that has to be made is
related to the future of the team.
Q: Flavio, we saw Ferrari were very competitive in the last race. How
worried are you about that?
FB: I don’t worry about our competitors Ferrari. It is quite clear
now to the end of the season and we will see the developments. Sure,
Indianapolis wasn’t fantastic for us, but we still have some points in
front and Michelin was very conservative there. They have done a
fantastic job for us up to now and for one race we had some problems.
Now we have a fight with Ferrari and let’s see what happens to the end
of the season. It is important for us to be on the podium and to take
points at every race – and, you know, it was not a complete disaster
because we took points as well (in Indianapolis) I mean if it is a
disaster when you take points then I think it is quite a normal
disaster. We are still some points in front in the constructors with a
big advance and Fernando I think still has 19 points in front of
Michael. So, for the moment, it is Ferrari who need to push against us
and we can defend our position. We are used to that. We did it with
McLaren. Let’s see what happens.
Q: What are your feelings about the Friday ‘test day’?
FB: I feel good. It is the right way to go and now we need to decide
to be much more severe about the testing during the season because we
don’t want Friday testing on top of everything we have already. This
is really for the team managers to sit together – and the fact that
next year we have only one tyre-supplier makes it much easier for
everybody. We need to think about being more efficient and have a very
severe reduction of tests and that is the right way to go.
JT: You know next year we will see exactly what are the
consequences. It is a very important change. Sometimes you decide for
some changes and by the time you realise you don’t get what you
wanted. In my opinion, it will not go in the direction of saving money,
but will increase the costs. Think – you will have three hours’
testing with two cars in other countries outside Europe like Australia,
China, Japan and it will make a lot of extra cost. It changes the
philosophy for the engine because the first idea was to use one engine
for about 1,400 kms and now even if it is true to say that we reached an
agreement to use one engine for 1,200 kms minimum the whole running will
become different . In ‘08 we were talking about technical and sporting
regulations and it is already inside rules that it will be a maximum of
30,000 kms of testing so probably those kilometres will be taken away
from the 30,000 and so we shall have to see how we organise ourselves
and I think you need to make a rational calculation to see exactly what
will be the final issue but in my opinion so far it will go in direction
of spending more money, but true that it will give more to see for the
spectators on Friday. You could see this morning most of the cars except
the third cars which will not be allowed in future they were not out for
the first hour, second hour was less, so it will be more spectacular
Friday for the organisers and for the public.
Q: How accurate is a newspaper report that says Ferrari have put an
extra 20 million into development for this year?
JT: It’s bullshit
FB: It’s too low!
JT: Don’t make me answer to third-rate speculations. It is
absolutely not true.
Q: Has the rate of development increased?
JT: I wish it would. That would mean every time I would find a few
more tenths. We try, but everyone is trying. It is a tough championship
with strong competitors and we know as much as we can within our
allocated budget. But you know, sometimes, to sell you need to invent
things, so I hope this has increased sales. I am talking about those who
issue the news.
QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR
Q: (Andrea Cremonesi - La Gazetta dello Sport) Can Colin clarify his
decision about taking a V10 for next season if there is no agreement and
Mr Todt, I didn’t understand if you will use a free engine for Friday
and the engine for the Grand Prix you will use just for Saturday and
Sunday?
CK: Well, obviously we don’t want to use a V10 engine, but the
four manufacturers obviously want to have a change of regulations which
would impose for us higher costs and we are all talking of recucing
costs and not spending money so these four prefer to spend one billion
in 2007 and then go back to the 2006 homologated engine and this is
nonsense for me instead of helping and giving benefit to independent
teams of maybe 75 million. We don’t want to use v10 engines. We just
want an agreement and we have been asked for an agreement. We are not
seeking to get or to negotiate or get free engines or cheap engines. We
just want stability and security for the future so it is very simple
actually. It is the other manufacturers, especially four of them, who
want to change and who want to spend money.
Q: And which engine?
CK: Obviously there is a Cosworth V10 engine.
JT: At the moment, a race weekend is Friday, Saturday and Sunday
and you need to use the engine for two race weekends. If the race
weekend is becoming for one engine for two Grands Prix for Saturday and
Sunday, its obvious it will be less mileage for this engine because for
the three hours on Friday you will put a different engine. What has been
decided on and voted by the Formula One Commission is that if there is
evidence that the engine has not been used for 1,200 kms during the two
race weekends then it will have to be used for the following Friday to
finish the mileage.
Q: (Dan Knutson - National Speed Sport News) Ron, while Juan is on
his leave of absence, is he permitted to race in Nascar?
RD: No. He is a contracted McLaren driver and it will stay that way
until the end of his contract unless there is some other commercial
arrangement between ourselves and the Nascar team or Juan himself.
Q: (Salvatore Zanca - Associated Press) Ron, do you envisage Juan
coming back to Formula One?
RD: More than possible.
Q: With what team.
RD: With our team.
Q: Are we talking about this year?
RD: It is possible.
Q: (Andrea Cremonesi - La Gazetta dello Sport) Don’t you allow him
to do any tests?
RD: No. There is a conflict of sponsors, advertising campaigns and a
whole raft or reasons why that is not a practical proposition.
Q: (Heinz Prueller - ORF) Ron is the contract to the end of the
season or year?
RD: Why on earth would I want to tell you that? It is a contractual
detail and all our terms are completely confidential. Obviously it
exceeds the racing season.
|
