Conference oass::racers

    
    Well it looks like the F1 boys are really worried that people might
    like to watch CART races just as much as F1 races.  Maybe even more!
    
    Otherwise I cannot see what the problem would be.  The F1 races only
    occur once per year in any given location, so there certainly would be
    no problem with scheduling.
    
    It is possible that if FISA bans the sponsors and suppliers they could
    be cutting their own throats.
    
    No matter what happens, it will be interesting.  I for one say let the
    CART boys race.  If the F1 is as much better as Bernie and JMB say,
    then CART will not be successful and will be back in the good old USA
    and Canada very quickly.  Of course if Detroit and Long Beach are any
    indication, then F1 has a right to be worried!
    
    Bob J.

    This morning's USA Today had another article about the CART-F1 feud. 
    It pretty much reiterated what the articles in 812 say with one
    exception.  Goodyear said they would do business as usual with the CART
    boys if they race in Australia.  Leo Mehl of Goodyear stated that
    Bernie is a businessman and that he would not do anything rash like ban
    Goodyear.
    
    My guess is that if Bernie bans Goodyear, he cuts his own throat.  All
    it is going to take is a few sponsors like Goodyear to apply pressure
    and FISA will probably find a way to sanction the race.  Even if they
    don't sanction the race, I doubt that they will enforce any ban.
    
    Danny Sullivan stated that if there is a ban, there would probably be
    many law suits in the United States -- violation of right to work laws
    according to him.   ACCUS is expected to end up in the middle of the
    mess, but they said FISA might throw their wohole organization out.  In
    that case we have US against the rest of the racing world.
    
    Bob J.

    note the subtle point that Indy is sanctioned by FISA.  This could turn
    out to be round 2 in the Indy/USAC vs. CART wars.  A couple of
    interesting scenarios spring to mind, like CART races Surfers and FISA
    applies sanctions, then CART reschedules the season opener to go head
    to head with the USGP, both in Phoenix.  Any bets on the results?  Or
    after FISA applies sanctions and the first CART entry is refused by
    Indy, the anti-trust lawsuit is filed....  My own favorite fantasy is
    that the anti-trust lawsuit ends up including a motion for attachment
    of assets within US court jurisdiction to assure payment of possible
    judgements against FISA/FOCA and their individual members, motion filed
    late Friday afternoon before the USGP....
    
    Heck, if we're lucky this war could end with JMB on the skids!  Let's
    hope for the best !!!!
    

    Well its done.  According to the USA Today FIA voted 69-1 to not
    sanction the CART race in Australia.  The one NAY vote came from ACCUS
    (surprise, surprise). They also reiterated that they intend to enforce
    the ban on all people involved with the race -- drivers, owners,
    sponsors, suppliers.
    
    According to the paper Goodyear, Marlboro, Valvoline, and some other
    suppliers and sponsors plan to honor their committments to the race.
    
    ACCUS has called together a meeting of their constituents which include
    CART, USAC, NASCAR, IMSA, and NHRA.
    
    FISA also reaffirmed that it is planning to go ahead with its
    international oval series.  The CART president, John Frasco, said that
    it is ironic that they are infringing on CARTs turf, but they won't
    allow the reverse.
    
    It is going to become interesting.  I want to see the reaction of Ron
    Dennis when Bernie Ecclestone informs him that because of the Marlboro
    and Goodyear involvement in the Australian CART race he will not be
    allowed to run in F1.  Actually, what happens to F1 without Goodyear?
    
    In any case it looks like there is going to be some court cases that
    will test all of this out.  There is little doubt that FIA has the
    authority to not sanction a race and also to ban anybody/organization
    they want.  After all they almost banned there former world champion
    for detrimental remarks.
    
    What about Goodyear?  Lets say, for the sake of argument, that they are
    afraid of the ban and decide to pull out of CART.  They will be sued by
    the CART teams who have contracts and the bad publicity would cost them
    a lot.
    
    I just wish everyone would quit being so emotional and work out a
    solution.  There must be a face saving way for FISA to sanction this
    race.  At the very least they could turn their back and let an
    unsanctioned race occur.
    
    Bob J. 

Just have CART pay Bernie his $1 mil 'protection' fee and I bet he'll crawl back
in his hole.

Dave

    I would think, based on the 1979/80 US Federal court rulings, that the
    only way Indianapolis could ban CART entrants (all of whom have active
    USAC Gold Crown licenses) is through a rules change for the 1991 race
    that would make the current National Championship cars obsolete. Any
    such change would violate USAC's commitment to run the race using cars
    equivalent to those that ran in 1990, and would put such hard-luck USAC
    stalwarts as George Snider and Gary Bettenhausen on the trailer. 
    Ironically, the CART boys would be the only ones with the technical
    wherewithal to regroup and run a compliant car in the seven months
    remaining.  And a court might think a rules change that requires a very
    short reaction time would be an unfair requirement for doing business
    (ref: restraint of trade, restrictions on interstate commerce, maybe
    even RICO.)  It seems that FISA can't use Indy as a lever without
    IMS/USAC management destroying its own race (and money machine).  Tony
    George is not very bright, but he ain't stupid.

    Having said that, if FISA kicks ACCUS out, IMS may seek to join FISA
    and become part of the oval track series (which probably will have only
    one race a year until 1993 at the earliest).  Under this scenario, of
    course, with the exception of A.J. Foyt, who is very close to the
    Hulman family, not one of the major CART stars will show up at
    Indianapolis, and the quality of the cars that do run will be suspect
    at best (ref: Mr. Donnelly at Jerez.)   

    I hope CART takes up Bruce's idea to reschedule the Phoenix Indycar
    race to the same weekend as the F1 fiasco.  And I hope Goodyear gets
    banned for supporting the Gold Coast race, which should prove
    interesting for McLaren, Ferrari, Benetton, etc.
    
    War is hell, but combat's a mother.

    In this morning's USA Today, Bernie Ecclestone was quoted as saying
    that the only way CART could be considered in anything is if they
    abandon the Australian race.  If they do that, he MIGHT consider
    letting them participate in the new oval series.
    
    Tony George, judging by his quotes, is leaning towards FISA and is
    hoping that CART will back down on the Australian race.  He said,
    however, that F1 people would not be able to race in the 1991 race
    because of previous committments.   What I want to know is if the F1
    people don't race and the CART people are banned, Who will race?  The
    Indy 500  would have all of the excitement of the replacement football
    games.
    
    Personally I think it is about time that someone really challenges
    Bernie, so I hope CART races in Australia.  There is definitely room in
    the world for 2 sanctioning bodies.  It might even result in lower
    admissions to the races as each group is trying to attract spectators! 
    If CART backs down again like they did on the Japanese race last year,
    they will never be able to expand their scope.
    
    Bob J.

.7>    Personally I think it is about time that someone really challenges
.7>    Bernie, so I hope CART races in Australia.  [...]
.7>    If CART backs down again like they did on the Japanese race last year,
.7>    they will never be able to expand their scope.
    
    yes, that's why I think they'll fight this battle.  My own feelings
    about challenging Bernie are the same as above, which is why I hope
    they end up battling rather than compromising.  I'm afraid that when
    push comes to shove Bernie and JMB will realize that they're
    overmatched (as I believe they are) and will find some face-saving
    compromise that will be accepted by CART to avoid the cost of a fight. 
    On the other hand, with the prior performance of JMB especially in the
    area of good sense overriding ego :-) I have grounds to hope that there
    will be no such easy way out.
    
    I too want to see F1 (trying to) ban Goodyear!	:-)

    
    	re. 6
    
    What does CART need with a world oval series anyway?  If they loose
    INDY, and vice versa, it's trouble for both.  JMB and Bernie will run
    a fiasco of a world oval series without US oval meisters involved.
    Look at the botch they made of WSPC and World Rally (just MHO).
    
    Nate

    What will happen if Goodyear are out?
    They will all run Pirelli. Bernie and JMB are tough cookies
    Buy Pirelli stock
    
    ..............<42`-`o>

.10>    What will happen if Goodyear are out?
.10>    They will all run Pirelli. Bernie and JMB are tough cookies
.10>    Buy Pirelli stock
    
    Bernie and JMB are a**holes.
    
    What will happen when Goodyear has contracts with those teams, and
    Goodyear is prepared to honor its commitment but the teams try to run
    Pirelli?  Not sure it's so easy to change as you indicate.  It's one
    thing to deal with a driver contract, where it is one individual
    person and trying to enforce the contract might result in an unwilling
    performance (with consequent questions about competitive fire), so
    there's not such a problem with breaking the contract (or a buyout from
    the favored team) with penalties possible to help ease the pain.  It's
    quite another to face a battery of corporate attorneys from somebody
    like Goodyear where they're motivated to prevent a competitor like
    Pirelli from getting an advantage.  Least it seems that way to me.
    
    The fur will certainly fly, if this silliness plays out to the bitter end!

    Bernie and Balestre are primary examples of prima donna mentality. If
    they are so afraid of CART why not try to merge with them. F1 could use
    the American Market, and CART could definitely use the World market. I
    am not going to spend time postulating on how this merge can be done,
    but it is doable. 

    If it comes down to a fight, F1 can do very well without American
    sponsors: in the case of Marlboro they would rather ditch CART, and
    stay with F1 for sheer economics  (more smokers in Europe and Japan),
    in the case of Goodyear they know they are not the only tire company,
    and will have to make a tough choice: stay American, or become Global.

    Both CART and F1 have to realize that they are not mutually exclusive,
    and that they do appeal to very similar market segments, so why not
    merge for the sake of global economics. 

    Who will prevail? Hopefully good business sense and not prima donnas.
    
    SMS - Un' appassionato Ferrarista
    
    FORZA MAGICHE ROSSE!!!

    Re: Pirelli replacing Goodyear

    Not a chance -- Pirelli has said they do not have the technical
    capacity to support more teams than they do today.  Michelin is a
    better bet, but is not yet ready to go into mass production with F1
    tires and may not be for a couple of years.  

    Of course, since Goodyear F1 tires are made in USA, Goodyear could
    petition the International Trade Commission to ban Pirelli and Michelin
    tires from the US, or at least slap a duty on them (like 100%), in
    retaliation for the closure of the European racing tire market to US
    manufacturers.

    RE: .13
    
    And start a new round of trade wars !?! Do you think that the
    International Trade Commission is willing to risk that just because
    Goodyear will not be allowed to mount a few racing tires!?!
    
    America is grand, but ain't stupid.
    
    SMS 

    Re: last

    What trade war?  Michelin will roll over and play dead, like the good
    businessmen they are, and ask FISA to "rethink" their decision for the
    good of the sport. (Executive Decision-making 101: prestige of
    providing sneakers to 26 arrogant, effete prima donnas vs. major loss
    of market share in the multi-billion dollar US market, including tires
    mounted on cars imported into the US).  If the ITC finds that <some
    entity> prevented Goodyear from participating in the (magnificent
    wonderful open) European market, they and the President are REQUIRED by
    Federal law to impose sanctions, including extra duties on like
    products from offending nations.

    Michelin may be French, but they ain't stupid.

    re: .15
    
    The catch is that Goodyear will still be allowed to sell in Europe,
    they just won't be able to ...

    > ... provide sneakers to 26 arrogant, effete prima donnas

    Goodyear could argue that they are not getting fair marketing exposure
    (so can a whole bunch of other companies), but with our economical woes
    (yes I am American too), and our staggering trade deficit, compounded
    with the opportunities that a consolidated European market in 1992 can
    offer, I am very skeptical that the ITC would consider imposing any
    tariffs on European tires.

    Again, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em
    
    SMS - Forza Magiche Rosse!!

    re .- the past few
    
    Right, so Goodyear simply petitions the ITC on the basis of unfair
    trade practices in the area of racing tires.  Not sure if the reprisals
    mandated by law are limited to the area of bias, I believe not because
    the fundamental motivation behind the law was areas like DRAMs where
    the Japanese cartels pay lip service to equal market access while
    discriminating blatantly.  I think the idea of the law was to *REQUIRE*
    use of a large enough club to dissuade such b.s. and this case just
    might fit.
    
    Thing is, the bureaucractic redtape would hang it up forever, but the
    risk of an adverse ruling just might induce the Europeans to look for a
    way out of the dilemna.  US participation in the European marketplace
    would not be the only issue, European participation in the US
    marketplace is certainly something they wouldn't want to give up!

    One thing that has not been mentioned is that Goodyear not only
    supplies tires to F1, but they supply about 75% of all the racing
    tires for all road racing in Europe. If Bernie and JMB want to play
    these games with CART they will be commiting political and financial
    suicide for F1 and themselves. There has been talk in F1 fan circles
    that someone should put a contract out on Bernie and JMB. Maybe someone
    from Brazil would take up the offer. Motorsport racing would be the
    better for it if someone did.(ha ha)
    
    FUN HOG
    
    

    re: .18

    Suicide ?!?

    Dunlop, Pirelli, Michelin, Kleber, Bridgestone, Yokohama ...

    There is too many tire companies out there that would love the
    opportunity to get into racing, without the worry of having to
    compete against Goodyear. 

    Goodyear does make the best racing tires around, and the European teams
    would have a tough time finding sponsor for, and adapting to new tires.
    Some teams will inevitably falter, but in the long run most of them
    will survive. 

    Goodyear is a mammoth but it is not above FIA. Is Coke above the
    Olympic Committee, or FIFA (World Cup Soccer)? Is Rossignol above FIS?
    No. Coke wants to appeal to Olympic fans, and not vice versa.

    Tires are important but they don't make the cars,  the drivers and the
    fans. Will the absence of Goodyear impact significantly the number of
    F1 followers (Japan, South America, and Europe)? I believe it will not.
    Consequently other tire companies are going to consider  seriously the
    marketing opportunities offered by such a large following.

    The problem in this dispute is the inability of Bernie and Balestre to
    realize the advantages of a F1-CART merge: CART wouldn't step on FIA
    toes to expand beyond North America, and F1 would finally get a real
    shot  at the US market. Imagine the thrill of having the best of the
    best battling together?

    It'd be awsome.

    SMS - Sempre prime le Rosse! Il resto? Dettagli.

    I doubt that any of the tire companies mentioned in .19 can match
    Goodyear's resources, expertise and experience.  There have been some
    cases in recent history where tires were introduced and used for racing
    but then withdrawn because they proved unsafe - how much more likely will
    this be with second-tier suppliers?  And don't argue they are second
    tier, the Goodyear market share defines everyone else to be second tier
    simply because of the difference in magnitude of their effort.  And how
    much worse, when the latest tire design has to be withdrawn when it
    fails during first day practice and the supplier has to air freight
    enough skins for the whole field overnight?  Not only can Goodyear do
    that, they have done it.  Could Kleber or Dunlop or any of those
    others?  So the other possibility is to stabilize tire design, to avoid
    the risk of such problems - is this consistent with the goals and
    philosophy of F1?  I think not...
    
.19>                          -< Is Goodyear above FIA? >-
    
    The point is not whether Goodyear is above the FIA, it's whether the
    FIA is a bunch of conniving, low-down dirty-dealing scum.  I submit
    that at present there is sufficient evidence to conclude such is the
    case.  One major point is the inducement of CART to join ACCUS by
    assuring approval of races outside the US, and then going back on that
    promise.  
    
    Is the FIA above honor?

    Wasn't Goodyear bought out several years ago by a Japanese corporation?
    Or was it just an attempted takeover?
    
    I have a close friend who recently retired after 40+ years with them
    and I remember talking about it with him.[Nice guy too, while he was
    still with them he provided me with a blimp ride and as many Goodyear
    racing caps as I wanted].
    
    I'll ask him next week about it,
    
    Bob

>> The point is not whether Goodyear is above the FIA, it's whether the
    FIA is a bunch of conniving, low-down dirty-dealing scum.  I submit
    that at present there is sufficient evidence to conclude such is the
    case.  One major point is the inducement of CART to join ACCUS by
    assuring approval of races outside the US, and then going back on that
    promise.  
    
    Is the FIA above honor?
>>

FIA are doing as they always said 

"Run races without our approval and we will ban you and your suppliers"

They are true to their word perhaps you dont like the words.

honeure and honour but perhaps not honor

		Derek

.22>  FIA are doing as they always said 

.22>  "Run races without our approval and we will ban you and your suppliers"
    
    The FIA also reportedly told CART "join ACCUS and we'll approve your
    international dates" and now have gone back on that.
    
    
    The top headline in last week's NSSN read "FISA Aussie Arm Sued". 
    Let's see how the courts decide (if they don't dodge the issue).

    re: .20

    You are right that the "second tier" tire companies do not have the
    racing outfit of Goodyear, but with them out of the picture, the second
    tier tire companies will only have to compete on who gets first through
    the learning curve.

    If you abhor the notion that other tire companies have the means to 
    to learn, and perhaps even get better then Goodyear, I suggest you
    buy a 50 pound punching bag, and let your frustrations out.

    Latest on "Operation Indy Shield" from USA Today:
    
    Burdie Martin, head of ACCUS, says their legal council believes FISA
    can be held liable for damages under US and Australian
    restraint-of-trade, antitrust, and right-to-work laws if FISA bans CART
    drivers, sponsors, etc.
    
    ACCUS is just a bystander, says Martin.  The member clubs (i.e. CART)
    have to come to terms with FISA.  Thanks, Burdie.
    
    FISA under pressure from Goodyear and Marlboro, among others, to get on
    the clue bus and rethink their position.
    
    Three potential compromises have been identified:
    
    	1) CART runs the Surfer's Paradise race as scheduled but doesn't 
    	   pay points
    
    	2) CART runs the race but splits TV revenue with FISA
    
    	3) CART agress to limit any further expansion outside North America
    	   to one site each in: Australia, Japan, Brazil, and Europe
    
    I bet dogbreath Ecclestone will settle for No. 2, as it fits in with
    FISA's shakedown racket mentality: CART pays FISA some protection money
    and Dwarf & Co. agree to go away quietly.

In any event, keep to the facts

    
    Thanks for keeping us posted George!  I concur, pursuing option #2 will
    probably break the impasse.  If CART is good for their word than option
    #3 ought to be acceptable to them as well.
    
    Your opinions and insights are always amusing.  Keep them coming.
    
    Nate

    re .25, comments about ACCUS sitting on the sidelines (.25> "THANKS
    BURDIE").
    
    ACCUS is caught in the middle really.  Strickly speaking they probably
    have to support FISA or violate their status as a National Sporting
    Authority, even if they sympathize with and would rather support their
    member club (CART).  By sitting it out ACCUS is probably taking the
    best course of action available to them.

    There is an article in this week's Autoweek that discusses the state of
    affairs between CART and FISA.  That article seems to say that Tony
    George holds the trump card (Indy 500) in this dispute.
    
    That article seems to think that CART will have to genuflect before
    FISA and give up the Gold Coast GP in Australia in order to be involved
    in the new international oval series.  They also think that CART would
    be hard pressed to deal with the FISA in court because of the money
    available to FISA.
    
    Boy do I hope they are wrong!  It sure seems to me that there is some
    big money in CART and that they could come up with some excellent
    lawyers.
    
    Bob J.
    

.29>    They also think that CART would
.29>    be hard pressed to deal with the FISA in court because of the money
.29>    available to FISA.
    
    I'd think that both CART and FISA have deep enough pockets that money
    will not be a constraint on legal talent.  The major caveat on that, 
    probably more for CART than FISA, would be that the case needs to be
    strong enough and the amount at issue large enough to make it good
    business to fight.  In this case, I think it is.
    
    Looking at this in the context of history, I think CART may've picked
    this fight, and on turf chosen to be favorable to them.  I'd say that
    the history of CART vs. IMS and CART vs. FIA may reduce the value of the
    Tony George trump card, and any IMS/FIA alliance might serve as
    incentive for CART to fight more ferociously.
    
    If I were judging form in order to place a bet, I'd rate the two or
    three sides as:
    	CART - a bunch of savvy hardnosed successful practical businessmen.
    	FISA - some opportunistic irrational egomanical extortionists.
    	IMS - a sheltered family preserve run by an untested younger generation.
    As a betting proposition I'd say one of those stands out as far better
    than the others.  Let's hope I'm right!

 Autosport basically put down the basis for a restraint of trade
suit that could be prosecuted in the European courts. 

	I now think FISA/FIA may be corrected but only if CART or
perhaps their supplier or driver bring a European action

    
    Reports now suggest that FISA will let the CART race in Australia
    happen if...
    
    1.) No points are paid.
    2.) F1 and F3000 teams/drivers are allowed to participate.
    
    That's just great.  Hey Bernie, how about letting some CART and ARS
    teams compete in F1?  And oh, by the way, you can't pay any points for
    the USGP at Pheonix either.  There, that ought to go down well.
    
    William Stokkan, CART Chairman, (who was at the OZGP) is supposed to be
    holding a press conference sometime this week on the topic.
    
    I think North American motorsports ought to cede from being invovled
    with the FIA.  They do us more harm than good and I think we could get
    along just fine without them, as they could us.
    
    Nate

    National Speed Sport News reported in the most recent issue (arrived
    yesterday) that SCCA workers might staff the Surfers Paradise CART
    event if there are not enough trained Australian workers available. 
    The story made the point that this would put the SCCA in conflict with
    FISA also, and went on to discuss the effects that this would have on
    FISA events in North America.  NSSN suggested that the consequences of
    this would seem to require banning SCCA workers from FISA events, thus
    effectively forcing the delisting of most if not all North American
    events presently listed with FISA.  As a result, FISA would have no
    race events in North America, the single largest motorsports market in
    the world.  Also would put additional pressure on Tony George to
    distance himself from FISA (I didn't see how this directly resulted,
    but I can see it increasing pressure all around).  
    
    It was not mentioned in the story, but my devious mind concludes that
    this also delivers a message about the event being possible even
    without support from Australian workers....
    
    As an SCCA member and worker, I have two comments:  (1) RIGHT ON! 
    and (2) where do I sign up?