Silverstone rumours.......

[Knowlesy]

Right, this is very inconclusive, but I'll say it anyways........

I was on another forum before and one of the members works at Silverstone as a flag marshall. He says that the BRDC have been given a provisional calendar for 2004 and Silverstone isn't on it.

Let's hope this is just scare mongering from Bernie.....

[903cc]

It would be tragic if true. However looks like ciggys again. Isn't the GB GP one of the few to run without the smokes on the side. I think this is Bernies real motive.

[Knowlesy]

Yeah, that does seem to be the problem, though the "poor facilities" smokescreen does seem to be thrown up a lot.

[Tristan]

Silverstone's unusual because, for me anyway, I'm not entirely convinced this is a ciggy thing. For once, I think Bernie's motives genuinely ARE to do with the facilities. But nevertheless, I don't belive it for a second. Sabre-rattling. Surely??

[Adam43]

Canada was dropped because of the Cigerette sponsorship. That was never hidden. If this is the reason behind the potential dropping of Silverstone I don't think anyone would hide it.

Besides at least one cigerette company can get away with still advertising at the track for Silverstone.

If it was the reason to drop another non-cigerette race then why not the one German GP that can't run it? Is the rule that the first race will be fag-free, but the second can have fag sponsorship? Also what are the rules for circuit advertisign in Germany? Britain does allow it (sort of).

[Ian-S]

I seem to remember that it was mentioned previously that the Silverstone, French and German races were the only safe ones because the "agreement" to run without fag advertising went back further than the argument with the EU, somewhere back in the 80's or 90's.

Don't quote me on that though, it is 2.30!

Personally I cannot wait to see Bernie fall flat on his face over these "problems".

[903cc]

I think you can run cigarette sponsership in the German GP not the European GP due to different legislation. I am not sure on that point but I think I read that on here last time it was discussed.

It does make you wonder though with Bernie cutting races. Maybe the teams are pressing him harder now the deadline is not far away from the total ban. The ciggy companies may be pushing for more exposure.

At silverstone what was the cigarette company? Wasn't it Marlboro clothing they were advertsing?

[Super Tourer]

Although with Silverstone the FIA have an apparent raft of issues, that IMO they seem to ignore elsewhere, I think tobacco advertising is the underlying issue.

I reckon that Bernie et al, have worked out that the whole new breed of non-tobacco sponsor that was supposed to replace the cig brands, either won't (or can't) justify the huge sums the F1 teams are asking, hence if the fags were banned there would be a huge void to fill - which it's likely the car makers themselves would have to fill, making them even keener to either extract a much higher precentage of the F1 revenue, or go the GPWC route.

Of the F1 teams, only Williams have been recently successful in attracting non-tobaccco sponsors, both their latest sponsors appear to have relatively minor branding on the car, so we could suggest that if BMW were to reduce their support (for example) - they would probably be insufficent to fill the gap.

It seems that any circuit that cannot display tobacco branding on the cars is fair game. The teams are resistant to an ever increasing number of races, whilst Bernie is courting countries far and wide that want to build tracks and host GP's - all the ones I have seen mentioned would have no issue with tobacco advertising.

Reducing the European presence on the GP calendar gets Bernie and the FIA out of the EU regulators sights, whilst justifying this to the teams by offering them new markets, and potential new sponsors in the huge middle east/ Chinese marketplace.

All in all, I can only see Monza and Monaco as guaranteed, rock solid fixtures on the GP calendar, with potentially a couple of 'European GP's' alternating around some of the other tracks. If we take a look at a theoretical future GP calendar it could be:

Australia
Brazil
Malaysia
Bahrain
China
Russia
Japan
USA x 2 (Indy and Long Beach ?)
Mexico - I seen that mentioned as a likely venue.
Monaco
Monza
A Euro GP
3/4 other Euro circuits

Which is 13 already, which leaves the rest of the circuits potentially squabbling over another 3 or 4 places. Of these you could argue that circuits that still allow tobacco advertising ( Hungary for example) will be first in line.

I'm not saying this is what will happen, but it's easy to see the potential, and with straws already in the wind over Canada and Spa, this could form the calendar in say 4 or 5 years time.

I would hate to see the British GP axed, but unless the BRDC, MSA, etc, etc fight their corner ( possibly with government help) we could end up in as part of a pitching process for the few remaining slots on the calendar.

[903cc]

Super Tourer your logic I can follow logic. Add Australia to the endangered list

[Barny]

Spa is back next year

[Jay]

The USA will have the same tobacco advertising laws Europe will have in 2 years as well...

really, Tobacco advertising is over, and F1 as well as all other motorsports have to get used to that.

[kristof14]

Marlboro still adverstise at Silverstone due to a clause that allowed existing deals to continue, as soon as they miss a race they won't be allowed to advertise on the trackside.

[Sato san]

Originally posted by Ian-S
Personally I cannot wait to see Bernie fall flat on his face over these "problems".

yep , im with you all the way there Ian !

[RWC]

For anyone who doesn't know all the issues yet.....
A couple of years back bernie went on his normal shopping spree to find some other track to run the brit GP.As usual with bern it had allmost nothing to do with improving f1 with a better GP and allmost everything to do with money.
In a rare case of bernie losing out,the proposed GP at brands hatch failed to get town planning permission(or sumsuch)so bern HAD to crawl back to silverstone on their terms!!!(whooohooooo!!!YES.Gotchya ya B*ST*ARD!)

Now the brit GP is actually run by the octagon group who's contract says that THEY are to pay for any work to the circuit required to run formula one races.
Now bernie comes up with his 'brilliant' plan...Say he wants(notice the phrase 'he wants') a new pit complex or he will drop the british GP.Now who should pay for this idea of bernies??? Well IF one were to agree it was a good idea(HA!)
then the contract says octagon* must pay.
So why is bernie (and MAX!!who is supposed to be impartial??) going round saying it's all the british racing drivers club's fault and that they should accept this great "deal" and pay for it themselves?????
Yes,top marks to anyone who answered "because bernie is a bad loser" or worse


*At some point in the recent past,octagon changed their name to 'brands hatch spot and leisure'...just normal company stuff