He has been in charge of Formula One for 30 years, a career that’s made him a fortune. Now 81, he speaks candidly about daughter Tamara’s TV show (oh dear), daughter Petra’s wedding (yes, it did cost £12m) and the art of spending money wisely

As a doting father, Bernie Ecclestone supplied his elder daughter with the money to fund the recent purchase of her £45m London house. But the Formula One supremo could not bring himself to sit all the way through a single episode of the free-spending 27-year-old’s recent three-part Channel 5 reality show, Tamara Ecclestone: Billion $$ Girl.

“I watched one of them,” he says with a despairing sigh. “I don’t know if it was the first or the second. Not all of it.”

He frowns at the memory of what he saw, and explains how Tamara had ignored his advice. “I told her: ‘If you portray yourself really as you are, it’s wonderful. But they aren’t going to let you. They’re going to wind you up, for sure. There’ll be things you’d rather they didn’t show that they’ll show, and all the things you’d rather they showed, they won’t. Because that’s the sort of show it is.’ I said: ‘You don’t need the money. I don’t see a lot of reason for it.’ But I think she got talked into it. She believed the show was going to be about Tamara in normal life.”

Hang on a minute. This is a girl with 200 Hermès handbags and a turntable set into her front drive, to save her the trouble of doing a three-point turn in her Ferrari. Can she be said to have a “normal life”?

“Yes. But I think they pushed her into not being herself and in the end she got carried away and thought: ‘I’m a superstar, I’m rich, and now I’ve got to show I’m rich and a superstar.’ But, you know, she’ll be in the kitchen like everyone else. Yes, for sure, she goes and buys loads of shoes and bloody clothes. Unnecessary. Completely unnecessary. I suppose it’s because … one wonders… and this is not in her defence – how many other girls her age would do the same if they could?”

But what about the notorious bath made to Tamara’s specification from crystal brought from the Amazon, and which allegedly cost £1m?

“First, it wasn’t like that. It wasn’t a crystal bath for a million quid. It’s the hype again. Makes me bloody mad. It cost nothing like that. Not true. Not at all.”

Tamara’s 22-year-old sister Petra had a wedding this summer costing £12m and lives in an m (£54m) pad in Los Angeles, which changed hands for cash (the owners had been asking 0m: a typical Bernie deal). Surely it must be hard for the daughters of such a generous billionaire father to retain a sense of proportion?

“I think so. But, as I say, most girls would like to do the things they do, probably.”

And then, with an air of mild exasperation, he raises the subject of “the trust” – something called Bambino Holdings, set up in an offshore tax haven in the 1990s, into which Ecclestone put £3bn of the money he made from his ownership of Formula One’s commercial rights. The trust is registered in the name of his Croatian ex-wife, Slavica Radic, from whom he was divorced three years ago after 24 years of marriage.

It came into the news last month when he found himself in a German court, explaining why he had given m to a banker called Gerhard Gribowsky, who is accused of massive fraud. He feared Gribowsky was about to tell HM Revenue and Customs that it was Ecclestone who controlled Bambino Holdings, which would have made him liable to pay tax on its funds. Now his lack of control over all that money is clearly irritating him.

“I gave to my wife the things that she put in a trust for herself and the kids, and the kids have had access to that money,” he says. “The idea was that they’d buy super-quality property, property that would be long-term, for their kids and everything else. Didn’t happen. They haven’t done that. So they’ve had access to money which they’ve spent. And Tamara’s programme just wound everything up, because that’s what they wanted.”

He is satisfied, however, that the programme’s view of his elder child was a distorted one, and the proof came during those now famous nuptials in the grounds of a rented castle outside Rome, where 250 guests drank Chateau Petrus at £4,000 a bottle to the strains of the Royal Philharmonic, Italian tenor Andrea Bocelli and Eric Clapton.

“I spent the weekend with both of them at Petra’s wedding,” Ecclestone says, “and Tamara was an angel. Nothing like that show in any shape or form. She was Tamara.”

At 81, Ecclestone looks much like the Bernie of 30 years ago, when he had just won the battle to wrest control of Formula One from the amateurs who had run it for the better part of a century. If being violently mugged outside his Knightsbridge home, as he was last year, failed to age him, an event such as the German court hearing – his first experience of such circumstances, he said – seems to put an extra glint in his eye.

Gribowsky, as he told the German judge, had tried to shake him down. “He wanted money to start up on his own. He wanted to leave the bank and start a property business – with me. He was shaking me down. I don’t blame him. I misled him a little bit, because when he asked me, I said: ‘Let’s see what we can do.’ We’re English, we don’t say, ‘No.’

“I asked the trust: ‘What’s going to happen if this guy tells the revenue that I’m managing the trust, which is what he was inferring?’ They said: ‘If he does, the revenue will want to come and check and they’ll assess you and you’ll be in court for three years proving all the things that are wrong, and it’ll cost you a fortune, and the trust as well. You’d be assessed at 40% tax on about £3bn. I said: ‘I can’t afford it. What shall I do?’”

What he did, as he told the court, was to pay him £27.5m to keep schtum: “I thought it might keep him quiet and peaceful and friendly and stop him doing silly things.”

Gribkowsky denies blackmail.

If his business affairs seem a little more complicated than the average citizen’s, that is probably how he likes it. When the author Tom Bower published an Ecclestone biography called No Angel early this year, whole sections were intelligible only to those with an understanding of the financial stratosphere. And Ecclestone’s handling of Bower, whose reputation was built on his evisceration of the likes of Robert Maxwell, Conrad Black and Richard Branson, provides evidence of how this son of a Suffolk trawlerman finesses potential enemies. Not that he has read the book.

“I don’t read books. But most people who read it thought it was a good book. Did you read it?”

Yes. It was entertaining, but lacked the anticipated revelations. Either Bower had got too close to him, or maybe – as unlikely as it seems to experienced Bernie watchers – there really is nothing to reveal about this most mysterious of tycoons, a man both accessible and frustratingly opaque.

“That’s what the problem was. I used to say to Tom – because we’ve become quite good friends – ‘What can I do that’s evil for you?’ He was upfront with me and I gave him complete co-operation. Anyone he wanted to speak to, I called and said: ‘Talk to this guy – tell him the truth.’ Because he had a reputation coming in. Somebody called me and said: ‘There’s a guy doing a book on you, but he’s not a normal guy for doing books, he’s destroyed a few people.’ I said it wouldn’t be a bad idea if he came and had a chat before he started destroying me, because maybe he could find even more to destroy. So Tom arrived and we had lunch and that’s how the name of the book came about. I said: ‘You write what you like, provided it’s more or less the truth, because I’m no angel.’ And when we’d finished the book, he said: ‘Would you mind if I called the book No Angel?’ I said: ‘Bloody good name.’”

Bower had finished his work before the violent suppression of anti-government unrest in Bahrain led first to the postponement, and then to the cancellation, of a race for which Ecclestone receives a reported m a year from the emirate’s ruling Al Khalifa family, several of whom are confirmed petrolheads. This week it was announced that Bahrain is back on Formula One’s 2012 calendar, scheduled for April, even though human rights organisations are still protesting about the treatment of medical personnel imprisoned for ministering to wounded protesters.

“The people I’ve met there are lovely people,” Ecclestone says, prompting the response that jailing doctors for treating demonstrators doesn’t seem very lovely.

“Do you know that? Do you actually know that? If that’s right, it’s wrong. Obviously. Doctors are doctors. They’re there to help people. It doesn’t matter who it is they’re helping. We have been assured that this is not what’s happening. In fact they had a report made, allegedly independent. What did the report say? Yes, there were instances or whatever, but … I wanted to go out there. I was happy to go. I’d like to go into the prison or the hospital or whatever and ask: ‘What actually happened?’”

Maybe they would let him, I suggest, if he asked. “I have asked. They said, ‘No problem.’ The danger is you go out there and they pick you up in a limousine and take you to the best hotel and take you to dinner and then put you back on the  aeroplane.”

All over the world, in China, India, South Korea, Abu Dhabi, Malaysia and Russia, governments are throwing money at Ecclestone in order to burnish their image by holding a round of the Formula One championship. He has landed himself in trouble before by remarking on Hitler’s ability to get things done, but had he been president of the International Olympic Committee in 1936, would he have sanctioned the Berlin Games?

“It depends what evidence I had on what was happening in the country. And the same thing would happen. I’d have been taken there and dined and wooed and everything else and told it was a wonderful country. It’s not easy. But wherever I go, the minute you get off the plane, the minute you go into somebody’s country, you’ve got to respect exactly what their way of life is – their religion, their laws or whatever. It’s not correct to go moving into somebody’s country and try to change them. Don’t go. If you know something’s wrong, stay away.

“We pulled out of South Africa years ago (in 1985) because of apartheid. I witnessed things that had happened there which upset me. I thought: ‘That ain’t the way to go on.’ I hope we go to Bahrain and there’s no trouble – the race goes on, the public are happy and there are no dramas. That’s what I hope.”

But if somebody came to him with incontrovertible evidence that unacceptable things were still happening there, what action would he take?

“We’d have to give it some serious thought then. But we’ve been to Argentina when there’s been big dramas. There’s been dramas in Brazil. Bad things happen there. I think you can look anywhere now and it’s not all good. You can’t really hold England up as being all good, can you? There have been some terrible atrocities that we committed.”

Bernie Ecclestone apologising for the slave trade and the Black Hole of Calcutta, as well as for his daughter’s televised indiscretions? Too much for one day.


guardian.co.uk © 2011 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Sport: Motor sport | guardian.co.uk

• Contract dispute threatens 2012 race in Austin, Texas
• Vital US market faces another year without Formula One

The US Grand Prix is on the brink of being axed from next year’s calendar, the Formula One commercial rights holder Bernie Ecclestone said.

It was believed Tavo Hellmund’s Full Throttle Productions owned the rights to host the race, scheduled for 18 November next year in Austin, Texas. However, Ecclestone said the contract with Hellmund was cancelled after he was found to be in breach. This has left Ecclestone negotiating with the track developers Circuit of The Americas (Cota), which on Tuesday halted construction work.

Cota said: “The contract between Formula One and Circuit of The Americas has not been conveyed to Circuit of The Americas per a previously agreed upon timetable.”

Ecclestone claims the reason why no contract has been issued is because he has yet to receive a guarantee or a letter of credit that he will be paid. “We’ve done everything we bloody well can do to make this race happen,” Ecclestone said.

Asked if the USGP was in danger of being dropped ahead of the final world motor sport council meeting in New Delhi on 7 December, when the 2012 calendar is ratified, Ecclestone said: “Yes, it will be, for sure, 100%.”

Cota has three weeks to resolve the crisis with Ecclestone, otherwise there will be no return next year to the US after what has already been a four-year absence in a vital market for F1.

Ecclestone said: “We had an agreement with Full Throttle Productions. Everything was signed and sealed, but we kept putting things off like the dates, various letters of credit and things that should have been sent, but nothing ever happened.

“Then these other people [Cota] came on the scene, saying that they wanted to do things, but that they had problems with Tavo. They said they had the circuit, and that they wanted an agreement with me. I told them they had to sort out the contract with Tavo, which they said they would. But that has gone away now because we’ve cancelled Tavo’s contract as he was in breach.

“We’ve waited six months for him to remedy the breach. He knows full well why we’ve cancelled. He’s happy. But these other people haven’t got a contract. All we’ve asked them to do is get us a letter of credit. We are looking for security for money they are going to have to pay us. That is via a letter of credit, normally from a bank. If people don’t have the money they find it difficult to get the letter of credit, and so we don’t issue a contract.”

Ecclestone is now looking for “a guarantor”, to assure him if Cota fails to pay then there is a reserve. “It’s probably an old-fashioned way of going about things, needing payment, but that’s business,” said Ecclestone. “It’s like buying a house. Before you buy that house, and before you get all the paperwork, you make sure you’ve got the money.”

Representatives for the Circuit of The Americas declined to comment.

The announcement last month of a street race in New Jersey, featuring Manhattan as a backdrop, in 2013 has further complicated matters for all concerned with the GP in Austin. That much was made clear on Tuesday by the Texas state comptroller Susan Combs, who said New Jersey had the potential to affect the economic impact of their race.

Combs confirmed that Texas taxpayers would not be held accountable for the m (£15.8m) sanctioning fee, required a year in advance, for the race.

Of late, Texas has used a tool known as the Major Events Trust Fund to attract large-scale events to the state such as Super Bowl XLV and the NBA All-Star game. However, Combs now maintains it will not now be used for F1 due to the emergence of the New Jersey race, and ongoing dispute over the race rights.


guardian.co.uk © 2011 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Sport: Motor sport | guardian.co.uk

• F1′s commercial rights holder attends Gribkowsky trial
• I never bribed anybody, Ecclestone had stated in July

Bernie Ecclestone will appear as a witness in a court in Germany on Wednesday in the case of a German investment banker involved in the sale of Formula One who is accused of receiving a m (£27.5m) bribe.

Ecclestone, 81, the sport’s commercial rights holder who has run the sport for more than 40 years, will be a high-profile witness in Munich at the trial of Gerhard Gribkowsky, a former chief risk officer for the Bayerische Landesbank, who allegedly received the bribe in 2006 for undervaluing its shares in F1 when they were sold to CVC Capital Partners.

Ecclestone admits the money was paid, with £8m coming from his own account and the rest from his offshore family trust, Bambino, but he denies it was a bribe, saying it was to prevent Gribkowsky, who has been in jail since January, making false accusations of tax evasion.

The leading sports business consultant David Bick, an expert in cases such as this, says: “Without knowing the intricacies of the case, my money is on Bernie clearing his name.

“The documentation is crucial. It depends entirely on how Mr Ecclestone documented this. If an invoice was raised at the time it is almost impossible to prove that that money was a bribe.

“If he didn’t document it, or he tried to create documents after the event, then he is in potentially a lot of trouble because with an amount of money that large the authorities will suggest there was some wrongdoing. But Mr Ecclestone is a very experienced businessman. And he will have top lawyers.”

Ecclestone’s lawyer is Sven Thomas, who says a 200-page legal submission made ahead of the hearing makes it clear the payment was not a bribe. “You could say Bernie has been the victim here. There was a hidden threat, pressure – a sort of shakedown.”

Ecclestone could still face a hefty tax bill if the ongoing investigations prove close involvement with an offshore family trust. Under UK law, if it were proved Ecclestone controlled the family trust, Bambino, he could be liable to pay UK tax on its income.

But Thomas added: “Bambino wanted to ensure Bernie would continue as CEO because they believed if he didn’t, the value of their assets would come down. That is why separately they also paid Mr Gribkowsky.”

Ecclestone stated in July: “I never bribed anybody or paid any money to anybody in connection with the company. I got 5% for the sale of the company. Bayerische Landesbank approved the sale and approved the commission, which was cheap. I should have got more because for that sort of deal a bank would have charged a lot more. There were no secrets.”


guardian.co.uk © 2011 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Sport: Motor sport | guardian.co.uk

• Formula One rights holder changes race date
• 2011 race was cancelled after political unrest

The Formula One rights holder, Bernie Ecclestone, has agreed to provisionally re-schedule the 2012 Bahrain Grand Prix from March to November, because of the uncertain political situation in the country. This year’s race at the Sakhir circuit was set to open the season in March. It was then switched to 30 October, because of bloody civil unrest, before it was struck off the calendar in June, after pressure from the teams.

When announcing its provisional calendar for 2012 in June, the FIA pencilled in the Gulf kingdom for the season-opener in March. However, continuing unrest has forced the Bahrain government to ask for a later date, according to a report in the online version of the Financial Times.

“They didn’t want it up the front so I’ve had to screw the whole calendar up,” Ecclestone was quoted as saying.

While next season’s calendar is provisional, the new date of 4 November, three races from the finale, would cause logistical problems for Formula One’s teams, who will face six back-to-back races in quick succession in different continents. A spokesman for the Bahrain International Circuit, said a November race would have advantages.

“We are extremely happy to host the Grand Prix in November. Due to high temperatures in our summer, either early or late in the season is better. November is the best month for us,” the spokesman was quoted as saying.

When it was announced by the FIA in June that the 2011 Bahrain Grand Prix would go ahead, the Australian Red Bull driver Mark Webber said: “In my personal opinion, the sport should have taken a much firmer stance earlier this year rather than constantly delaying its decision in the hope of being able to reschedule it in 2011. It would have sent a very clear message about F1′s position on something as fundamental as human rights and how it deals with moral issues.”


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Sport: Motor sport | guardian.co.uk

There may be a short-term blip in viewers, but a lack of exposure to a new audience may have worse long-term consequences

After facing a potential court case in Germany, Bernie Ecclestone has returned to the spotlight in Hungary but this time by doing what he does best – making deals. Fans’ anger at the joint Sky-BBC TV deal was still bubbling away in the UK on Saturday but as preparations were being made for qualifying at the Hungaroring, it was difficult not to sense that the teams rather like it when Bernie the dealmaker is in action.

There had been talk that the new contract was in contradiction of the Concorde Agreement – the final ray of hope for disgruntled petrolheads. But it emerged on Saturday that not only had Bernie covered that base, but that the very nature of the deal had been dictated by it. Autosport magazine revealed that an appendix of the Agreement reads: “The Commercial Rights Holder may not permit Formula 1 events to be shown only by pay television in a country with a significant audience if it would materially adversely affect audience reach in that country.”

It is virtually impossible to prove in advance that it would necessarily affect audience reach, and no doubt Sky, the BBC and Bernie believe it will not. By including the BBC as a part of the deal it neatly sidesteps that awkward “only” in the clause.

Which at least partly explains why this ugly compromise exists. Fans are rightly cross – no one wants to pay for something they used to watch for free, and the BBC, having invested in and made such a good job of broadcasting F1, wanted to hang on to something, anything, but ultimately, this suits neither.

F1 fans will not want to miss a race, and even the idea of deferred re-runs, which remain unconfirmed, will not be acceptable to many. They will simply have to buy Sky while, at the same time, paying for the BBC coverage in the form of the licence fee. Coverage that includes the expense of showing 10 races, but that will be of interest only to casual fans – hardly likely to increase viewers who will know they can watch only half a season.

These do not appear to be concerns within the paddock, however. The global nature of F1 means its sponsors are largely unconcerned about the anguish of a single territory; the marketplace for the brands in the sport, especially the larger ones, is worldwide and it would take a massive collapse in viewing figures for them to exert their financial muscle.

For the teams, very simply, it means more money, estimated at around £1m a season. The HRT team principal, Colin Kolles, said: “If you would ask my colleagues after the meeting with Bernie Ecclestone, everybody is very happy.” And McLaren’s Martin Whitmarsh noted that they “assume Bernie has got the best deal he can for the sport”.

Inevitably, it is iron-disciplined business principles that drive these organisations and more money is, well, more money. It is not that there is disdain for the fans, just the realpolitik of modern F1. Hence the refrain – look how Sky transformed football – being bandied around the paddock. But for all that Sky have revolutionised sports coverage, “transformed” in this sense, is from small dollar signs to large pig-shaped dollar signs, smoking cigars and wearing top hats.

It is not a necessarily a good comparison. Football boasts the familial and tribal bonds that automatically bring new generations to the fold. F1 does not, nor does the sport lend itself to a collective drinking experience on a Sunday. So, while in the short term there may be but a blip, a lack of easy exposure to a new audience could have far worse long-term consequences.

Would it have been too much for a sport as rich as this one to have come up with a plan that allowed the BBC to keep its coverage but for the sport to make slightly less money? Sadly, F1 and Bernie don’t do those deals.


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Sport: Motor sport | guardian.co.uk

• F1 supremo alleged to have paid bribes to German banker
• Banker who organised sale of stake in F1 in 2005 is charged

German prosecutors have alleged for the first time that Bernie Ecclestone and a trust belonging to the head of Formula One’s family paid almost m (£27m) in bribes to a German banker.

In return, they allege, Ecclestone received .4m in commissions from BayernLB, the German bank, while a family trust company was paid m.

State prosecutors in Munich said on Tuesday they had charged Gerhard Gribkowsky, the German banker who organised BayernLB’s sale of a stake in F1 in 2005, with breach of trust and tax evasion as well as having been in receipt of corrupt payments, the Financial Times reported. Gribkowsky, the former chief risk officer at the Munich-based bank, was arrested in January.

Prosecutors told the Financial Times that Ecclestone, who was not available for comment, remains under investigation in connection with allegations of bribery and abetting breach of trust. Ecclestone, who leases the commercial rights to Formula One with his associates from the FIA, the ruling body, has given evidence to the prosecutors and said he expects to be cleared of wrongdoing. He has not yet publicly explained his involvement in the BayernLB sale or his dealings with Gribkowsky.

There is speculation over a possible sale of F1 by CVC Capital Partners, the private equity group that bought the motor sport in 2005 from BayernLB for .7bn, with Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp interested.CVC has said it has no knowledge of any payments to Mr Gribkowsky in connection with its purchase of F1. It was alleged that an internal CVC investigation uncovered payments by BayernLB to Ecclestone and a foundation linked to him, Bambino Trust. Prosecutors allege Gribkowsky set up and controlled two Austrian companies that received almost m from someone they name as “Bernard E” and an entity of the Bambino Trust.

“According to the results of investigations this is bribery money, whose payment was disguised through two fake consulting contracts with [companies] in Mauritius and the British Virgin Islands,” a statement from prosecutors said.

The prosecutors said that to compensate for these payments, Gribkowsky agreed to pay .4m to Ecclestone on behalf of BayernLB, as well as m to Bambino. “The Bayerische Landesbank incurred damages of almost .5m through the conduct of the accused.” Under German law, a court must now decide whether to open the case against Gribkowsky. BayernLB declined to comment.


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Sport: Motor sport | guardian.co.uk

• Ecclestone claims he cares about who will run F1
• Rumours of a possible bid from News Corporation still exist

Bernie Ecclestone has suggested he would again be willing to take control of Formula One.

Ecclestone last ruled F1 in 2005, selling out to private equity firm CVC Partners for whom he now serves as chief executive, for US.7bn. It is estimated the growing brand of F1 is now potentially worth around five times that figure, yet Ecclestone would appear to be interested.

As the commercial rights holder, Ecclestone already has a large amount of control when it comes to negotiating contracts with circuits and television companies. But it seems the 80-year-old, who shows no sign of slowing down, may yet be willing to take charge again. Asked if he would be interested in buying back F1, Ecclestone was unequivocal in his response – “Yes, absolutely.”

There are other interested parties, with rumours still persisting with regard to Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation in conjunction with one of Europe’s leading investment firms Exor. However, Ecclestone maintains no conversation has ever taken place with them with regard to any potential buy-out.

Like that consortium, though, any purchase on his part would have to be at the right price, unsurprising given his reputation as a hardball negotiator.

“I wouldn’t buy at the price that I think CVC would sell it,” said Ecclestone in the International Herald Tribune. “But I would certainly buy at the price they [News Corporation and Exor] want to pay.”

If it is not Ecclestone who eventually returns to running F1, he maintains he does definitely care as to whose hands it falls into come the day any sale does take place. “I care that people that own the company want to own it and run it in the correct manner,” he said.

Despite the fact News Corporation and Exor have yet to show their hands, there are stumbling blocks to any deal with both companies.

“[There is] a little bit of a problem with Murdoch because they are more or less on pay-TV,” said Ecclestone in relation to the Australian’s Sky network. And we have to be, according to the European Union, on free-to-air television. Our agreement with them was that we are everywhere on free-to-air television.

“And the other people [Exor] own Fiat, and the teams don’t seem that excited about another team having big control over the regulations, or whatever. So there is a bit of a conflict there.”

There have been suggestions that speculation regarding a takeover is a ploy to ramp up the negotiations of the new Concorde Agreement that binds together the teams, the FIA and Ecclestone.

The latest Concorde Agreement is due to come into force in 2013, yet Ecclestone said: “It certainly won’t make any difference. The bottom line is simple. If there is no Concorde Agreement it doesn’t make that much difference.

“All the Concorde Agreement is is really us telling the people what we are going to pay them. If there was no Concorde Agreement, same thing, we would run the championship and we would pay the people probably a lot less than they get now.”


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Sport: Motor sport | guardian.co.uk

• F1 supremo Ecclestone says takeover talk ‘media driven’
• Says any possible deal would have to involve free-to-air TV

Rupert Murdoch has a “close to zero” chance of buying Formula One and talk of a takeover is being driven by the media and advisers seeking to make money, the sport’s supremo, Bernie Ecclestone, has said.

Reports this month said that Murdoch’s News Corp was in the early stages of talks to form a consortium to acquire control of Formula One motor racing. Formula One is owned by the private equity firm CVC and managed by Ecclestone. News Corp held preliminary talks with at least one big car manufacturer, thought to be Ferrari, and with the Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim, who already has links to the sport, the person said.

“It’s media driven,” Ecclestone told Reuters in a telephone interview. “It looks very much like someone who is trying to see if they can make [money].

“All of these people that get involved with these things, they get some victims and say: ‘We can make this happen, I’m sure we can do this,’ and then all they do is keep pumping fees in.”

Analysts have also pointed out that the big manufacturers and advertisers traditionally want the sport to be shown on free-to-air channels as they draw the biggest possible audience, as opposed to Murdoch’s paid-for TV channels such as BSkyB in Britain or Sky Italia.

Asked if coverage on free-to-air TV was still an issue, Ecclestone replied: “Definitely, 100%. If, and I think the chances are close to zero, but if Murdoch was to buy certainly he’d have to broadcast some free-to-air like it is now.”

Murdoch has made sport a cornerstone of his pay-TV operations and it has also been a prime motivation for many of his deals, and analysts see a logic to his involvement in F1.

Martin Sorrell, the chief executive of the world’s largest advertising group, WPP, and a director of Formula One, told Reuters he had no problems with a media company owning the rights to the sport. “I see no harm whatsoever in a pay-TV company investing in or owning Formula One,” said Sorrell, who has clashed with Ecclestone in the past. “I see no problem with that.

“From what I’ve seen, I don’t think CVC have indicated that they want to sell the business. I’m sure there would be interest because Formula One is a very strong property. But [I make] those comments as a WPP employee and not as a Formula One director.”


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Sport: Motor sport | guardian.co.uk

• ‘We would not sell to a media company,’ says Ecclestone
• Any financial offer would have to be ‘ridiculous’

Bernie Ecclestone has dismissed speculation of a potential takeover of Formula One by a consortium led by News Corporation.

It was suggested on Tuesday that News Corp had held talks with the world’s richest man, the Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim (who entered the sport as a backer of the Sauber team this year), and a leading manufacturer, rumoured to be Ferrari, with regard to the possibility of making a bid for F1.

However, Ecclestone, the chief executive of the owner and commercial rights holder of F1, the venture capital company CVC, claims the story is without foundation.

“It is all rubbish,” Ecclestone told the Times. “Formula One is not for sale. And, anyway, we would not sell to a media company because it would restrict the ability to negotiate with other broadcasters.”

However, Ecclestone did sell to a media company, the Kirch Group in Germany, only for the deal to fall through, which then allowed CVC to step in and acquire F1 for around £1.8bn in 2006. Although CVC is the majority shareholder in F1, it is understood that both Ecclestone and the Federation Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) have veto rights on any new owners of the sport.

Ecclestone claims any offer now would have to be “ridiculous”, but the combined might of News Corp, Slim, who is reputed to be worth around £45bn, and Ferrari, could comfortably make a bid.

Any takeover, however, would be subject to a new concorde agreement – the commercial arrangement involving the teams, CVC and the FIA that binds all parties to the sport – with the current deal expiring at the end of next year.

It would make for even more complex negotiations for what is always a difficult process, with the other teams involved likely to be uncomfortable with one of their number potentially co-owning the sport.


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Sport: Motor sport | guardian.co.uk

Ecclestone has been busily interfering with the Formula One script for decades. He has never bored of it – now for the producer’s most ambitious plot yet

This week Adrian Newey, the boffin behind Red Bull’s 2010 Formula One championship winning car said: “I am the only dinosaur left in the pit lane who is still using a drawing board.” This was thrilling news indeed as the clear inference is that there are other prehistoric creatures on the grand prix circuit who use their weirdly foreshortened front legs for swatting away pterodactyls and making futile attempts to grab up lithe and bronzed young cave-chicks clad in sloth fur bikinis. Some of you will doubtless declare the latter is totally anachronistic. That maybe true, but this after all is motorsport – a world that perpetually trails so far behind the zeitgeist, it should by rights have been swept up by the broom wagon decades ago.

The fantasy demi-monde of F1 is crazier and more kitsch than anything from a 1960s cult movie – part Barbarella, part Fantastic Voyage with, as Newey has revealed, a pinch of One Million Years BC chucked in. Much of the credit for that must go to Bernie Ecclestone whose visionary leadership marks him out as sport’s answer to Dino De Laurentiis.

Admittedly Bernie is at an advantage here because he is in the unique position of owning the entire kit and kaboodle. None of the world’s other great administrators are blessed with such overwhelming power. Should they ever be so, then one struggles to imagine what the likes of Sepp Blatter might come up with – though on past evidence something involving cummerbunds and match officials who look like Sophia Loren would be most likely.

From his chair in the producer’s office, Ecclestone has been busily interfering with the F1 script for decades. He has never bored of it, messing around apparently endlessly with tyres, rejigging qualification over and over again, fiddling on with aerodynamics and banning everything from launch controls to automatic gearboxes all with the express intention of making the sport more exciting and getting people like myself to chunter: “Bloody typical: just when I finally worked out what data downlink telemetry does, they get rid of it. It’s the telex machine all over a-bloody-again, I tell you.”

Bernie has lately hit on the notion that F1 would be considerably enlivened if water were sprayed on the track at random moments during the race (I’m not sure, but does anyone else detect a Flashdance influence here?). This is movie mogul madness at its zany best because it will be recalled that Ecclestone has spent a good deal of energy wrestling grand prix away from northern Europe (where water sprays randomly on the circuit via a process known to scientists as “rain”) and staging them instead in the Middle East (where it doesn’t). If this is the counter-intuitive way the world’s leading Chris de Burgh lookalike is going to carry on it may well be that in future he will declare that motor racing would be much more exciting if, instead of wheels, the cars had feet.

In which case Ferrari and McLaren will have to come up with some glossy version of those lumbering war machines the Empire deploys against the rebels in Return of the Jedi. If memory serves (and since I only watched it again on DVD two weeks ago it probably does) these great mechanical beasts are brought crashing to earth by the Ewoks, a tribe of stocky, hirsute, primitive and fiery little creatures who seem to have been the inspiration behind Gennaro Gattuso.

Formula One would surely benefit from some Ewok action. Indeed a whole Star Wars makeover for the sport might be an idea.

For those who doubt the commercial wisdom of such a decision (drivers in white storm-trooper armour, mechanics clad as scrap-dealing Jawas, all TV commentators contractually obliged backwards to speak so that like Master Yoda will sound they) I should point out that the same approach has worked wonders for the boardgame Risk (invented in the 1950s by the Frenchman Albert Lamorisse who also picked up an Oscar for his movie The Red Balloon – my, what a lot of stuff I’ve taught you down the centuries). Its sales were fairly moribund until a movie tie-in deal was done with George Lucas a few years back.

Star Wars F1 would bring a whole new audience to what I feel sure we must call “the product” and, to be honest, it wouldn’t involve too much tinkering – especially given the presence of the dinosaurs in the pit lane, easily sprayed grey, stuck over with kapok and passed off as something from the planet Hoth. After all, one of the enduring memories of the original trilogy is a small robot who speaks in a series of mechanical bleeps that are then translated for the audience by a perpetually flustered English-accented android. So not so very different then from Lewis Hamilton being interviewed by Murray Walker.

Of course other versions of Risk have also proved popular and there maybe some who would prefer to see car racing taken down the Tolkien route complete with orcs, hobbits and a series of races to secure ownership of “The Ring”. Others may say that to tap into the teenage girl demographic F1 should introduce vampires. The obvious pay-off here is to make a crack about Max Mosley. So why not, eh?


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Sport: Motor sport | guardian.co.uk

© 2012 F1 Drivers Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha