Friday press conference - Canadian GP - Pt.2.

Team principals: Ron Dennis (McLaren), Eddie Jordan (Jordan), David Richards (BAR), Paul Stoddart (Minardi), Frank Williams (WilliamsF1)

Questions from the floor:

Q:
For all you, Ferrari's superteam has now signed through 2006. What are your thoughts of having to take on that potent combination for the next three and a half years?

Frank Williams:
Well, it was good news in one way that Michael was off the driver market, but depressing news that the group will stay together, so it's not going to be easy. But we're ready for the fight.

Ron Dennis:
Well, we love a challenge. It's great that they're all staying in. Why not? If you're going to win a world championship, if that's what one of us able to do, why not against the strongest competition? I mean that's Formula One, it's competitive and if they weren't there and you won a world championship everyone would have been saying 'ah yeah, but if it had been a Ferrari this or that'...Great. And it's great that Michael's staying in Formula One, it's great that they're staying together and I hope that we're the team that's going to beat them. And they will be beaten....

Paul Stoddart:
I don't think it's going to concern me terribly much but, having said that, I fear that, for Ron and Frank, with that combination, they may find championships hard to find - and I would also refer to the fact that if, we lose ten teams and we put out non-points scoring cars, the very words that Ron said that people would say 'yeah, but...' is exactly what's going to happen under that scenario and it could well happen in this year's championship.

David Richards:
They clearly set the benchmark today, but it's quite hard to keep up that year after year after year and there will come a day, I'm quite sure, when they'll be challenged by somebody hopefully in this room.

Eddie Jordan:
I happen to believe that Michael will never see out that time. I believe it's probably the right thing to do from a PR exercise, but I'd like to see what exit clauses are in that contract. I think that there are a lot of very, very talented young up-and-coming drivers, and I also happen to believe that a driver such as the magnitude of Michael makes sure that he has the opportunity to leave with great dignity and I would be surprised if he goes past '04 - that's just my view. I think that there are some really strong combinations and outfits available at the moment. That's my view. I do not see... I can't see how it's in Michael's interest to go to '06 as much as we might like it to happen.

Q:
Formula One is looking for a new way to find out much more competition and show. In this way, what does a day like today mean?

PS:
I'll take it first. I think it levels the playing field when you get a situation like this. You have a level playing field on tyres. You have a levelling of the individual characteristics of each car, and it becomes very much a driver's skill as to where they end up, and perhaps a little bit of luck as to how hard the rain's coming down. I think it's good for the sport. We need a few races like this, or qualifying sessions like this, to just make it very interesting for the viewers.

EJ:
I think the conditions were, surprisingly enough, very different throughout the qualifying session, so Paul's two cars ran at the same time. I think everybody in the room sees where two drivers in the same team had huge disparaging [disparate] times, it's not down to talent. There was much heavier rain in the middle and stuff like that, but it is actually interesting to shake it all up in the middle, so from that point of view, sure, it's interesting.

Q:
I'd like to ask Ron and Paul this question - whether they think the idea of philanthropy and Formula One go together? What's the point of having an incredibly competitive series and helping out your rivals?

PS:
Well, I think we've just got to look at football. In many, many sports you're looking to have the actual sporting spectacle and if you're competing with budgets that are 20 times your budget then it's very, very hard. Many football and other sporting areas give the little guys a bit of a chance. Now, if what we're saying here is you want to see the little guys out of the sport, well, to be honest that's exactly how I feel it's going anyway, [and] perhaps that's the way it's going to go. It will be a manufacturers' series, but I think there are many fans worldwide that will see that as a very, very sad day for Formula One. And also, what manufacturer would like to see their cars consistently at the back of the grid? It's not a nice place to be. It's very hard to defend to sponsors and it's very hard to defend to shareholders or partners.

RD:
Well, I'll answer the question in a slightly different way. First of all, I think that, perhaps, going by the potential body language that's being displayed here that you'd think Formula One is in a very difficult and downward spiral. I personally don't believe that's the case. We have seen, over the last three months, a plateauing of the situation regarding the attracting of new sponsors.

We're in negotiation, ourselves, [with] several new sponsors, we have extended several contracts and, in most instances, we've increased the face value of the contracts. The TV figures are not as a great as they've always been, but we are very competitive against all other television sport. Sport generally is down, television is down as a whole and, of course, through Bernie's efforts, we're opening new markets in the Middle East and China. So we know our figures are going to surge again. The simple fact is that there are 388 million watching each and every grand prix. That is a tremendous penetration of the world TV market. The demographics of the viewer are exceptional, very unusual because of course we pull a whole family in front of a television on a Sunday, and this is a great sport.

There have been huge brands come and go in Formula One: Brabham, Lotus, many many more. And it's an inevitable ebbing and flowing of Formula One because, as Paul points out, it is difficult at the back of the grid. But no-one gave me a handout. I climbed from humble backgrounds into a position of being responsible for a competitive team and, along that way, I can't remember anyone giving me a handout - and, more importantly, I never asked for one. This is a tough, competitive sport and, if you can't take the heat, get out the bloody kitchen. The bottom line is... Paul's position, I understand, but he is damaging Formula One by his actions and I love Formula One. And because of that, I'm, not particularly ingratiated by what he said, and even more so, less ingratiated when he infers that there are people, one of which is myself, that is not keeping his word, which is absolutely not true. Formula One has a place for everybody, but it's not...we do not have a soup kitchen in Formula One.

PS:
I think I'd like to respond to that because it's quite personal. Let's just clear something up. There have been handouts in Formula One in the past. In 1997, both Ron and Frank helped Ken Tyrrell stay in Formula One when he was fighting against Bernie. In 1998, McLaren, Williams, Tyrrell received a very substantial amount when they signed the Concorde Agreement. In 1999, BAR received an eleventh payment, in interesting circumstances. A certain team in Formula One has and still continues to receive money from every other team on a regular basis every year and that team is probably the team that needs that money least. And, in most recent times, a rumoured fifty million dollar golden handshake has been offered for that very same team. So let's also dispel the idea of charity.

Last year, I fought for a rightful position over the Prost monies. We have to sustain the same costs as everybody else to attend these grands prix and to turn our cars out week after week. Over that period of time, what would have happened had certain people had their way, that money would not [have been paid]. Team eleven, even though it was a complying team in terms of the Concorde Agreement to be paid money, under the Prost circumstances, would have seen nothing. The [others] would have divided it up amongst themselves. Now, if anyone thinks that's fair, great, but it's also not legal and that's why the situation last year saw the Prost money rightfully going to Minardi.

This year, on the 15 January, Ron correctly says that he put a proposal - Eddie and I did not ask for a handout - he put a proposal forward to offer each of us, since it's now going down a little bit I'll mention the figure - $8million - to compete in and complete the 2003 Formula One World Championship. That was done for two very solid reasons. The first of those reasons was the need to maintain 20 cars, that avoiding the expense - and it is a very large expense - of running a third car, and far more importantly the need to maintain the integrity of the constructors' championship.

These guys are backed by large multi-national household names, very respectable names. Would it be a perfect scenario to have a championship decided in very dubious circumstances from a non-points scoring car getting in the way of a championship contender? I don't think so. I think there were valid reasons why that agreement was made on the 15 January and all I'm asking is that it's honoured and it is honoured now. There was supposed to be a bit more support for this today but it's pretty clear, having not been invited to the team owners' meeting that you're all aware of just took place, and having someone else who was to support me not so supportive, that things have gone on whilst I've been in here with you.

RD:
There was a meeting before this meeting and the only thing that was discussed was if everybody had remembered what had taken place. I don't think there was anybody that was at that meeting that didn't accurately recall what had taken place on the 15th and the subsequent discussions. Each of the team principals can choose whether they share the circumstances that led up to today but there was one thing...95 per cent of the recall from each of the team principals was the same and there was nothing other than a discussion to that effect.

EJ:
Sorry, I just have to reply. Just to be accurate. First of all, really, Bob [Constanduros, journalist and compere], I don't know who and why you went down this track. I've said again, I don't think what you're doing here is constructive. We're moving out of sport and into drama TV, and it's not helpful because nobody here is prepared. There are certainly strong differences of opinion and I think it's the wrong forum and the wrong place.

Minardi and Paul Stoddart need help and I support them on that. I think he said something that is as if I have changed my view. I haven't changed my view. I'm very clear that the reason was not and never would be... Jordan will never take charity, but I believed, which is what I understand what Paul is saying, there are different views on it. And what Ron is saying about different views...

Ron has to be applauded. He was the initiator of the fund because he feels strongly about Formula One and, if possible, keeping ten teams in there. Nobody wants to run a third car, we haven't done it. And it was his idea but, to be fair, for whatever reason, it hasn't quite happened for different circumstances - and everyone has their own different view. If we could put that behind us and see some constructive way to ensuring that Minardi...and I have a particular strong memory of Minardi from Formula Two days because Minardi is one of the very few teams who have come the junior formulas as Jordan did, and fought their own way, in their own individual way, to get to where they are. I need ten teams for the credibility of what I'm doing. It also helps me because, right now, Paul is keeping me off the back row of the grid and I wouldn't want to be there. But things aren't easy at the moment and this is the wrong forum. We should have a meeting and, as Paul rightly says, there was a meeting and he wasn't at it.

PS:
I wasn't asked to come, Eddie, let's be clear.

EJ:
Yeah, okay. But I think, if we could, possibly, as a result of this meeting...I think, if the five of us here, if we can try and make sure that we leave this weekend with some positive...if the ag [aggression] factor that seems to be here can come...I mean, what Paul needs is immediate support. Let's see if it can be done. I'm actually 100 per cent behind Paul because I don't want to have to run a third car if I need to. I certainly couldn't afford to do it, that's for sure.

Q:
You said before you never would take charity from another team. Who paid your leasing rates for the trucks in Barcelona?

EJ:
I don't actually know that and I don't know anything about who pays leasing rates. There are all sorts of people who pay different sponsorships.

Q:
Okay, so you would swear it, never to get money from another factory or another team to pay your trucks?

EJ:
Trucks? Sorry, I think we are really losing the plot here. Can we please try and keep on the subject.

Q:
Well, I had a question and I wanted an answer. That was everything.

RD:
Let's move on.