Customer cars Q & A with Colin Kolles

Colin Kolles: A customer car is a customer car. It is not a constructors' car, so it is very simple. I am not against running these cars, even though this is already damaging for F1, but they are not constructors.

And we have a constructors' Championship, so they are not entitled to get constructors' points. It is not a Toro Rosso, it is a Red Bull. It is not a Super Aguri, it is a Honda.

Q. There have been suggestions that the first step to resolve the situation will be an official protest in Melbourne?

CK: Yes, obviously we have to wait. We don't know what they will be running. Maybe Toro Rosso decides to run their two-year old Minardi.

Q. Frank Williams said last week that he believed a compromise could be struck before the start of the season. Do you think that is realistic?

CK: Yes, we are proposing a solution. Bernie (Ecclestone) made a very fair proposal and it is very clear. As long as you are not a constructor, and to stop lying to the world, they should not score points. To be a constructor you have to own the intellectual property and it is singular in the Concorde Agreement.

You cannot share it. That is the point. They are simply sharing and it is not fair that they are saving lots of money while we are investing lots of money. They want to save the money and get the benefits. It cannot work like this.

Q. Will it come down to a financial deal being struck before the start of the season?

CK: I don't know if they will accept this. They are playing hardball. I cannot decide what they are going to do. I know what we are going to do.

Q. There are some suggestions that the FIA is not supporting the independent teams who have been around for decades, and are helping new start up outfits more. What do you think?

CK: Well, Frank Williams was very clear in a recent meeting. Everyone knows Frank Williams, they know his passion, education and what he has done in 38 years of motorsport. And it is just like spitting in his face. The customer cars are only allowed from 2008 - and we have 2007. This is even a bigger slap in the face. It is amazing.

Q. Have you spoken to the FIA about the matter?

CK: I don't have to speak to the FIA about this. For what reasons should I speak to them about this? The FIA is not the body that will have to decide this.

Q. The courts are?

CK: Exactly. So I don't know on what Red Bull are counting. Even their technical director has said they are using the same car except for the mounting points on the engine. He said this to the press in front of people, so they cannot turn it around by changing company names from Red Bull to Red Bull Technology overnight and things like this.

I wonder how a judge will see it. It cannot be. They are afraid of something, otherwise they would not change something like Adrian Newey all of a sudden not being employed by Red Bull Racing but by Red Bull Technology. All this rubbish is just fake.

Q. Should something have been done last year with the Scuderia Toro Rosso situation and the old Jaguar?

CK: We are going to also do something about this. That is very clear. They know, they have received a nice letter from us where everything is clearly stated.

Q. And it details what will happen from now?

CK: Yes. It is a very clear letter, and every other team is accepting it except for four teams - and even Red Bull say they comply with the Concorde Agreement.

Q. Is it a possibility that only nine teams race in Australia?

CK: I don't know. If they are not in the rules we will do whatever is possible, even an injunction. That is very clear.

Q. And that relates to both last year's car and this year's car?

CK: Yes, I believe last year's car (Toro Rosso) was also illegal. I understand that some people want to take advantage, but there is a certain point where you have to stop it. And they can run whatever they want, but there should be no constructors' championship points. It is clear: one team has to own the intellectual property. This is the definition of a constructor in the Concorde Agreement.

Q. Would you prefer it if it did not go to court?

CK: Yes of course. We are trying to settle this. They have to come and say: 'Yes, we are using the same car. We are doing this and doing that. Let's find a solution.' And the solution has been proposed. You can enter the championship as a customer car user, but in two years time you should be a constructor. It is just to make it easier to enter F1, so you can buy another chassis, but then you have to build your own car after a period. To become a constructor.

The cost to build two or three more cars is so marginal compared to the development costs, and that is the problem behind this. It is a commercial problem. And it has nothing to do with the FIA. It is the Concorde Agreement, and the FOM.

The 2008 Technical and Sporting Regulations are unclear regarding customer cars. They don't state either way whether you can or cannot use customer cars. But the Concorde Agreement is not signed yet, and it says very clear that you have to be a manufacturer. The problem is that some people are trying to overcome this in 2007, and say I am a constructor and I want to get the money for it.

The Concorde Agreement says who is entitled to get the benefits, and there is a clear proposal for this. So if David Richards wants to use a customer car he can use it from 2008, but he is not entitled to any benefits.

Q. He might not agree with that though?

CK: Yes, but this is Concorde Agreement. You have a Concorde Agreement and this is what regulates the commercial issues, and not the Sporting and Technical Regulations.

Q. Do you think it was significant that the Super Aguri failed its crash test?

CK: They are trying to say 'we are a constructor, we are building our own monocoque'. But so what? We will see. Last year I complained about this, and I was alone, but now it is not only me complaining about this - it is everybody. It is McLaren, it is Ferrari, Williams, and Toyota. Everybody.

Toyota are very unhappy. They say they might not join legal action but the Concorde Agreement is black and white: they believe they are not within the regulations.