Why Ecclestone can’t let go of F1

Bernie Ecclestone is, he always said, a man of his word. A man whose word is his bond.

So, when he said "let's talk in Bahrain" during his pre-Australian Grand Prix telephone call to me, I had expectations of interviewing the 86-year-old. I certainly did not, though, believe our chat would last 45 minutes, and end only when a race promoter called with some urgent business.

We meet in Bahrain circuit's executive tower on Saturday at 4pm, two hours ahead of qualifying, and I open by quipping that "You're on the fourth floor; last year you would have been on the roof."

"Well, I don't have a lot of choice in doing anything these days, because I've been elevated to a position so high up I can't see the ground," he says, waving at the expansive view while commenting "Ross [Brawn] has got that office."

Only 30 seconds have elapsed before a mention of the man many see as Bernie's successor, although, truth be told, Ecclestone was replaced by a triumvirate.

Does he view it as a compliment that his job as CEO of Formula One Management is now done by three men, namely Chase Carey (chairman/CEO of the renamed Formula One Group), Brawn (sport) and Sean Bratches (marketing)?

"No, I was an idiot," he shoots back wryly.

Given that he had been in Brazil for well-nigh three weeks on a family visit - wife Fabiana, hails from there, and was an Interlagos executive - it seems opportune to start gently by questioning him on the future of the Sao Paulo circuit, and rumours that he planned to buy the venue.

"Firstly it was never that I was interested in buying it," Ecclestone explains. "It was the case that Chase asked me, when I go over there can I speak to - which I had before - the president [Michel Temer] about support for the race.

"It seemed to me pretty obvious that he had plenty of other things on his mind rather than worry about Formula 1. So, we turned to the mayor of Sao Paulo, because it's more his area.

"The bottom line is simple: he doesn't want to spend one dollar in support, he wants to sell the circuit. So, he said to me would I be interested. 'No idea. Depends what the terms are'.

"So, that's more or less as we've left it. We got him to agree that when it goes to tender, whoever buys it, has to keep the Formula 1 circuit."

Race or circuit?

"The race, it will be there until 2020, for sure. 100%."

Onto the main thrust of our talk, then. We move onto the question of his call to me a month ago to discuss "what we did, what we are doing, and what we are going to do".

"To discuss the fact that things are going to change, I think, basically because Chase wants to see the Bernie era gone, and move on. That's what his intentions are.

"I don't quite know what they're going to move on to, because basically what they bought was like buying Starbucks, where there's a formula: how much milk do you put into the coffee, and how much this... and there was nothing really to do.

"What they can do, which is what they thought they would be able to do, is probably help a lot with TV companies, because that's their business. We were struggling always in America for TV, the same in China.

"I thought, 'Well, at least they'd be able to do something there.' Hopefully as well, maybe bring some new sponsors into the business, because I think otherwise basically all the things that we were doing on a day-to-day basis would probably run alright."

It is difficult not to detect an element of bitterness in his voice, so the obvious question: "Are you bitter?"

"No."

I leave the answer hanging, hoping he'll expand, but nothing doing.

A different tack, then: "Some of the things you've said, like you've charged promoters too much money, are construed as mischievous. Obviously they will now ask [FOG] to charge less..."

"What I said was I envy Chase a little bit because when I was chief executive of the company, it was my job to ensure the company made the maximum amount of money it could make, long term.

"Which is exactly what I did, to make sure the shareholders were happy.

"I said I think in Chase's position he's lucky enough not to be in that position to have to do that."

I point out that the previous day, during an impromptu media scrum in the paddock, Ecclestone was asked whether he had any regrets, whether there was anything he would have done differently, and he replied with "I charged them too much for what we provided so I feel a bit responsible."

He expands.

"What I meant was, firstly, I charged them as much as I could get, because I was in the business to try and make money for the company. So that's what I did. We didn't deliver... what they'd paid for."

Namely?

"Bloody good racing, competitive racing. When you sell a ticket to somebody and you know more or less - not guaranteed, but a fair chance - who's going to win the race and who's going to be second, it's not what they bought.

"They bought racing."

He grimaces as he says that and adds that F1 has "gone through its worst, to be honest with you."

That F1's buck stopped on his desk seems lost on him.

But, if he's right that the 'worst' has passed, does Ecclestone see potential for F1 to grow now?

"I don't know. If you said to me, 'Bernie, if you were still CEO, what would you do?', for sure I'd try to do a deal with the promoters.

"Before I dealt with the promoters, I would do a deal with the teams.

"I'd say, 'We're not going to pay you as much as we used to pay you. Forget about even distribution; forget all that. We're going to find a different system to reward you for your activities.'

"Now they get at least 70% [68, actually] of the total [gross] profits of the company. 'You're going to get paid a bit more on what you deliver to us.'"

Does that imply incentive-linked revenue structures?

"Yeah, exactly. So I would do that, then I would say to the promoters, 'We're going to charge you a bit less, but you have to sell your tickets much cheaper.

"'If you want to do something for the fans, that's what you can do. So they can bring the family along for not what it costs today but a more sensible figure.'"

It's an intriguing concept, particularly as on the Friday of the Bahrain GP weekend the Baku promoter, Arif Rahimov, suggested regionalised hosting fee structures - one for European races, another for the Americas and so on.

I ask Bernie why he did not introduce such structures as CEO during CVC's 10-year rule.

"Well, Donald [Mackenzie, CVC co-founder and -chairman, and formerly Ecclestone's de facto "boss"] wanted to sell for four years.

"So, for four years I was running the business and wrapping it in nice paper to make sure it was a good product to sell.

"So now, if I hadn't have had to do that, probably I would have done what I said."

I point out that he started hiking the fees around 2005, before CVC came in, so the trend was there, plus the teams earned less back then.

"Well, things were a little bit different those days. If you look at the fees I wished to charge them it was all right [and teams earned] a lot less.

"Now they're getting 68%, and they used to get 47% of TV revenues only, that's how it started. [The bottom line number was 23% of FOM's earnings]."

How does Ecclestone feel about the present management team of FOG?

"Sean I've never met," he says, which seems incredible given that both men were highly visible throughout the paddock all weekend, plus FOG continues to operate out of Bernie's Princess Gate premises - although the management trio itself works out of temporary offices in St James's Square.

"This Sean, he's never been to a race, except [recently]. So, to stick somebody in and say, 'You're dealing with commercial things'...

"Chase I met yesterday again. I feel sorry for him, because I think he's been thrown into the deep end, nobody's going to throw him a rope to save him if he's drowning."

So, onto Brawn.

"Of course he's not capable..." says Ecclestone with a steely glint, adding some explicit terms.

You don't hold a very high opinion of Ross...

"No, that's not correct. His position that he had, both with Flavio [Briatore, at Benetton] and at Ferrari, was a different position to what these people, Chase, believe he was in. He's never had to do the job, apparently, which he's going to do now."

But he ran his own team, which won the championship...

"Absolutely, because he cheated."

You think he cheated? Strong words.

"I don't, but other people do."

I put it to Ecclestone that the "cheating" revolved around the use of a double-decker diffuser in 2009, and that both he, Bernie, and then-FIA president Max Mosley had agreed to allow Brawn GP to keep the diffuser.

"Yeah, there's lots of things we agreed to. But that doesn't mean..."

That they were legal?

"Yeah, exactly right."

Brawn sold his eponymous team to Mercedes, and I put it to Ecclestone that he engineered Brawn out of the team - as recently described by Brawn in his book 'Total Competition'.

"Not correct," says Ecclestone, arguing Brawn left "Probably [due to] a financial incentive, maybe to do something else."

He later passes opinions of Brawn in terms too blunt for this website, so clearly the two do not swap Christmas cards.

Why, then, did Ecclestone tell all and sundry he had a three-year deal to stay on, then find himself booted upstairs in January?

I put it to Bernie that people believe, whether true or not, that Brawn... Ecclestone completes the sentence: "He said if I'm there he's not going to take the job. That was in his contract."

"You know that or heard it?" I ask - explaining that Brawn had said during a separate interview that it had not been the case.

"I was told. I think it's more or less come out with the people who put [Brawn's] contract together."

The real facts, then, likely lie midway between the two scenarios.

Ecclestone moves on: "I think with me they should have said, 'Bernie, this is what we would like to do, we now own the company, and we'd like you and Chase to find a nice agreement.'

"Which is what I suggested: share the office, listen to the phone calls, meet the people. And before they bought, and at the races he went to, I introduced him to everybody.

"And then, after a little while, then they could say, 'Thanks a lot, it's working well, we're happy and everything, are you happy, Bernie? If you wouldn't mind, you know, you take a little bit of time off now and enjoy life or whatever.'

"That's what I think they should've done, because I think they've got a lot of people who weren't happy with the way they dealt with things."

Given this background, does Ecclestone believe Liberty Corporation - now owner of the listed Formula One Group - is the best owner of F1?

"The best people as far as I'm concerned are... we should have done a deal with the Qataris. They didn't want any partners, including Mackenzie. They didn't want anybody. They wanted to buy the entire shareholding."

So, 100%, as Ecclestone originally owned when he first acquired F1's commercial rights in the name of SLEC, his original family trust?

"Yeah, exactly. Obviously [the Qataris] said, 'We'd like you to hang on for three or four years, if you could, and run things and do things the way you want to, we're happy.'

"So, being selfish, as far as I'm concerned, that would have been good for me, so I could step down in my time. I thought that would have been OK. I told them, and they were happy with it.

"I said, 'If I find I can't deliver, I want to disappear then.' This is what would happen.

"I don't know, because I don't know exactly what's going to happen with our new shareholders.

"Chase is a very nice guy, I have no problems with Chase at all. He's never done anything wrong or whatever.

"He could have dealt with me a little bit different to the way he did."

Clearly Ecclestone has not moved upstairs quietly. And as he intends on attending 10 grands prix this year, that's not going to change.