F1 can't disguise its shortcomings

If the platform for the interview was utterly predictable, its timing certainly was extraordinary: during the very week that Formula 1 board member Sir Martin Sorrell faced shareholder criticism over his £70million pay packet and lack of concrete succession at WPP, the global advertising/PR agency started by the 71-year-old, the series' official website published a "frank and enlightening discussion" with the "plainspoken" Brit.

The full text can be accessed here, but, where various media outlets were bullish about Sorrell's responses closer scrutiny suggests that not only are his comments arguably designed to deflect attention from WPP's recent media coverage - but that, rather than provide a road map for F1's future, hard facts in many ways do not support his views.

For example, he states that F1 CEO Bernie Ecclestone, 86 years old this year, "is somebody who is unique - and this will get me into trouble - by definition cannot be replaced." The fact of the matter is that one of humankind's characteristics is that every member is as unique as the next individual.

Patently the CEO of GM is unique, yet the automaker's board does not simply roll over and play dead when it comes to the question of succession planning; ditto the highest executive in the most powerful office in the world, namely the president of the United States of America - right now the country is gearing up to replace what is a unique individual. Imagine if voters shied away from polls because Barack Obama is unique...

Simply put, as a board member (and CEO) it is incumbent upon Sorrell to participate in succession planning for F1's top job. By definition Sorrell is unique, yet in April the chairman of WPP, Roberto Quarta, made the following comment about WPP's need to institute succession planning:

"Whether, in [Sorrell's] case, [succession] happens tomorrow, in one, two, three, four or five years, or even over a longer period, we have already begun to identify internal and external candidates who should be considered [as his replacement]."

The matter again reared its head last week during WPP's shareholder meeting - as did the question of Sorrell's 2016 remuneration that pans out at 200 times the average annual earnings of WPP employees - but the crucial question in F1 circles is: does F1 even have a two-, three-, four- or five-year programme? We should be told.

During the Canadian Grand Prix weekend there were suggestions from various sources that Sorrell had used the interview to position himself as successor to Ecclestone, with whom he enjoys, of course, a relationship going back 50 years: Sorrell worked as "bag man" to Jackie Stewart while with sports marketing agency IMG at a time when the Scot was friendly with and neighbour to Jochen Rindt, then managed by Ecclestone.

The personal chemistry between the two self-made men is evident during an Advertising Week interview Sorrell conducted with Ecclestone in May. Whether, though, Sorrell has the right stuff to replace Ecclestone is another question.

If ever there was a man who ticked all boxes it is Ross Brawn - as this writer has maintained since 2013 - but the 61-year-old is now clearly more motivated by fly fishing than flying around the world in pursuit of fast cars, so another shortlist needs to be compiled.

Contrary to the widely punted scenarios of two CEOs jointly running F1, Sorrell correctly believes a single person should be in overall charge after listing the qualities required by the successful candidate. He could do far worse than consider Carmelo Ezpeleta, who single-handedly built up MotoGP to a level where it challenges F1 as a top rank motorsport entertainment spectacle.

The Spaniard has experience in dealing with top politicians, understands how to string calendars together, has negotiated top-dollar contracts, runs the series with an iron fist and has immersed himself in motorsport since his teens, when he worked for the Spanish motorsport federation. Above all, occasionally he has blindsided Ecclestone when it comes to race promoter contracts...

Ezpeleta sold his business to current F1 majority owner CVC Capital Partners well before Ecclestone did - indeed, CVC divested of MotoGP as a condition of having its F1 purchase approved by the EU Commission - so he fully understands the culture. Dorna acquired MotoGP's commercial rights a decade before the FIA/Ecclestone followed suit with F1.

In many ways Dorna provided F1 with blueprints, so if Brawn could slot into Bernie's footsteps in a flash, Ezpeleta would surely take just five minutes longer.

Moving on: while Sorrell maintains that "demand amongst global and local sponsors for [FIFA World Cup, Olympics and F1] is immense" and that "Formula 1 - because it happens every year - generates more sponsorship money for a four-year cycle than anybody else", the current Brandz Top 100 report, compiled by a WPP subsidiary, shows the top global brand currently in F1 to be Ferrari partner UPS at #17.

True, a subsidiary of Microsoft (#2) graces Renault, but for the rest it is pretty bleak, for after UPS comes SAP (#22) before a massive void to Mercedes at #39. Intriguingly, the Three Pointed Star trails Toyota (which exited F1 after failing to win a race in eight years) and BMW (one victory), with the baby nappy Pampers brand sat midway between BMW and Mercedes.

Honda comes in at #74, Red Bull is ranked 90th, while Renault's alliance partner Nissan rates the 92nd spot - with Ferrari not even ranked.

Of greater concern is the number of ex-F1 sponsors on the list: apart from aforementioned car companies, no fewer than seven brands, including the likes of AT&T, HSBC and Vodafone, all exited the sport over the past decade. Saliently, newly announced F1 global sponsor Heineken comes in at #97, while the top beer brand is Budweiser (think NASCAR) at #31.

By contrast, FIFA lists VISA (#6), McDonald's (#9) and Coca Cola (#13) as partners, while the IOC also lists that trio, in addition to GE (#16, ex-F1 sponsor) and Samsung at #48.

When it comes to "building heroes", Sorrell waxes lyrical about the branding concept created by reality TV star Kim Kardashian, whom he recently interviewed. Yet, not once does he refer to Lewis Hamilton, whose efforts at brand-building deservedly made the triple champion a global star. Ditto Max Verstappen: when mentioned by the interviewer, Sorrell brushes aside the most exciting driver to hit the grid in a generation with an answer of less than 50 words.

Sorrell sees F1's emerging markets as being BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa), followed by the Next Eleven (Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Turkey, South Korea, Vietnam), stating that the "next billion consumers" will come from those territories.

Yet four (India, South Africa, Turkey, South Korea) of those have already voted with their feet when it came to F1, while Mexico recently made a comeback at enormous cost after a 30-year absence.

As F1 decamps in Baku just days after racing in Montreal in the most convoluted travel itineraries faced by F1 personnel in many a season - possibly even ever - folk may like to reflect on Sorrell's list of future hosts: Argentina (ex-F1 venue), Peru, Columbia, Indonesia, Nigeria and Vietnam.

He also suggests F1 should stage three races in the USA: one each on the east and west coasts, and one in Detroit - which, for the record, no longer has any connection with F1 given that Ford exited the championship a decade ago, while Ferrari no longer forms part of the Fiat Chrysler alliance - but this overlooks the rather simple reality that Austin's race happened only after various failed attempts elsewhere.

Sorrell sees F1 as "entertainment [that] competes with other entertainments for people's time on a weekend", having made the points that it is a highly competitive sport that does not compete with other racing series. Whether he is correct will manifest itself this weekend when petrol/diesel heads face clashing F1/Le Mans schedules. As he knows all too well, TV ratings are king in this business.

Whatever, his comment that "the more equal [F1] is the more exciting it is...the more volatile in the sense of results" cannot be left unchallenged, for, as an F1 board member, he was party to its contentious governance process and inequitable revenue structure, which collectively have conspired to create the most unequal sporting environment in the history of F1, possibly even all sport!

While talking about heroes Sorrell also alludes to the need of a "much more levelled playing field, where you have the ability for many people to become heroes", which is about as close to an admission that F1 currently lacks heroes beyond Hamilton - who, crucially, races the best car facilitated by a budget that is substantially augmented by premium payments - due to the current revenue structure being plain wrong.

Any wonder, then, that on Sunday the top seven finishers represented four of the teams who sit on the Strategy Group, and which benefit from premium payments that alone exceed the total budgets of some independent teams.

A large part of the interview was dedicated to the question of virtual reality, and while this is certainly in F1's future, the topic is so complex it will be the subject of a future feature of its own.

That said, various issues need to be resolved before fans are able to virtually stroll along pitlanes or wander through paddocks, not least because estimates are that there are only about 2.5 million VR headsets in use globally versus a TV footprint several hundred times that. Clearly, then, costs of VR kit need to reduce dramatically to accelerate up-take, and that lies outside of F1's direct control.

The most intriguing thing is why a board member of F1's holding company would take to F1's official website in support of Ecclestone. Why not CVC founder Donald Mackenzie, majority controller of the sport's commercial rights through its 35.5% stake in the Formula One Group?

If anything, the message that emerges from Sorrell's interview that, against a background of dwindling TV numbers, inequitable revenue and governance structures, tilted sporting pitches and lack of succession at the top level, F1 is in need of a total revamp, starting from the top down. No amount of spin on an in-house website by a global PR professional can disguise that fact.