this post was submitted on 01 May 2024

55 points (95.1% liked)

Formula 1

9099 readers

74 users here now

Welcome to Formula1 @ Lemmy.world Lemmy's largest community for Formula 1 and related racing series

Rules

Be respectful to everyone; drivers, lemmings, redditors etc
No gambling, crypto or NFTs
Spoilers are allowed
Non English articles should include a translation in the comments by deepl.com or similar
Paywalled articles should include at least a brief summary in the comments, the wording of the article should not be altered
Social media posts should be posted as screenshots with a link for those who want to view it
Memes are allowed on Monday only as we all do like a laugh or 2, but don’t want to become formuladank.

Up next

F1 Calendar

2024 Calendar

Location	Date
🇶🇦 Qatar	29 Nov-01 Dec
🇦🇪 Abu Dhabi	06-08 Dec

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Photographer@lemmy.world

wes@lemmy.world

bwoah@lemmy.world

U.S. Congress members demand answers on Andretti's exclusion from Formula 1 (www.nbcnews.com)

submitted 7 months ago by Rapidcreek@lemmy.world to c/formula1@lemmy.world

55 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 24 points 7 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

I want Andretti in F1 too (well, more precisely I want another team or two. Or at least someone else to take over a pointless team like Haas or ~~Minardi~~ ~~Toro Rosso~~ ~~Alpha Tauri~~ Diet Red Bull, I don't really give a shit whether it's Andretti or not)

But what the hell does this have to do with random US politicians? They don't have a say on this. This just seems like some politician trying to get a bit of free PR. He surely can't actually believe his shouting into the wind counts for anything, can he?

If this nonsense is allowed, imagine the can of worms it would open. All of a sudden plenty of countries could say it's not fair and demand they also have teams allowed to enter. Should the NFL have to let British teams join if the UK government started kicking up a fuss about it? I'd say no.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 17 points 7 months ago (3 children)

As the article explains, Congressmen invoked the Sherman Act. That has to do with competitive markets. congress has the authority to make laws and make sure they are followed in interstate commerce, which F1 falls under. So, they are doing their job.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (28 children)

The NFL doesn't allow competition from teams from plenty of countries. Should those countries be able to sue the NFL on that basis, saying it's anti-competitive?

If your opinion on the above is "no", could you then explain what merits this double standard?

There seems to be an element of US exceptionalism here. The US does not get to impose management terms on foreign sporting organisations, except for the events that take place within their borders.

[–] Baahb@feddit.nl 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The NFL, MLB, and whatever US based sports leagues actually have exceptions to the Sherman antitrust act. F1 does not have this, but are owned by a US based, publicly traded company, and are this is subject to US law, including the Sherman antitrust act.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

They have those clauses in the US, not the UK. So based on your logic the UK should be able to tell the NFL what they can/can't do regardless of US law.

You're arguing both ways. That the UK can't impose terms on the NFL because it's under US law, but that the US can impose terms on FOM despite being under UK law.

Incorrect. FOM is a UK company based in the UK. They are under UK jurisdiction, not US jurisdiction.

Think of it this way, McDonalds is an American company, but their UK subsidiary has to follow UK law, not American law. Does that make sense to you? The UK business follows UK advertising law, food safety law, employee protection law, environmental law, etc. Not US law.

[–] Baahb@feddit.nl 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

If they operate in the US, like they are at this very moment in Miami, they are supposed to follow US law. They don't get some weird ass exception just cause the governing body is located elsewhere. Just like countries are free to ban cigarette advertising, the US does have the ability to say "you want to race here, follow our rules."

Think of it this way, McDonalds is an American company, but their UK subsidiary has to follow UK law, not American law. But if that UK franchisee wants to open a store in the US, they still have to follow US law. Does that make sense to you? The business that is operating in the US follows US advertising law, food safety law, employee protection law, environmental law, etc. Not JUST UK law.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (27 replies)

[–] Octavius@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Or andretti made a considerable donation to their campaign ;)

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago

As the article says, the Congressman from Michigan is involved. Michigan is the home of GM. GM is going to reintroduce the Cadillac name to Europe. GM is being excluded from marketing though F1. So, it's probably GM not Mario. Though, Mario has plenty of money.

[–] hsr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

I don't know enough about American politics to know how much it costs to pay off a rep, but Mario racked up over $100,000 worth of donations to Republicans, and his daughter-in-law, Jodi Peterson, about $30,000 to both parties.

Edit: Mario is at $144k according to www.fec.gov

[–] Alto@kbin.social 2 points 6 months ago

I can't remember what the exact numbers were, but that last time I saw someone put together charts of "oh this company gave $X to Reps A, B, and C, and they all backed this law, hm", it was something depressingly low, like 25k.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

It's been said that old Mario made twice as much money trading stock than he did racing cars. He was better at it than his twin brother Aldo, who was a very successful stock broker.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

Surely any country could do this, making it laughably unrealistic.

Any country could just say "according to our interpretation of our law X, you must allow new F1 entries from our country"

I imagine the FIA is under no obligation to allow entry of a team just because some country where the FIA isn't even based demands it.

I guess Liberty being American adds complexity, but as far as I know it's not up to them.

Similarly, if the UK said their laws state that UK teams should be able to join the NFL, it should be laughed at. But that's what the US is doing here.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The EU also has laws about anti competitive practices and I would think this letter might stir their interest.

First of all, the FIA is a sanctioning body which only owns the F1 brand. It is very much in the US, since it sanctions racing here. I myself held an FIA license. The FIA approved Andretti's inclusion.

Liberty and the F1 Constructors are the ones on the hook.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, I'm aware there are races in the US. I'm saying all they can really do is stop them from racing in the US, and a couple of other peripheral things to be a thorn in F1's side to apply pressure. They can't really impose terms on the FIA beyond that, because it's not their jurisdiction.

Besides, the Concorde Agreement is set out in English law. They'd have to challenge it in an English court.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

Seems to me there might be other kinds of problems. For instance, Formula One is listed on the NY Stock Exchange. At the very least, an anti-trust suit would wound the company. But, it could turn into bigger things. GM/Andretti would get a whole lot of money in damages. Considering what happened to FIFA...

But, this letter is merely a shot across the bow it seems to me. They have to answer it, so we'll see what they say.

[–] hsr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

But F1 is racing in the US, in theory there's a threat of Vegas, Miami or COTA cancelling their contracts.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] dugmeup@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Not if the FIA want to stay and operate in that country. The FIA is not exempt from national laws.

Sure they can leave the US. But if they want to operate in the US, believe it or not, US laws apply.

[–] JJROKCZ@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They think European businesses (most of the teams are European) are colluding to prevent an American business’s participation in an industry. Which violates US anti-trust laws. Formula 1 will either have to prove that isn’t happening(it clearly is), or allow the American team to participate, or stop doing business in the US. Along with paying whatever fine is decided upon. Formula 1’s best bet at this stage is allowing Andretti/GM to enter

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It may violate US anti-trust laws. It might also violate Bangladeshi anti-trust laws. Doesn't really matter as FOM isn't under their jurisdiction, not is the Concorde Agreement.

There's nothing they can do about it other than say no you can't race here. Which is obviously not what FOM wants, but that's quite a bit different to a legal challenge, which would have to go through the UK/UK law.

[–] JJROKCZ@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

If they’re found to violate US laws they can be forced to either comply or not so business in the US. They always have the choice to not do business in the US but no one is ever going to choose to not do business in the wealthiest and third largest nation on earth by population

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

That's what I'm saying...

[–] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

This definitely feels a little like getting your parents to fix things. Having said that, I bet you anything that if a Saudi Arabia based team wanted in. They would very much get Mohammed bin Salman to put a call into Liberty Media and FIA. And I would be very surprised if the Saudi team wasn't approved the next week

Also I kind of don't care if it's a little whiny because Andretti got screwed and I want to see them in F1. It would be nice to have an American team that cares.

[–] exanime 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

This will help as much as your mother calling the CEO of the company that didn't hire you, to demand reasons why they didn't think her baby is awesome

[–] smeg@feddit.uk 5 points 6 months ago

It is a bit "Team America" of them to think they can just demand it because the current owners of the commercial rights (or whatever it is that Liberty actually own, it's hard to tell!) happen to be American.

USA politicians: 'We demand that you let the American teams in!'

Liberty: 'Well it's not really our decision, you'll have to ask the teams'

Teams: 'Lol, you're not our boss, you have no power here!'

That said, I'd love to see more teams on the grid so I'll still be happy if this wacky scheme pays off!

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

IDK, I suppose FIFA thought the same thing.

[–] Rognaut@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

If there is any way that they could beat red bull and max, I'm all for them joining.

I kinda doubt they stand a chance though 😕

Hopefully losing their designer will actually hurt red bull.

load more comments