From Conflict To Collaboration: How The COVID-19 Crisis Reconciled The MSMA

Once upon a time, the manufacturers reigned supreme in MotoGP. The MSMA – the Motorcycle Sports Manufacturers' Association – determined the shape of the premier class. In the early years after Dorna secured the rights to promote Grand Prix motorcycle racing, the MSMA negotiated a monopoly over the technical regulations in MotoGP.

The rules in MotoGP are made in committee, the Grand Prix Commission, containing representatives of the four parties with an interest in the sport: Dorna as promoter, the FIM as sanctioning body, IRTA representing the teams, and the MSMA on behalf of the manufacturers. While the sporting and other rules are voted on by majority, the MSMA controlled the technical rules.

In the early years of the MotoGP era Rule changes proposed unanimously by the MSMA were adopted automatically, and the MSMA retained a veto over rules put forward by the other members of the GPC. It was the MSMA who asked for the switch from two strokes to four strokes, and the MSMA who insisted on reducing the capacity from 990cc to 800cc in 2007, when concerns were raised over the speeds of the bigger bikes.

Then the global financial crisis hit in 2008. Through 2009, it became clear that the technical rules were unsustainable in the economic climate of the time. First, Kawasaki dropped out, then Suzuki went at the end of 2011. When new contracts with the factories were negotiated, Dorna ensured that the MSMA lost a little of its influence.

Reshuffle fallout

The loss of Kawasaki and Suzuki had a bigger impact on the MSMA. Up until that point in time, Honda had dominated the manufacturers' association, as the senior Japanese manufacturer, with the others deferring to HRC. Ducati was seen as a mere inconvenience, a Johnny-come-lately, having only joined the premier class in 2003. But from 2012, Ducati comprised one-third of the MSMA, with Honda and Yamaha. And Ducati were considerably less inclined to play along.

There were early signs of trouble back in 2011. Dorna had proposed raising the minimum weight for MotoGP machines from 153kg to 160kg for the 2012 season onward, to keep costs in check for the CRT teams which were due to join the class in 2012. That proposal was rejected by the MSMA at a meeting in Valencia in 2011, which meant it was dropped by the Grand Prix Commission.

But in the weeks that followed, it became evident that the MSMA members had not been unanimous. Ducati had voted in favor of the weight increase, and so it should never have been rejected. The Grand Prix Commission adopted a compromise, raising the minimum weight to 157kg, and unleashing a raft of issues of chatter for Honda and, to a lesser degree, Yamaha in early 2012.

This episode made clear that unanimity would be hard to maintain within the MSMA. That made it easier for Dorna and IRTA to push through the rule changes they wanted to reduce costs and make the racing closer. That helped MotoGP arrive at the point we currently are, with spec electronics and maximum prices for the lease of satellite machines.

Out of balance

These changes have disturbed the balance inside the MSMA even further, however. Where once there were four Japanese factories (Honda, Kawasaki, Suzuki, Yamaha) and Ducati, the new factories arriving have been a mixture. Suzuki have returned to increase the number of Japanese factories to three, while KTM and Aprilia have entered MotoGP to swell the European ranks to three. There is a very different power balance and a different vibe inside the MSMA nowadays.

There has also been a marked increase in tension. With less consensus and a clash of corporate cultures, relations have been strained. And the changing rules in MotoGP has served to radically ramp up those tensions.

First, Gigi Dall’Igna threw a spanner into the works of the MSMA when he announced that Ducati would be racing in MotoGP as an Open Class team in 2014, to allow them to circumvent the freeze on engine development, and use more engines during the season. That was solved by the introduction of concessions for manufacturers who hadn't won races, a system which has also proved invaluable for Suzuki, KTM, and Aprilia in helping them develop and, in Suzuki's case, return to winning.

Ducati's first attempt at wings was quite modest, smaller wings low on the fairing, here on Andrea Iannone's GP15 at Qatar

Ducati muddied the waters even further with their pursuit of aerodynamics as an alternative to electronics to control the bikes. Winglets appeared on the Desmosedici GP15 in 2015 as an anti-wheelie device, and quickly spread all over the front of the bike.

By 2016, the Ducati had sprouted wings everywhere. Here, the front view of Andrea Dovizioso's bike at Texas in 2016 shows the upper and huge lower wings

A war of words erupted between Honda and Ducati, though mostly behind closed doors. Shuhei Nakamoto, vice president of HRC at the time, expressed his anger at Ducati publicly in an interview with international journalist Manuel Pecino. "Ducati said no to everything," Nakamoto told Pecino, about proposals put forward to restrict the wings. "It just was no, and no, and no. All the Japanese factories agreed and Aprilia in some respects did too, but Ducati did not want to discuss the matter. It was their way or nothing."

This followed earlier dark warnings that Ducati did not want to get into a war of aerodynamics with Honda. HRC, after all, had the backing of the largest motorcycle manufacturer in the world, tied to one of the largest car manufacturers, with a vast amount of experience with aerodynamics through their F1 programs, as well as wind tunnels at their disposal.

Compromise followed, with winglets being replaced with ducts and loops. The aerodynamic function remained, though it had been somewhat curtailed.

To read the remaining 1328 words of this article, you need to sign up to become a site supporter by taking out a subscription. You can find out more about subscribing to here.

This is part of a regular series of unique insights into the world of motorcycle racing, exclusive for site supporters. The series includes interviews, background information, in-depth analysis, and opinion, and is available to everyone supporting the site by taking out a subscription.

If you would like to read more of our exclusive content you can join the growing band of site supporters, by taking out a subscription here. If you prefer, you can also support us on our Patreon page and get access to the same exclusive material there.


Back to top


When one's survival is at stake, individual petty differences are set aside for the common good of the whole. As far as Motogp and the MSMA is concerned, maybe this will lead to even closer racing.

Agreed peterday "When one's survival is at stake, individual petty differences are set aside for the common good"

Competition is good, now is not the time for it. With lots of work and collaboration we may see racing again this year.

Thanks for the history lesson David.

Already we have a challenge to the MSMA's new accord. Aprilia would like a dispensation to do some reliability testing.

I think that Aprilia definitely needs to improve the reliability of their MotoGp engines. I assume that the other five manus would prefer not to have Aprilia oil & engine components on the track. So I guess it is in the interest of the MSMA to have reliable Aprilia RSGP bikes. Don't think Aleix Espargaro, Bradley Smith or Andrea Iannone are likely to take anything away from Marc Marquez. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I would love to see six competitive brands racing in MotoGp.

Two day race weekends? I'm not sure how that would work. As Peter Bom says in the article By The Numbers: Setting Up A Racing Motorcycle Using Chassis Software

 "Riders and teams are in a constant battle against time" & he goes on to write "they have just a few practice sessions to come up with the perfect setup"

Taking away a day from the current 3 day race meeting is going to challenge the riders & teams a whole lot more.

Maybe having two Gps at the same circuit on back to back weekends might help make it work. The first Saturday could be practice, like Friday was last year etc. Two full practice sessions. Grid possitions decided by practice times. Sunday race day as normal. Second race weekend at the same track, Saturday could be Saturday as usual, 1 practice session followed by Qualifying. I'm assuming that the conditions don't change much from the previous week. If one weekend is dry & the other wet it is going to make life even more complicated. To me it seems like the workload for the teams is going to be more extreme than last year. At least at each round.

There won't be 19 or 20 races this year, that is something. Motorcycle grand prix racing may not do all the fly away races that where proposed before the pandemic. No Finland, no Mandalika Indonesia this year. Will we travel to Argentina this year?

I will wait & see what happens.

I think two weekends at the same circuit could be fantastic. Think of all the 'woulda, shoulda, coulda' debates we've had on here over the years, where, if the idealised race was re-run we'd see a different result. Well, this way we'd have just that. Rider X bins it on the first corner taking out Rider Y, who assures us they were absolutely on for a podium? We'll see, when it's re-run.

Of course it could also be a bit boring; if someone sails off into the sunset on weekend 1 they may do exactly the same on weekend 2. Though I don't think too many of us will complain given the context.

For obvious reasons it compares with WSBK, and it strikes me that the venue is never as important as the battle, in terms of entertainment. You can have a processional race 1 at PI (though I struggle to think of one) and an absolute classic in race 2. Though Qatar will never compare to the majestic sweeps, falls and rises of PI or Mugello.

The necessity of racing on weekends is gone. In this new Corona-world, the week and the weekend meld together. Since it's almost certain there will be no fans, go to a track and race on the days that make sense. Bad weather day? Wait to race to the next day. Two bad weather days? No problem! Stay until you can race. We're not going anywhere!

That's what I pay premium rates for. Even in an era of record and play on demand the spoilers hold the ability to devalue a race. I have had many catch-ups spoilt by tv and radio news. They seem to think it only matters to football fans. Even though I can work when I like, more or less, I still schedule downtime around weekends as that's when most people with less flexible schedules have their time off.

Also, I don't imagine the likes of racers to be sat around and they will still want to race to a plan, wet or dry. Safety will remain the only factor. A Silverstone type weather event might delay and enable a mid-week race, but that wasn't exactly routine.