For far longer than I have been involved in F1, Bernie Ecclestone has been a convenient source of blame for all the sport's ills. In the era of the 'Max and Bernie show' it was a 50-50 split whether the finger of blame would point to FOM or to the FIA, but since Max Mosley's departure from the FIA Ecclestone has stood alone as the sport's primary scapegoat.
Assuming that reports of Ecclestone's departure are far from premature -- and the mutterings on the grapevine imply that the F1 supremo was hoist by his own petard last week -- what will a Bernie-free future look like?
Some of F1's ongoing problems can certainly be laid at Ecclestone's feet. When the octogenarian started selling his stake to various banks and investment companies he maintained near-total control over the sport as long as he was able to ensure the investors' profits kept on rising. This led to races in territories with little to no interest in motorsport, to the gazumping of sponsors lined up by the teams, and to the shift to subscription broadcasting which led to a collapse in fan figures that further affected the teams' sponsorship revenues.
Ecclestone is also largely to blame for F1's refusal to take advantage of social and digital media, and for helping to create the current -- untenable -- distribution of wealth and power within the sport. But he is not the only person responsible.
One difference we will see whenever the post-Ecclestone era arrives is that the teams will no longer be able to imply that all of the sport's ills are caused by his obstructions, or by his ongoing mini-battles with the sport's other stakeholders. At some point, the teams will have to recognise when they themselves are often the source of obstruction and find a way of prioritising the long-term needs of the sport over their individual short-term interests.
With Bernie out of the way and Liberty Media -- seemingly -- keen to invest in F1 while exploiting opportunities for growth, the next round of Concorde Agreement negotiations should see significant changes both to the governance of Formula One and to the division of the financial spoils.
Liberty have already singled out Ferrari's legacy payments as being worthy of review, and it is expected that the continued existence of the F1 Strategy Group will be up for discussion.
Whispers from last week's WMSC meeting said that incoming chairman Chase Carey was detailed in his proposals to either implement cost controls or to even up team payments, which put the cat among the pigeons for the attending team personnel. Carey is said to be against the Concorde Agreement, and hopes to secure longer-term deals with the teams than have been negotiated in the past.
Amid discussions of improving the story-telling around grands prix -- turning each one into a highly anticipated SuperBowl-type event, and both creating and distributing associated digital content -- Carey was also clear that one of his aims was to create a casual fanbase for the sport, expanding beyond the current core of die-hards. But the American was also pragmatic, looking to a 2020 timeline, not 2017.
If Liberty do as they have said they will and treat the teams with an even hand when it comes to negotiating long-term deals and dividing the revenues and prize money, then they will find rabid supporters among those teams who have been out in the cold, both financially and politically, under Ecclestone. But they will also find dissenters from those currently accustomed to playing with a loaded deck, and that could lead to a new form of instability, unlike that to which we have become accustomed.
With luck, however, the end of Ecclestone's "divide and conquer" leadership style will usher in a new era of mutually-beneficial stability and growth for the sport. We can but hope...