You used this argument to justify the big investment that Audi has made in endurance racing over the last few years with its R8. This has paid off in a big way with your Le Mans wins and other successes. The R8 is clearly an impressive car. Especially to your credit was your use last year of direct fuel injection for its V-8 engine. But no victory really hits the history books unless it's achieved against tough opposition. And what was the opposition this year at Le Mans? Dallara? Ascari? Dome? Courage? MG? Cadillac? Panoz? Not exactly tough challengers to a two-time Le Mans winner.

But back to your statement, Dr. Ullrich. Is it your contention that Williams and/or its partner BMW made its name through endurance racing? I'd be interested in your rationale. Okay, let's take McLaren. Endurance racing? Bruce McLaren did a lot of endurance testing for Ford and won Le Mans in a GT40 Mark II, but I'm sure that not even Ron Dennis would claim endurance racing as an important part of his company's portfolio.

Toyota has done some endurance racing, as has Renault, but I doubt that either would claim that their participation "established their sporting image." For Toyota, rallying has been paramount and for Renault it would be hard to top their turbocharged Formula One racing on their own account and their long and successful partnership with Williams as contributors to their sporting reputation.

I guess you could call Jaguar a "big brand", and to be sure the grand-dads of today's young enthusiasts may vaguely recall some successes for the Big Cat in endurance racing, especially at Le Mans. But if you're using the Jaguar example to convince your board that Audi should stay in endurance racing, you've set yourself a very tough challenge indeed.

If we go to the biggest Formula One brand of all, we do find some endurance-racing successes. In fact, consider this astonishing achievement: in 1953, 1956, 1958 and 1961 Ferrari won both, the World Championship for Grand Prix drivers and the prevailing World Sports-Racing Championship. Ferrari has nine Le Mans wins to its credit. But I'm pretty sure that Ferrari doesn't look to endurance racing as the basis of the massive respect with which it is regarded throughout the world. Its continuous participation in Formula One, through good times and bad, counts vastly more.

There is one brand in Formula One that made its reputation in endurance racing, although I don't think it would yet be fair to call Sauber one of the "big brands". It has rather been a plucky and respectable competitor that has brought steady quality and a certain Swiss flair to Formula One's starting grids. I remarked on the Sauber story in my column after last year's Australian Grand Prix. Sauber became a make to be feared in endurance racing at the end of the 1980s during its productive partnership with Mercedes-Benz.

Watching the race at the Nurburgring, where the cars from Hinwil finished sixth and seventh, it occurred to me that of all the teams now competing none deserves a partnership with a car maker more than Sauber. To be sure, it had works Cosworth engines from Ford in 1995-96, but the team was too immature and lacking in engineering depth to make good use of them. Nor was Ford's backing wholehearted and substantial (is it ever?). Now, under Willi Rampf's technical direction and using Ferrari's hand-me-down engines, Sauber is cutting a pretty fair figure with drivers who are certainly able but somewhat short of proven Formula One winners.

Dr. Ullrich, you said in Autosport that "at the moment there are many working groups within VAG [Volkswagen Audi Group] considering the future of motorsport strategy. At the end of this year we will know what the solution is going to be." Please put into the hopper the idea of a close relationship between Audi and Sauber in Formula One. Why let Mercedes and BMW have all Germany's glory in Grand Prix racing? Don't you wish you'd been among the battlers getting worldwide television coverage at the 'Ring last Sunday? And at Hockenheim in July? Those are the guys you are trying to rival in the marketplace, so why not tackle them on the track too?

If I may remind you, the four rings that you're using as the Audi logo were appropriated after the war from Auto Union, which made its brand reputation in Grand Prix racing! Your colleagues in Audi Tradition are busy building new Grand Prix Auto Unions (with the help of England's Crosthwaite & Gardiner) to remind people of the true roots of Audi's glory. Isn't it time for Audi to enter the Grand Prix lists again? Sauber would be an excellent partner. And leave the Group's endurance racing to Bentley, which has an authentic tradition in this field.

As I see it, there are only two problems. One is that you had a Formula One engine designer, but he was headhunted by BMW. Perhaps you can entice Dr. Werner Laurenz to head north up the Autobahn again to Ingolstadt. The other problem is that - unlike BMW and Mercedes - you don't have a road car that captures the kind of glamour that Formula One communicates. There's a big gap between the petite Audi TT and your big sedans. Without affronting your ward, Lamborghini, you should be able to come up with a road sports car that fills that gap with something potent and sexy. May I suggest a second look at the Audi Avus? You could power it with your own version of Lamborghini's new V-10.