Hey, So, it seems these three had a long meeting in Maranello last Friday. Some comments from Autosport. Edited and my emphasis added; Dunno about shortening and/or splitting the races, but he makes some good points. However, I think the meetings real agenda was all about getting the Cans on board - Or if not, how to **** 'em up........ Cheers, Ian http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/102372
He has some valid points about aero, but this is not spec racing. Aero is pretty much the only thing that separates teams from one another these days, so if it's not aero reliance then what is it? I suppose I can see a further reduction in wind tunnel testing, or perhaps they limit the amount of aerodynamic upgrades each team can bring per season to a set figure, say 10 or 12.
I'm still in favour of reverse grids. Instead of qualifying, cars start race 1 on Saturday, half distance. Winner will start last on race 2, Sunday. Half distance as well. The rest of the time can be spent to meet the fans.
+1 It's a tough one if costs are to be contained - And I agree with JT (and pretty much all of 'em apart from the Cans) that costs must be contained...... I wonder how much, in the overall scheme of things, the tunnels and CFD actually cost 'em though? My problem with limiting updates is two fold; - Ferrari (as an example) couldn't have made the progress they have with Clifford - If your car's a dog at the first race, you'd be pretty much done. - If I work harder than you upgrading my car, shouldn't I be rewarded? For sure, there's no easy answers; "Banning aero" is one that crops up here from the peanut gallery - No answers on how to do that however! Restrict the # of people allowed on the team? I know the Cans reaction to that idea! I'm sure there are better brains than ours (mine anyway ) working on it, but I'm sure they too are struggling. Cheers, Ian -
JT is quoted this weekend as saying that his aim is to reduce F1 costs by another 30%. Just shoot me now.
Lessen the time of the races? Is he out of his mind? GP races now are rarely much over 1 1/2 hours and some are less than that. They are too short now! What a concept ... attract more fans by giving them LESS for their money!
He thinks that two hours is taxing the limits of the TV audience's attention span. Let's dumb down F1 even more.
Problem is that it always will be. If there was an "enough" Bernie would have had it long ago. He claims that he is acting in the interest of the smaller teams that aren't profitable. But coincidentally everything he suggests will enrichen his interests more than anyone else's. He's willing to do anything that will increase revenue regardless of its effect on the sport. Isn't it in the very nature of the " pinnical of motor sport" that inferior teams just won't succeed?
Maybe get into the soda business too. Then they could pay for the 24 hrs of slipstream testing. Who wouldn't want a Ferrari energy drink?
VW is on track to be the biggest automaker, they would make things really interesting, but they have zero interest. Waiting for Daimler's board to pull the plug...
It's no accident that F1 is made unattractive to the big automakers. Bernie prefers dealing with entities that need him more more than he needs them.
And the show suffers for it, thank goodness for DVRs, I can watch a race now in 10 minutes and not miss a damn thing...
Racing suffers. The show, judging by revenues, is succeeding. Bernie took H.L.Menken's advice about underestimating taste to heart.
I think F1 cars need to drift more. maybe add a few jumps on the circuit too while we're at it...background explosions and fire hoops usually pull in the crowds too (-_-) I do agree with Monte though that with so much at stake by sponsors & teams, the layout and configuration of the cars should somehow lend itself better to a more impactful correlation for applications on road going cars. Would most of you agree, that the biggest ROI from a stake in F1 nowadays seems to be that badge in the car that reminds owners of how many times World Champion they are? =D And even that is only relevant to folks in Europe mostly...F1 imo has a very small presence in USA. And making those general grandstand tickets 7-800 bucks isn't going to help grow their presence imo. Maybe that's why we've seen a good handful of big automakers leave F1 for dtm, endurance and rally car racing? I'm guessing they're a lot cheaper + the technical developments are more directly correlated to consumer applications? And I'm probably alone on this, but the whole notion of trying to make racing more "green" is bull***** to me...electric f1 cars? seriously?
F1 has never had a close correlation with road cars. It's always about the highest tech and fastest drivers. There are existing formulae for the automakers to better show off road car related tech. No need to reinvent and ruin F1.
This is just more political spin because the sport is in town, which is an unfortunate part of the sport. LdM wasn't too interested in saving money in 2009 when budget/salary caps were being discussed. Spending millions of dollars to go .2 faster is F1. The problem now is that after they spend all this money the FIA turns around and says, sorry this tech is now banned. Shorter races?!?!? So these "young fans" which have no issues playing video games for hours at a time somehow struggle to stay awake for 1-2hrs? When did the sport revolve around young fans anyway? Every race I attend the majority of people walking around aren't young. The time the sport is on makes no sense. You don't spend the whole day at the soccer game. You rock up 10mins before the game watch it and go home. For most people F1 is a 3day event so if the race is on at 2pm or 10am or 8pm it doesn't matter. Another issue I have with the whole time thing is that LdM is only thinking about European viewers. F1 is a world sport not everyone is at the seaside in July.
