Bernie threat to axe Aussie GP

There isn't much love for F1 in Australia, I know a lot of people wont miss it, however the F1 fans that are in Australia, are 100% die hard. Its losing so much money, its probably for the best. Now Melbournians really will have nothing.

 

It makes me wonder how BernieCo truly calculates P & L on race events. I'm sure he presents a skewed picture based on his agenda, because you need to take into account intrinsic gains to the sport from various events. What are the TV numbers? How many Aussies are going on-line and purchase merchandise? How much does a cool season-opening race like Australia influence the decision of a viewer in another part of the world to go see a race somewhere else? Once again, he's messing with a good event and threatening to replace it with an unknown. Look at the most recently-new events, starting with Malaysia. That race is the perfect example of Bernie's push into the "New World" and it's on life support. China will make money because the government will waste however much money it takes to maintain its race for PR reasons. Bahrain and Turkey are big-money tracks in low-interest locales. I seriously doubt they will become big $$ producers. And now we head into Singapore. We'll see...BernieCo needs to remember the concept of tradition when he so anxiously chases new money.

 

Add Abu Dhabi to the list. Word from informed sources is that Bahrain draws no crowd to speak of. No paying crowd, that is. Abu Dhabi will be the same after maybe a first-year spike of interest. Fact is that Bernie doesn't care if there are no fans at the race. That isn't his revenue stream. So long as he can find countries willing to pay his fee and take the loss, even the British GP isn't safe.

Will this mercenary approach kill F1? Maybe, but why should Bernie care? He's created a cash cow and now he's milking it.

 

You're mixing issues here: The ones who should consider whether a F1 race attracts tourism and is helpful to the local economy isn't Bernie, but the local government.

Bernie's calculation is pretty straight forward: He knows the TV viewership numbers, the ticket sales and the costs for his circus to go there.

The real issue here is, that the recent organizers of the GP made a total mess of the finances and now the govt is reluctant to sponsor it again. Bernie has other choices, so what does he care?

 

I call him Greedie Pigglestone.

 

Probably similar to US where BE puts so many financial demands on the venue that they finally say forget it. Seems short sighted really, take the good with some of the bad.

 

Actually the USGP was always heavily discounted and Bernie didn't make much money off of it (nor did George,who actually lost money). The winners of the USGP were the city and economy of Indianapolis. Which is why I think they should help close the gap between the current demand from Bernie and what George is willing to pay. Raise it via a temporary sales/hotel tax for the F1 weekend.

Bernie is short sighted in the sense that the US is the biggest car market for all the manufacturers competing in F1. And I hope he will get lots of heat and pressure from them this year and that'll make him come back to the table. Basically what Bernie should realize is, that he can do a mixed calculation: Make less money in the USGP and recoup that from races in Asia or the Middle East where the Govt sponsors them.

 

What do you mean?

Tobacco advertising is basically gone from F1. The few races where Marlboro is allowed to strut its stuff are negligible. Unfortunately.

 

Why would he do that? Only Marlboro is left as a tobacco sponsor.

No, Bernie's pick of countries is based on the money he can get from the organizers. He can't get much from Europe where the organizers struggle to make ends meet. In the Middle East and Asia the races are govt subsidized. Simple as that.

The ban on tobacco is what used to drive F1 out of Europe, but it only started the process.

 

I agree, but he's the one who brings the issue up to begin with. He charges $XXX million dollars to host a race, win lose or draw. Regardless of the race's significance to the overall image and well-being of the sport, he then throws them under the bus when the ROI doesn't come out as strongly as hoped. BernieCo could just as easily step forward and issue a statement along the lines of "Australia brings much-needed enthusiasm and excitement to the F1 calendar. We really feel it would be a tremendous loss to the overall character of the schedule to lose them from the season, which is why we want to work with them and ensure the success of the race."

Mixing the issues is very necessary. While it's important for each race to be profitable, it's also important for Bernie to view the big picture when determining a race's place on the schedule. If Monaco started crying poor (just humor me on this one, please), do you think for a moment they would say "Well, bollocks to you then. We'll replace Monte Carlo with New Delhi." ?? Not likely. Well, just as important as Monaco is to the wonks, the teams and the sponsors, so too are other races to the fans. The value of Formula 1, like most machines, is greater than the sum of its parts. But some parts are more vital than others.

 

Make that XX. The prices are in a range from 8 million (USGP) to about 30 million (Singapore). Don't forget, that a good part of the money gets redistributed to the teams. So you can't really say he is ignoring the sport. Without bucks, no Buck Rogers.

Bernie has a nucleus of European GPs that will never leave the scene. Monaco is one of them. Just as there will always be an Italian and a German GP. And in all likelihood a British and a French GP. Bernie is no fool, he won't be messing too much with the formula. Besides fly away races are insanly expensive logisticswise and hard on the teams and drivers.

I would love for the Australian GP to remain in the calendar, simply because it is Australia. The tracks (Adelaide, Melbourne) never excited me much, but having Australia on the calendar is nothing to sneeze at. But it is not a core GP nor terribly essential from a sponsors perspective.

 

I vote to let it go ... Bernie can go snck somebody else dry. F1 sncks anyway, lets have more rounds on the A1 GP, or lets create a 24 hour Daytona or Le Mans equivalent in Australia.

Pete

 

More competition is what is needed. I think Bernie let's his ego get in the way and if he senses a take it or leave it attitude from a race location he puts the screws to them. If they fold he takes his ball and plays somewhere else. He may even be more hard nosed these days as he knows his years are numbered.

 

See, that is exactly the sentiment that Bernie needs to read. While the sport is better than a few short years ago, it still continues to alienate fans. He would rather pull up stakes and launch a new event in a location like India where I have a hard time believing long-term success will follow. Distributing sanctioning fees to the teams is merely him paying the players, and has nothing to do with this issue. Even Bernie knows he has to share with them. But he has also threatened each of those European races in the past, and outside of Monaco I would never consider any of them to be safe from his axe. If he was younger, I would even bet that F1 see the day where the Euro calendar gets trimmed to a couple of European races in lieu of Russia, India, and whatever pet project emerges year to year. He would justify it by saying that Europeans have long been spoiled with so many races, and a demand needs to be maintained. And don't think the manufacturers would have the ultimate say, because he allowed Indy/US to die (regardless of what we feel about Tony George) and the car companies like it here.