"Formula 1 Goes To War With Itself"

Would VW/Porsche ever make a team? What about a *cough* GM entry? Far fetched, but not impossible. If F1 started getting much more publicity in the US it is possible the US manufacturers would care about it more.

 

LMAO..I posted this yesterday and then saw this in pitpass.com

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=21072

 

Pete:

Without Bernie we wouldn't have F1 at all today. He has single-handedly make this sport the international spectacle that it is.

--Dan

 

Matt

This still doesn't answer my questions. I don't mean to sound contrary, but WHERE is the cost reduction? How is the rewriting of the rules going to reduce the costs? I agree that a spec series will reduce costs. No doubt about it. But how do you mandate a cost reduction in the manufacture of the cars if each constructor manufactures their own cars? Can you tell Sauber to dismantle their new wind tunnel? Can you tell Williams they may only have one? How do you reduce the costs of racing at the top level? It will always be expensive. Sauber is running last years Ferrari, yet to be competitive they are compelled to spend millions improving a world championship car. So, once again, how do new rules address this situation? Why will new rules cause the expense of R&D to be reduced if each team continues constructs their own cars? Even agreeing to allow teams to buy other constructors cars doesn't remove the R&D expense from the purchasing team. The costs will continue to escalate unless the FIA forbids teams from building their own cars. Is this a reasonable demand?

In regards to the drop in the number of teams in F1, I did a quick reference at Planet F1. Here is the breakdown for the number of teams on the grid in 04, 94, 84, 74, 64, and 54.

04. 10
94 14
84 15
74 15
64 6
54 6.

For 84 and 74 the field included teams such as Osella, Spirit, Ralph and MacDonald, ATS Wheels, HEX, Trojan, Hill, Hesketh, British Racing Motors, and Maki.

So explain how teams like the aforementioned group provided a better series? Is quantity preferred over quality?

I know I probably sound like a broken record, but I don't see cost reduction as a legitimate excuse unless the FIA mandates a spec series. I see no way to modulate the expense for the front of the grid. The teams that have the resources will continue to run at the front. Money = Speed. It will always be the case. What difference does it make if you make running at the back more affordable? If that is all you want, buy a one year old F3000 and be last every race. That is cost effective racing. If you are going to call F1 the top of the mountain in motor racing, you need to expect the costs to reflect that fact. If you expect to run at the front, bring a really big wallet. Why the sudden realization that winning in F1 is expensive?

Otherwise, buy them all Formula Mazda's and send em out to battle for the WDC. But you can count me out of the audience.

 

Well said! You know exactly what you are talking about and are 100% correct. The true F1 fan would think the way you are thinking. However, their people in very powerful positions in F1 who want to line their ockets for the next few years by cutting costs in F1. Thier are two things that will stop me from watching F1 1) Ferrari who may quit F1 OR 2) If F1 turns into a series where everyone drives the same car.

 

Steve,

I actually agree with you about the costs. I don't see any way you can really cut costs in F1 without changing it into something that is not F1. The point I was trying to make was that I feel F1 will either change into something else, or be gone.

I am not saying quantity is better. My point about teams dropping out is that without teams coming in the sport will eventually disappear. Did these teams add a whole lot to F1? No, probably not. Do you know who else was on the grid in 1974 and not doing very well? Williams! (They had 4 points for the season.) That is why new teams are important. Most of them crap out and are never succesful. Sometimes though, you get a Williams. Eventually one of the present top teams will leave F1. If there is no one to replace them, were will that leave us. Without quantity OR quality.

I think that F1 as it is now is in serious trouble. I think that they need to figure a way to reduce costs or find another source of money like tobacco. Finally, I think F1 has GOT to find a way to reduce the cost of entry and bring new teams in.

 

Yes, I realize I am essentially contradicting myself here. The things is, I don't know how they can do it. I hope those more involved, and knowledgable, can figure something out.

 

In sports a salary cap is used. In racing could a racing expenditure cap be used? The benefits are obvious....teams are required to do the best under limited resources (ie: actual engineering). The disadvantageous? Is this even possible? Would their be any way to monitor it? Let's say 100million is your max budget per year.

 

There is a really simple answer to this problem. Quite simply instead of the TV money being handed out based on championship results, hand it out evenly. Currently the top 3 teams get almost all the money ... (note: I am not sure of the exact figures), and this makes no sense to me, as the top three teams also have the best sponsors.

I believe this is what Paul Stoddard has been arguing with Bernie over.

This would mean that the little teams get a much larger salary and thus can start building up their infrastructure ... and thus attract sponsors.

No need for stupid and hard to enforce restrictions just make the playing field even.

Pete

 

Matt

I actually believe your thoughts are right on target. I also feel Max Mosely is standing exactly where you are at this moment. I think a lot of people want to reduce costs and improve F1, but I don't think they have thought this through. I am afraid this latest incarnation of F1 crisis is a knee jerk reaction, based entirely on a desire to be seen as doing something......even if that something is not well thought out.

I just want the FIA to step up to the plate and explain exactly how these proposals will save money. I want them to explain in clear terms how these changes will improve F1 and provide the opportunity to new teams to, not only join the F1 circus, but to have a legitimate chance to compete. All they have done up until this point is make proposals based on wishful thinking. I don't understand why these proposals were made public without any supporting data to validate the ideas put forth. Why should anyone back a proposal of such wide reaching consequences without a solid foundation of estimated savings and the observable improvement to the series. This reminds me of Ebay. People just put crap up for sale, place some flowery prose next to it, and see what idiots buy in.

All this hand-waving by Max Mosely is not the way to make F1 more affordable, or more exciting. There needs to be very public accounting of the situation, the proposed solutions, (along with data supporting the solutions), and some input from the people that buy the tickets, support the sponsors, and tune in the tv to watch the races.

If the cars are too fast.....say so. If all of F1 is going bankrupt....say so. Don't hide behind this 'escalating cost BS", because the costs of F1 have been escalating since 1950. They will escalate as long as the constructors build their own cars, hire the best drivers, and travel the whole world putting on this show. Anyone that thinks otherwise is deluded.

 

Wrong!. Bernie sat on the side and made money from a great sport. All he did is show it to many more people.

The sport was awesome before he came along, and will be awesome once he is dead. Bernie equates to televising the races thats all.

Go and watch a club race meet, pretty damn good entertainment ... and no Bernie.

F1 used to be pure sport, we humans love that and love to watch a challenge. Anybody that thinks Bernie started men racing against each other is an idiot ... that happened 1000's of years ago, and we have simply progressed to using cars.

Read the history books, motorracing was pretty damn good back in the early days, awesome spectaticle in the 30's and very competitive in the 60's ... and NO Bernie.

Pete
ps: All Bernie has done is add the money to the sport ... funny thing is now the sport is complaining about money problems. Now tell me who caused that problem!

 

Is not racing fun?