News

Liberty planning F1 budget cap

Discussion in 'F1' started by william, Dec 18, 2016.

  1. fer312t

    fer312t Formula Junior

    Nov 16, 2010
    500
    The majority of teams want some form of a budget cap though...
    If Ferrari, Merc, RedBull were to pull out and attempt to create an new, alternative series who exactly is going to sign on take them on...in a speculative series with no financial guarantees, and an even more unrestricted (expensive) technical format? The answer is no one...
    I have no idea how a budget cap could ever really work in from a practical perspective, but to me the intent is an obvious one...to boost the competitiveness/upward mobility of the grid.
     
  2. Nortonious

    Nortonious Formula Junior

    Sep 20, 2018
    687
    TX
  3. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,626
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
    This is what puzzles me.
    How to impose a budget cap to teams who operate from different countries, with different business laws, wage structures, fiscal systems, utility costs, etc ...
    We have teams with links to Italy, Britain, the USA, Austria, France, Germany, Switzerland, Canada, etc ... in terms of locations, ownership, suppliers, etc ...
    If the teams are imposed a budget cap, they may well leave Europe and migrate to places with lower labour cost for example, or subcontract some work in cheaper countries.
     
  4. DF1

    DF1 F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 10, 2007
    16,071
    BaWü
    Clever interpretation will allow 'costs' to be considered engine related, salary and marketing or hospitality. Effective cap say about zero from the current spend lol :)
     
    Senna1994 and daytona355 like this.
  5. daytona355

    daytona355 F1 World Champ

    Mar 25, 2009
    11,732
    London
    Full Name:
    Sid Korshak
    Because the majority of them can’t afford to be in F1 to win, only to take part. So what? Are we socialists now? **** that. If you can afford to compete, compete, if you can’t, but insist on getting the exposure F1 provides, suck it up
     
  6. fer312t

    fer312t Formula Junior

    Nov 16, 2010
    500
    #131 fer312t, Jan 23, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2019
    Again...you can be the capitalist purist all you like - but it does come at a price - namely no (modern equivalents of the) Jack Brabhams, Colin Chapmans, Frank Williams, Bruce McLarens, Eddie Jordans, Ken Tyrrells, or Enzo Ferrraris entering the sport from here on in. Small, dynamic, modestly funded groups of clever people have zero chance against the sheer weight of 1000's of computers manned by highly specialized, bespectacled drones pouring over constant streams of data, running cfd and simulation software 24/7. To me this aspect of F1 holds very little romance.
    I'm not holding my breath, but I personally hope that someday the bubble bursts and F1 reinvents itself on a smaller scale...again the domain of specialists firms and dreamers/enthusiasts, rather than mega corporate entities.
     
    375+ likes this.
  7. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,626
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles

    If F1 wants to stay the "pinacle of motorsport", as the FIA calls it, it has to embrace modern technology and that comes at a cost.
    That's the sad reality.
    Trying to do F1 on the cheap will not work.
    Now, maybe Liberty has vision to make it "affordable by some sort of standardisation and budget cap, but then F1 will lose its value and be relegated as another specs series.
    I would have thought the FIA would have tried to preserve the spirit of F1, rather than siding with purely the business interest.
     
    DF1 likes this.
  8. DF1

    DF1 F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 10, 2007
    16,071
    BaWü
    The FIA constructed this current model in-directly with Bernie FOM. The tie is such that the FIA influenced has been relegated to below the commercial power/influence of the actual bill payers - top teams. Liberty is caught between the 2 with the FIA ever so subtle in its alignment with the teams. Liberty provides a stage for the true powers thats all.

    They Liberty - are in denial of what they can do overall. Mercedes, Ferrari and R-Bull do not need the F1 stage at all. The realm they serve is not the F1 fan in terms of revenue generation as a business in primary.
     
  9. Bas Jaski

    Bas Jaski Two Time F1 World Champ

    Mar 24, 2008
    29,137
    Manchester
    Full Name:
    Bas
    Enforcing a budget cap is impossible. Limit what they can spend money on however, is a way cost cutting is easily done. Simple wings, simpler body. No exotic vanes and brake ducts and the like. Want a brake duct? Stick a rectangular one on and no tricks. No aerodynamic bits stuck on it or the ducting.

    Manufacturers always drone on about being road relevant in F1. Well, we're never going to be driving on carbon/carbon brakes so lets go back to steels. Braking distance will increase a little. Cost will reduce enormously on those. The incredibly complicated engine? Take the MGU-H off, not applicable to real world. Standard KERS with a qualifying, overtake and race map + manual deploy. Take off the stupid 100K+ turbo charger and get off the shelf units and bolt 2 of them to the current engine. 4K on 2 turbos vs 100K+ per unit. Allow more boost. The V6 base unit costs **** all to produce so let them have an engine per 2 weekends. Turn the boost up, allow more fuel, allow refueling. More power, no more conserving. Real racing.

    Cars will look better. Cars will behave much better in dirty air, allowing for closer racing. Cars will have more power but longer braking distance. Less aero. Crucially the sport will be much cheaper.

    Recipe for success.
     
    375+, daytona355 and william like this.
  10. P.Singhof

    P.Singhof F1 Rookie

    Apr 19, 2006
    4,684
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Full Name:
    Peter Singhof
    You make it sound too easy... now you only have to convince all engine suppliers and teams to agree with you when in reality they can not even agree on the colour of the sky
    Mercedes and Ferrari most likely will not agree with you on taking away their current engine advantage and RB/Newey will most likely not agree with you on minimal aero...so you have the three most powerful teams in F1 against you, good luck with that

    Gesendet von meinem SM-G930F mit Tapatalk
     
    375+ likes this.
  11. DF1

    DF1 F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 10, 2007
    16,071
    BaWü
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^ So so so TRUE! :)
     
    375+ likes this.
  12. Senna1994

    Senna1994 F1 World Champ

    Nov 11, 2003
    12,771
    San Clemente
    Full Name:
    Anthony Tonokaboni
    Spot on as usual DF1.
     
  13. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,626
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
    In an ideal world, you would be right with your proposal.
    In reality, it's unlikely to get accepted by the top teams
    If you manage to scare them away, you could lose 2 or 3 power unit constructors that supply most of the grid !
     
  14. Bas Jaski

    Bas Jaski Two Time F1 World Champ

    Mar 24, 2008
    29,137
    Manchester
    Full Name:
    Bas
    With my engine proposal the engines are so simple, the services of say Cosworth could easily be employed to build anyone an engine. Red Bull could easily have their own build. The magic of current power units is really in it's MGU-H.

    My engine proposal means the engines aren't revving high enough to be super complicated. Would current teams have an edge over say Cosworth entering? Yes, almost certainly...but it wouldn't be much. And quite easily overcome. Cosworths biggest challenge would be fuel economy vs the established engine manufacturers. It would sip a bit more.
     
  15. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,626
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles

    I get what you are saying, but the FIA wont probably draw rules to take F1 back in time.
    As for Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault and Honda they are unlikely to take it laying down either.
    They have invested $ millions and worked for years to develop this complex technology, and they are unlikely to jetison it without a murmur.
    They would probably walk away and move to WEC, or something else.
    Steel brakes? Off the shelves turbos ? Standard KERS ? What you are dreaming about is a semi- specs series, not F1.
    One thing is sure: You cannot put the genie back in the bottle.
     
  16. Bas Jaski

    Bas Jaski Two Time F1 World Champ

    Mar 24, 2008
    29,137
    Manchester
    Full Name:
    Bas
    It's up to FIA/F1. This series is not sustainable much longer in this way. Call their bluff and see if those moaning leave, or wait for the inevitable to happen and have all teams priced out bar Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull. It's a series no one will watch. FIA/F1's dream they promised for 2014 for a cheaper formula never happened (the opposite). Their dreams that going hybrid would mean manufacturers would come and get back into F1 never happened.

    I don't think moving back to steel brakes, off the shelf turbos or standard KERS is spec series at all. There will be different manufacturers for the brakes (just like now). Same goes for the turbos, and they're free to choose which manufacturer they go with. A Ferrari engine could run a borg warner and the unit in the Sauber could run a Garrett, hypothetically. KERS is not a standard unit, just a version of what we had pre-2014. Battery, button on wheel or a simple map setting for automatic deploy.
     
  17. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,626
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles

    You may be right, of course, and I would certainly enjoy watching a formula along your lines, but the pragmatic that I am cannot see it happening.
    IMO, Liberty is in F1 to make money, and they cost-cutting drive is just to avoid paying the teams so much money.
    They keep saying that the F1 audience is still growing, and that supports their pitch.
    I think it's mostly the money spent on aero that cripples the teams.
    If there was a way to freeze the constant development there, that would be good.
    I was expecting more from Ross Brawn in that area; it hasn't happened.
    The larger front wings next year will be very vulnerable, and contacts in the first lap traffic jam will eliminate several cars at each race, I fear.
     
  18. daytona355

    daytona355 F1 World Champ

    Mar 25, 2009
    11,732
    London
    Full Name:
    Sid Korshak
    F1 has told stories about budget caps for the last ten years, and the teams have always gotten around them.... libertys PR plan for it won’t change anything. Wanna win, part one is bring cash, lots of it. Don’t wanna spend, prepare to be also-rans
     
  19. DF1

    DF1 F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 10, 2007
    16,071
    BaWü
    Im thinking you and I know the political drama will be very entertaining for this issue lol :)
     
    Senna1994 likes this.
  20. Bas Jaski

    Bas Jaski Two Time F1 World Champ

    Mar 24, 2008
    29,137
    Manchester
    Full Name:
    Bas
    A development freeze isn't the answer. Run a very big risk of having one team with the fastest car and basically guaranteed to win the championship because the rest can't develop.

    The even larger front wing for next year baffles me. Even more downforce. Even more affected by air in front....even shorter braking distance.

    F1/FIA needs to learn that overtakes isn't what makes it exciting (see their focus on DRS and such in most of their series now), it's the ability for cars to follow close to each other that makes racing exciting. Back in 2005, Schumacher chasing Alonso at Imola for example....20 laps or so of Schumacher within half a second trying to find a gap to overtake Alonso, before that with Button as well in the same race. It was brilliant. Was overtaking done? No....but it had everyone on the edge of their seat. Alonso fan, Schumacher fan, Button fan...racing fan! Everyone tried to refrain from blinking. That's what makes racing exciting. Right now we have the potential to be great like that, we have Ferrari, Red Bull and Mercedes all very close, but the aero regulations mean that the air is so dirty the cars struggle to be closer than 1.5-2 seconds of each other. It's nowhere near exciting now. A small mistake isn't punished. Visually it's not enthralling. The driver in front feels far less under pressure thus less likely to make a mistake.

    Once they learn that they're good and they don't need to worry about their sport. But they're not getting that with ever more aero.
     
    daytona355 likes this.
  21. 375+

    375+ F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed Rossa Subscribed

    Dec 28, 2005
    6,139
    We already had a version of that with the Token system. What rubbish.
     
  22. Bas Jaski

    Bas Jaski Two Time F1 World Champ

    Mar 24, 2008
    29,137
    Manchester
    Full Name:
    Bas
    Exactly.
     
    stavura, daytona355 and DF1 like this.
  23. jgonzalesm6

    jgonzalesm6 F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Oct 31, 2016
    8,886
    Corpus Christi, Tx.
    Full Name:
    Joe R Gonzales
    FIFY mate
     
  24. Bas Jaski

    Bas Jaski Two Time F1 World Champ

    Mar 24, 2008
    29,137
    Manchester
    Full Name:
    Bas
    true
     
  25. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,626
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles

    Oh well, if it's not a good idea, forget the "freeze" and let the teams spend as much as they want.

    But that will never redress the unbalance between the top teams, the mid-field teams and the rest.

    It's obvious that as the richer teams have twice or more money to throw at F1, the others will never be able to compete.

    It ends up being a championship between 6 drivers (at best) and the rest are "participating".

    If the people don't mind that, that's OK with me.
     

Share This Page