2004 However fate was nice to me: While my GP experience was not the greatest, this was the year they run F1 cars through the streets of London, right outside my hotel and so I got a prime seat to that spectacle, which was terrific fun and probably a historic once-in-a-lifetime event. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
I remember that; very cool! what year were the London bombings? This thread got me thinking; we should start an f-chat blog on GP's attended with reviews/recommendations/tips etc. Not that I have a ton of spare time, but it would be cool to have one central resource to read everyone's experiences and recommendations for attending future gp's.....plus I like reading them... Kevin
Bombings were in 2005. 2004 was a very different time. Good idea about the blog. Particularly since every year somebody starts a thread about going to GP <insert name here> again and again.
Let's see. Hawthorn, Graham Hill, Surtees, Hunt, Mansell, Damon Hill, Hamilton, Button, (to which one could add Clark and Stewart who are Scottish) were all Brits. I hope I don't forget any ... Which country has more world champs then? As for teams winners of the constructors championship, most of them apart from Ferrari were/are based in UK.
The thing is I cannot comment of late at the apparent state of the track or facilities, I haven't been for ages, you appear to paint a bad picture contrary to the others I have spoken to about it, I feel bad you experinced such a bad time. However maybe my expectations are not as grand as yours. Whatever the state of the track is only comparable to the state of the other historic tracks, and of these that have I been I could find fault with them all, traveling to them being the main pain in the ass. I maintain 50% of the revenue of F1 flying out the window is the problem, Bernie is going to tracks in the Far East whether its sold out or not, for oil/cash not because you can't take a dump at the Silverstone-dump.
Whereever the money is going the fact remains, all tracks and there governance teams need to give the punters a basic level of services, and not there members. At a certain point the tracks exist as a business and like any other business they need to look after their customers first and foremost and the customers will then pay good money for tickets and the shareholders can take a percentage as profit, classic right ?. Why then do english, and I have enough english ancestors to know, insist on first looking after "the old boys" and then the customers ??. Even to the point of throwing away their one great drawcard, they keep looking after their members. Silverstone isnt that different is it ?.
Well thats it business, if you can afford to pay Bernie his fee and make a profit good on them track owners, I believe thats rather hard, and the price of ticket won't be coming down anytime soon. You think Bernie cares about the average fan. Bernie had some sway with are goverment till he tried to screw them over, with a back hander in his attempt to change the Labour partys policy on tobacco sponsorship in F1, so Tony Blair got his fingers burnt, I don't see them giving him any money for a race in England unlike alot of other oil rich nations. Maybe they deserve to lose it, I don't really now how bad or good it is. Personally I hope they tell Bernie to F-off with his ultimations, and go and race in some glamorous sand pit, for the corporate A-holes, where the attendance for the average fan is next to zero.
The problem with Silverstone is the competition it faces. Bernie Ecclestone had it too good for a long time, finding year after year new tracks and new countries willing to fill his agenda, and pay lots of money for it. Silverstone is a private club with limited funding and NO state help. Compared to that, we have Bahrain, Abu Dhabi, Turkey, Malaysia, China, etc using F1 as a showcase and each ready to spend an insane amount of money to attract the F1 circus and advertise their country one week-end a year at least. Even with obsolete facilities, Silverstone will sell-out because there is a terrific fan base in UK, even if the gate income is ridiculous compared to the investment needed to upgrade the place. Silverstone, and most European tracks are fighting a loosing battle. They can't afford to go into huge debts, just to have a once--a-year event that fills Bernie's pocket! But we have seen how the grandstands are almost empty in some of the far-away venues, because the ticket price is out of reach for the locals, or because there is no public interest, who knows? Most foreign tracks don't rely on the gate to break even. The state finance the whole event. In the end, I am wondering what will be the response of the team sponsors, if they loose slowly their exposure on their markets (North America and Europe) and just end up financing the entertainment of Far East or Middle East spectators.
None of that explains nor excuses that the BRDC squandered the money it had on its own club house instead of better facilities for the fans. Other European tracks don't get money from the government either and managed to beef up their infrastructure. I'm not asking for a Ferrari theme park or a place to park the yacht as in Abu Dhabi. Just basic parking, toilets, food stands and grandstands.
So twenty races it is. More races at "untraditional " venues. More "untraditional" teams. All we have to do is have faith in Bernie.
seems to be a bit quiet of late about Silverstone... We've been to Silverstone the last two years each in September and have no complaints - obviously not an F1 race, therefore, the entire place was open to us - had infield parking pass (couldn't get much closer to garages!), a few of the grandstands were closed but not a problem as the good ones were open), real restrooms & restaurant (but then again most likely off limits during F1 unless you're a special person), early hotel reservations and you can stay pretty close in Northhampton Last couple times at Spa F1, the section where we had seats had private potties which were 1 euro but well worth it, otherwise a tree works just fine (in the us you'd be charged with urinating in public); parking was not the world's best but no big deal (we walked back to the car several times (parked in Silver 8 farmer's field) because the busses could not get thru the congestion) - always got there early for parking and often the support races were better than the F1 race (especially the last GP2 race we saw with Rosberg in the entire race in rain w/o rain tires) Carol
Less and less of European tracks can afford the exhorbitant fees asked by Ecclestone, and many will just stop host GPs. Haven't you noticed? France has stopped, Germany is in doubt in future. Years ago we lost Sweden and Holland. I never had the pleasure to sample North America venues, but even with their quality infrastructure, they can't afford Bernie's injustified prices either! Ecclestone is less than sincere in accusing Silverstone of inferior facilities. If they had accepted the terms of his contract without blinking an eye, it wouldn't even have raised the subject. It's just a weapon for him to attack the BRDC.
Silverstone is no problem if you go there while there is no F1 GP. But put in 50k or 100k people and things are very different. That's only partially true. Monza, Monaco and Barcelona are still there. Now we got Istanbul and Valencia and there is serious talk about Rome. Sweden and Holland were outdated by F1's standards years (if not decades) ago. Not because of fancy schmancy VIP boxes, but by the plain speed of the cars. Germany still has two GP sites. Nuerburgring just added a huge infrastructure (hotel and amusement park) to its track. France's problems are only vaguely related to Bernie: First off it was stupid to put a GP into the middle of nowhere (Mitterand tried to get jobs to his part of France, but that didn't work). Now they have about 5 proposals on the table, but given the socialist state of France, none of those will ever reach a majority in the governmental process. Partially true. Last time Tony George and Bernie were in real negotiations, they were about 6 millions apart. So yes, you can say Bernie asked for too much. Then again, the city of Indianapolis should have just paid those 6 millions. Because a GP weekend brings in about 50 millions in revenue. Using a standard city tax of 12% would have just about covered it. But F1 is not that popular in the US and the voting public would have probably not accepted this. PS: None of your arguments justify the BRDC's decision to build a fancy VIP club house instead of improving the infra for the common fan.
There will or will not be F1 at Silverstone next year.....whichever suits BE's man-purse better. Jack.
