| Welcome to The Pit Lane. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Mosley meets F1 teams in search of lastminute deal | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 11 2009, 05:07 PM (611 Views) | |
| Brave_Lee_Flea | Jun 13 2009, 08:59 PM Post #16 |
![]()
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well I kind of see your point but I think the financial problems those Rock Dinosaurs over at Williams (who could never be accused of being a tribute band) face illustrate that your argument is flawed. And the team that currently heads the championship by a country mile - and appear therefore to be the real deal - are struggling to attract sponsorship. At the moment only those teams with a sugar-daddy (Red Bull) or manufacturer support (including Brawn whose car was developed at great expense to Honda) are in a position to *ever* be able to compete. Surely you cannot deny that that's not a great situation? Now I'm not in favour of Max's draconian stance but the teams themselves accept the need to reduce costs and if we do want it to be possible for new teams to enter F1 and stand any chance at all of being more than the next Minardi then costs do need to be reduced further than those teams whose finances are their greatest asset would like. It's better for F1 in the long term. Honda and Ford (and many other down the years) have both shown that the manufacturers are not committed to F1 beyond the point where they think they get advertising value for the money they spend. Any of them, Ferrari excluded probably, are liable to pull out at short notice when it suits them to. I personally would like to see greater variation. I don't want a series that's basically rigged so that Ferrari will always be at the forefront or that the older established teams can never be challenged. I know this year is a bit of an aberration but how long do you think it will be before Ferrari and McLaren are utterly dominant again? Unless they have changed recently the current financial arrangements award Ferrari "extra special" payments and rights just for being Ferrari and then the teams are awarded sums of money based on how long they have been in F1. It ring-fences the status quo who were certainly no tribute act but it is no kind of principal on which to run a sporting competition. The teams don't like it. Of course they don't. But then turkeys wouldn't vote for Christmas. |
![]() |
|
| Jack | Jun 13 2009, 10:39 PM Post #17 |
|
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So, will the other teams use three wheels only?
|
![]() |
|
| Pasta | Jun 13 2009, 11:33 PM Post #18 |
|
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ya but Petra, while you might not want a biased system where only the big guys can consistently be competitive, that is going to be a fact and there are no rules that you can create to change that. But is that really bad. Would it matter that Jordan for such a long time was a good team but never really a contender? Williams was a real exception ending the year JV won the WDC, but other than that you would expect that to be a consistent winner you need big money and management. So 50% of that is going to come from the big manufacturers. Again is that bad? Smaller teams bring in new talent and play a role. Sponsors do get some benefit. Not as much as Shell or Marlboro I grant you that, but relative to their expenditures not bad. We only need two or three cars to be fighting for position for the sport to be a good spectacle. The solution is not in the Max rules. A few years ago I said the key was for the big teams to share their technology better. Look what is happening today. Red Bull and Brawn are both outperforming their senior teams. Even though their primary team is not winning or even close, Mercedes still gets big benefit, and essentially the big development money from Mercedes is finding its way into Brawn. The last big financial bit is for F1 to share more of its revenues with the teams. Right now F1 is a glutonous pig. Has been for years. If the revenue sharing was a bit more skewed to the teams, we would not have such a severe cost crisis in these lean years. By the way, got to take my hat off to Bernie getting away with this for so many years. I tried to emulate him. I started getting really bad hair cuts and deliberately stunted my growth. Didn't work. Still not rich. |
![]() |
|
| Steelstallions | Jun 14 2009, 07:16 AM Post #19 |
![]()
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There is no denying costs have to be reduced, but FOTA (or myself even) are not denying this. The problem IMO is that reducing the costs so dramatically in one season leads to large scale redundancies of staff during a world recession. Jobs that were secure until Max decided on an unrealistic budget level. The teams are not developing anything cutting edge just playing about with standard parts they now cannot afford to develop in budget. I.E. How the hell will new teams develop KER's in budget? They won't they will buy a standard part. How will teams develop new engines to meet the new regulations of the future? They won't they will have to either buy the cosworths that won the contract or administer creative accounting that shows the engine was developed for a fraction of the actual price. FOTA have drawn a line and IMO that's what MAX wants. They will either have to stay in the sport as mere contenders in a matchstick poker game, or leave. Either way IMO Max does not care. I think he is under the delusion that a grid full of new names he can shape and bully as he feels fit will fool the public that they are F1 cars. As I said, a tribute band will never make the money the real deal makes, this would not be a problem if CVC was not so full of debt. But what Max cannot control are sponsors. Sponsors may want to stay with F1, but try convincing them they should pay what they pay now for a watered down sport that has teams nobody has heard of and that don't sell image like the big boys do. If the viewer ratings drop dramatically as I suspect they will, try convincing all the stadiums and media outlets to fund the sport the way they do now. In 2005 alone, when Ferrari struggled with the bridgestones and one tyre for the race rule, 20% of F1 bookings including flights to GP's and package bookings, after the first few races, went down. Now MS was still racing all season in a Ferrari, but knowing the season was a damp squid, was enough to lose a substantial amount of fans interest. This, IMO is why Ferrari get the extra money from F1, their fans bring in more revenue than any other team, and if they make you more money than any other team, then you have to pay them more. It does not matter what history Ferrari have, it all boils down to numbers. Their fans fill seats even when they are in the wilderness for 21 years. When they began improving the car with MS driving, the viewer figures and revenue into the sport went through the roof. Only when the domination began to reduce viewer figures did all the rule changes come in to give other teams a chance. Now before you jump on me for saying that, consider this, never have i known a team so dominant they could even race the previous years car for the first part of the season, wipe the floor with the opposition who had spent all winter making new and improved cars. All at the same time as testing their own new and improved car for that season. Back to topic. Imagine the viewer figures and financial impact there would be if NO Manufactures raced at all? Max obviously thinks that's BS and F1 can survive without them, what he forgets are the gigantic debts F1 (CVC) have now compared to years gone by when Manufactures came and went and viewer revenue fluctuations could be tolerated on the F1 balance books |
![]() |
|
| Brave_Lee_Flea | Jun 14 2009, 08:55 AM Post #20 |
![]()
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I have agreed that Max's proposal's are too draconian and I'm not backing Max's proposal as it stands. As I've said before I don't think Max expects to get everything he has thus far demanded and I think his stance is a device to force the teams need to give more than they would otherwise be willing to. I've not stated my position so far, so I will; I'd like to see budgets cut to around 100 to 150 million. I think that should be more than enough to develop and race a couple of cars. I believe that is further than the rich teams would go left to their own devices - why would they cut so dramatically given that their greatest strength is their budget? I personally think this is in the ball-park of what Max is hoping to achieve. There is no other sport I can think of in which the big teams receive extra payments simply because they are big teams. True in most sports successful teams receive more prize monies but, in principal at least, it should be possible to gatecrash that sort of arrangement whereas in F1 there is no such possibility. As to the rest of your argument - are we talking about a sport or a business? I want a sporting contest in which well managed teams allied with innovative engineering and good drivers drivers can succeed even without the backing of a sugar daddy or a major motor manufacturer. You appear to want to generate a lot of revenue. To what end exactly? To line Bernie's trousers? |
![]() |
|
| Steelstallions | Jun 14 2009, 01:20 PM Post #21 |
![]()
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If Max had offered a sliding scale starting at £200 million from next season this mess would already have been sorted out. So far he has not budged from £40 million and appears to not want to. So as me and you and FOTA agree costs need to be reigned in, we also agree Max has gone to far. The difference is, you think he will relent, I don't think this idiot will and the teams will have to sack staff to race next year or leave. To address your "are we talking about a sport or a business?", you cannot separate the two if you are talking about the pinnacle of motor sport. F1 is a business, in 2009 the race is almost a by-product of the business. If you want motor sport that does not come without the expensive label you will find it at local level. Its good its exciting, BUT, it doesn't even manage to air on free view channels full of cillit bang adverts and tupperware accessories. I am sorry to say the money has made F1 what it is. The cars until this year were the best vehicles on earth that can go around a twisty track at the fasted lap time with arguably the best drivers in the world at the wheel. The history adds to its appeal. Away from the actual race and the sheer danger of the sport meant that drivers, team members stewards and innocent spectators have literately lost their lives to give F1 the name it has now. But take away the money or have a series with faster cars produced by a breakaway FOTA and F1 financially cannot survive. That's why I said its the debts F1 have which means it cannot suffer the loss of these big teams. F1 from years gone by could have survived and did survive the loss of manufactures. But in those days its was not so much in debt and there was teams waiting to join who had the means to race. Max must back down and increase the budget or take on board the FOTA request as I don't think he now wants to budge from £40 million. Pretty pathetic when Manchester United and AC Milan have just sold two players to Madrid for over £140 million. How much will the full 11 first team cost Madrid? There is money, only the big teams in F1 or Football can attract it. |
![]() |
|
| Brave_Lee_Flea | Jun 14 2009, 10:55 PM Post #22 |
![]()
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A good and well argued case and a very enjoyable discussion. ![]() I believe that there there is a mid-point at which F1 can still be a global draw with exciting technology, great drivers, close racing and yet have sporting integrity. If Max had started his negotiations at $200 million he would have the same resistance as he does now the only difference is that this way he'll end up much closer to what his actual aims are. I think he's just playing his cards close to his chest but that in the end he will compromise; I can't see how he can't. I guess time will tell on that point. I based my figure of 100-150 million based on what I believe is Williams current budget. Not because I am utterly biased (although I am) but because I figure that the amount of money a team with Williams profile and history can generate without manufacturer subsidy is about as much as any unsubsidised team could ever hope to generate. I'm sure that many of the newer start-ups would not be able to raise even that much but at least is would be something they could realistically aspire to. I very much want an end to the extra payments for the established teams although I would comprise and award greater prize monies to the more successful teams. You might think that amounts to much the same thing and, to a point, it does. The difference being that it would be possible for a new team to gradually edge towards the front of the queue by being just that little bit better each year. As it stands that's not going to happen. |
![]() |
|
| flood1 | Jun 15 2009, 03:11 AM Post #23 |
|
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This is a good discussion and I think Steel and Petra have arrived at the exact point of agreement that the FIA and FOTA should reach. I agree completely with Steel that the so called "tribute" teams will never match the historically active team's "relevance," no matter their pace or their position. But, I also agree with Petra that a team like Williams have kept near the front with a fraction of what Ferrari and McLaren have to spend. I think Williams are the fastest team per dollar in F1, and I think that deserves some consideration. I would wonder if Ferrari and McLaren could equal Williams if they had the exact same budget? I suspect not. We may all question whether or not that type of comparison is worthy of consideration, but if they all had the same budget, then I think William may just outsmart them all. Whether this is a reasonable course to pursue is beyond my purview. But, I would prefer a sport that rewards the clever, as opposed to the most well funded. |
![]() |
|
| Red Andy | Jun 15 2009, 09:00 AM Post #24 |
![]()
|
I agree, and I would hope that limiting budgets would pave the way for a relaxation of many of the technical regulations. In recent years it has been necessary to all but standardise most of the cars, because teams were spending millions of dollars on developing aero parts that contributed perhaps 0.05s per lap. But with cost restrictions in place, the game becomes less about who can afford to develop most of these parts, and more about who can make the most of the limited resources they have. You are right that Williams have more experience than most in these matters, and they should stand to do well out of such restrictions. People who claim that F1 will somehow become akin to a one-make series if budgets are capped are somewhat missing the point. By capping costs it will be possible to lift many of these complex technical restrictions on the design of F1 cars, bringing F1 back to a pure engineering challenge, where the cleverest - not the richest - win out. I simply hope that this is what happens, rather than capping the budgets and retaining the same restrictive level of development.
|
![]() |
|
| AndyW76 | Jun 15 2009, 12:55 PM Post #25 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The problem is that Mad Max wants the budget cap and F1 to be a onemake series. If max would free up regs then I would agree with some sort of expenditure restriction, though I would suggest that it is phased in over a couple of year (with regs being freed up gradually over the same period). |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · Formula 1 · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2






![]](http://z6.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)







12:59 AM Jul 11