A day at Heathrow as F1 seeks to end crisis
An interesting day spent at a Heathrow airport hotel for The Mole, as the Grand Prix powerbrokers met to save Formula 1 as we know it.
The team bosses present were: McLaren's Martin Whitmarsh, Force India's Vijay Mallya, Brawn's Ross Brawn, John Howett and Tadashi Yamashina of Toyota, Williams's Adam Parr, Toro Rosso's Franz Tost, Red Bull's Christian Horner, Flavio Briatore of Renault, BMW's Mario Theissen and Ferrari's Stefano Domenicali.
They arrived at around 1000, with none saying anything apart from Williams's Parr, who muttered something about "time running out", which made everyone listening that bit more tense.
The team bosses, all members of umbrella organisation Fota, discussed tactics and objectives at a pre-meeting.
A light lunch was served before FIA president Max Mosley and F1 commercial boss Bernie Ecclestone arrived just before 1400. Mosley was accompanied by Tony Purnell, a one-time principal of the now-defunct Jaguar Racing F1 team, now of the FIA and the man who is sorting out the detail of what is achievable with a budget cap.
According to Mosley, whose fascinating interview with BBC sports editor Mihir Bose can be seen below, Toyota boss and Fota vice-president Howett began by refusing to discuss the cost cap and encouraging his colleagues to walk out of the meeting. Mosley says they ignored him.
With that dramatic outcome averted, Mosley, Ecclestone and the bosses got down to business. They talked for an hour and three quarters, during which time The Mole took some fresh air on the roof of Terminal Five's car park and compared noise levels of a Boeing 747-400 and the new double-deck Airbus A380 taking off from Heathrow's runway 27R (the A380 is quieter, but despite its greater size, is still less impressive than the 747).
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.
Ecclestone emerged just before 1600, to give this summary of the meeting. Mosley had backed down on giving the budget-capped teams technical freedom, thus eliminating the prospect of a two-tier championship.
Mosley later confirmed this, indicating that he had given way on this issue and hoped that, in time, the teams will give way on the budget cap. He made the entirely sensible point that, as governing body, the FIA can't have Ferrari and the other teams dictating the rules. It's a fair point - but his problem is that without the commercial draw that Ferrari and others bring to F1, there might not be a worthwhile series for the FIA to govern.
Mosley then made a point we hadn't heard before - that, in many cases, the taxpayer will be directly or indirectly subsidising the car manufacturers' involvement in Formula 1.
It's a point that references the support various governments are giving car manufacturers, and it's difficult to prove, but dropping the idea into the public consciousness is a good example of the way Mosley garners support. Your average F1 fan is happy to watch these teams go round in circles on a Sunday afternoon burning money, but they might not be so comfortable if they knew their taxes were paying for it.
The team bosses stayed in their meeting room to discuss their next move and what to report back to their boards or parent companies. Theissen was the first to emerge, and rushed off to check in for his flight back to Munich. Mallya was next, politely declining to comment in a very affable way.
Tost slipped out the side door completely unnoticed, while few expected Brawn to make a comment, since he arguably has most to gain from a budget cap.
Whitmarsh was next out, and could barely muster a "no comment".
Horner and Briatore left discussing the issues together (they're quite tight, these two, always have been), before Howett and Yamashima made their way back to T5 with an apology to reporters that they couldn't say anything and a look of surprise that Mosley had told the BBC about their failed plan to stage a walk-out.
Domenicali was last to emerge. To his credit (and possibly due to the fact he was the only boss to bring a press manager along), he took questions from reporters, first in English and then in Italian.
He didn't say much, save to confirm that Ferrari had issued an injunction against the FIA's 2010 rules. But while saying nothing new (as it seems the bosses had agreed) at least he said something, and therefore provided some balance to the way the story would be reported.
And in many ways, that is what surprised The Mole most about the whole day. The fact that all but one team boss refused to talk to the assembled media ensured that Mosley's side of the argument completely dominated the reportage.
If the teams can't contrive to brief a few journalists, the Mole wonders how great their chances are of out-witting Mosley in the crucial negotiations over the months to come.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~27~RS~)
Comments
on the other hand, what they did present was solidarity... so maybe their chances are just fine. after all, this isn't a battle that's going to be won or lost in the media.
Complain about this comment
It was also the head of FOTA who made the comments - deliberate on behalf of the teams?
Complain about this comment
This is getting a bit tedious.
The days of spending £100m and wasting £40m just get 1 second more out of the Car are over.
There is a credit crunch and we cant lose any teams.
Max has the best plan, F1 needs to be more affordable and it surely isnt.
Complain about this comment
"Mosley had backed down on giving the budget-capped teams technical freedom, thus eliminating the prospect of a two-tier championship.
Mosley later confirmed this, indicating that he had given way on this issue and hoped that, in time, the teams will give way on the budget cap."
How is this news not front and centre on every sports outlet?
Also, if he's backed down on providing an advantage to teams applying an optional budget cap, why would anyone accept said cap?
Complain about this comment
I think Mosley is exactly right here. I always have with regards to the budget cap. I was under the impression, however, that all the teams would get under the budget cap anyway and speak of a 2-tier championship was mainly hypothetical. It would be a shame to see Ferrari leave, but if it has to happen, it has to happen. I also think it will be much more interesting to see them spend their money wisely, and think that it could create more flux in the winners.
Complain about this comment
Dominic,
Before the cap was optional. Now he is looking enforce the cap (I believe).
Complain about this comment
I wish they'd just agree to compromise already. It's clearly going to be the solution to the problem but they'll have the usual arguments as both sides try to get the upper hand. It's almost certain that we'll see a £40 million budget cap with the new teams being granted technical information from the bigger teams so they are competitive by the first race.
I also think the FIA will push for all the teams to sign up to the budget cap so that we don't see McLaren, Toyota and Ferrari spending the same amounts they have now and dominating the season. Speaking of Toyota, what were they thinking when they tried to stage a mass walkout? Completely pointless and disruptive and they missed their chance to have their say on the budget cap
Complain about this comment
To me it seems as though this Fota group is not very well organised.
They keep saying things like, we will put our own suggestions to the FIA, but if they cant even agree beforehand on such a simple thing as walking out of a meeting, how in hell's chance are they going to agree on their own proposals to put to the FIA?
If I was the president of the Fota group, that Vice President would now be getting his P45. In my book, what he tried to do was organise an on-the-spot coup, and his colleagues were'nt having it. What this means is that Fota WANTS to make a compromise, but if there are elements within the group that dont, then I dont hold out much hope for any compromise at all on their part, which is a shame for them. There are clearly elements in that group that are holding this issue back, meaning that potentially, the FIA will get it all their own way.
I'm surprised more has'nt been made of the attempted walk-out issue....it highlights the fact that FIA have the stronger hand. But hey, if you want to talk about planes and not focus on the real issues, go ahead.
Complain about this comment
The soultion is clear,
Reduce the buget cap to 40 or 60 million(whatever), then reduce Mosley and Eccelstones ect.. salaries by the same percentage that the cap apples to. Then reduce the cost of the licences for the drivers.
Most importantly reduce gate costs to the spectator by the same percentage, if we are to get 'a cheaper' product, after all'WE DO COUNT,DON'T WE?'.
Then i'm sure we'll ALL be happy.
Paul
Complain about this comment
There will no doubt be a compromise on the budget cap. My guess is that there will a higher budget cap this year (say $80million), with reductions next year and possibly the year after.
It will be interesting to see how the bigger teams will operate under the budget cap as it will likely mean a lot of job losses (or jobs shifting away from F1).
I still don't see how this will be monitored as the technical developments could come from other areas of the motorsport industry and be 'adopted' by F1 after significant testing and development.
Complain about this comment
What is F1's problem? Get a limited budget cap of 50 to 70 mil. No Two-tier championship, no stupid amounts of money spent, more teams and if the teams have a cap which brings their budget down so does everything else in the sport. Budget cap on everything = Cheaper gate fees = more spectators = more money = better prizes for the teams = more teams = teams can have more money but not from tax payers etc.
Complain about this comment
+ a limited cap means that if the teams spend anything over the cap then they get a penalty. If the cost of bringing in development from other areas doesn't raise the cost then it isn't braking the rules or why the rule is there.
Complain about this comment
personally i hope the teams stick together and too there guns and not sign upto the fia for next year. ive been watching f1 for years and the fia are killing the sport, the sport is about making the fastest car possible, i mean by that in its the pinacle of mostorsport and there shouldnt be boundaries like these caps in place if a team cant afford to be there it shouldnt be there simple as. im afraid ferrari and kimi are right in this aspect its not f1 anymore. plus bernie dont want f1 to be run at silverstone no more, can somebody tell me why ? ive been there three times now and theres nothing wrong with the place....
personally if the budget cap remains and ferrari,toyota,redbull and renault do pull out then its bye bye f1 for me and perhaps a few other millions of viewers..
Complain about this comment
f1 is a high tech sport a two tier system is NOT a good thing for F1 they want teams to cut costs why can't bernie do his part cut is cost so the tracks can make money to
Complain about this comment
Technical freedom VS Budget cap?
If there is a budget cap, invariably it will limit the level of research thereby limiting technical freedom. If there is technical freedom, it requires a big budget to deliver any result. Therefore choosing between the two is not possible. If either of them go ahead, the accountants will have a good day at work spending lots of money and still be within the cap! The FIA will have to be come a super-duper auditing firm to read between the lines of expenses.
I strongly feel that the teams should left to the forces of economics combined with technical acumen. Currently the BRAWN GP team is such an example.
Another option will be salary caps for drivers, but they should have the freedom to earn more from sponsorship deals in their own time. We can also intorduce standardised paddock facilities for all teams at all tracks.
Complain about this comment
If the budgets are capped (and it now looks likely) then other costs should be capped too. Bernie's share of the revenue should decrease, The FIA super licence should decrease in cost, the amount fans pay for entry to the venues should decrease as well. Its no good the FIA saying we've got to decrease costs for the teams, it has to be an across the board cap so we (the paying public) can see the reductions in our pockets too.
The walkout ? proposed by Toyota during the meeting is a little baffling, if they took the trouble to attend the meeting, what was the point in not talking/listening after which, if still not happy, making the gesture (if one needed to be made, and from the other team's response, one didn't need making).
Max is obviously out to cause rifts between the teams by reporting the proposed walkout, which shows how precarious his position really is if he has to resort to such tactics. After all, without the teams there is no income for either the FIA or Bernie and both must be very mindful of that.
Complain about this comment
I dont know why everyone keeps going on about Brawn and look at them a small team at the front has everyone forget their car came from honda who spent a whole year and a whole load of money to develop the car would the be at the front spending only 40million most likely not, why should f1 has a cap if max and bernie want to cut costs stop taking all the profit out the sport
Complain about this comment
AW NAW ANNONI'S ON ANAW NOO
It's not as though Honda were a massively dominant force in F1 though, was it? It's not like they were taking over from Ferrari.
Complain about this comment
Why should it be a negative thing that the sport is subsidised by tax payers? Currently for people watching in the UK, the only cost to watch Formula One is just that of a TV license, it is freely accessible to all and thankfully it has not been scooped up by the subscription sports channels. Frankly, the fact that some of our tax is used to fund something that brings us so much enjoyment every two weeks is relatively reassuring. As it is, our tax will not, and cannot fluctuate with the whims of Formula One, and so really it's a mute point.
Saying that, if Max and Bernie are seemingly concerned about the fans, why not ask them how they feel about the issue. Hold a public opinion poll (a referendum so to speak) on the official f1 website, and make it known through all the media outlets, that the fan's opinions are wanted.
I for one feel a budget cap so low will ruin the essence of what the 1st formula of racing is; the most elite, and innovative..the grand prix.
Complain about this comment
At the moment this is a non-news item. Yes they had a meeting, and it has been reported as such, there is no point debating it much further until their actually seems to be some progress in the talks. That probably wont happen until late summer, when teams are starting to look at next years designs.
As for the plans... The cost cap is a great idea but I think that it will need to be raised to get the current teams on board. Maybe $80 - $120 million. This will still be a lot less than teams like Ferrari and Toyota are currently spending, even Williams will make savings, but this will still give these top teams the extra budget to satisfy their R&D departments. Unfortunately this could also mean that some of the potential teams will be unable to compete but by the sound of it their will be too many, so could some merge? Also the smaller teams might find it easier to poach sponsors as the big teams wont need as many and might not fight as hard, or maybe not.
We'll just have to wait and see.
Complain about this comment
i 100% agree with mosley in this video - everything he says makes perfect sense.
And I think we should have had a budget cap in F1 back in the 90's when the costs started to increase more and more.
It will be FANTASTIC, having all teams competing on a level playing field, and putting more of the emphasis on ingenuity and teamwork, and who has the best brains, rather than 'who has the most money to spend'.
So what if the car manufacturer teams don't want to compete? So what? They use F1 purely as a marketing tool, nothing more. For them its about selling cars. The marketing is still as effective, no matter what the level of budget is. They will get the same TV exposure.
Ferrari, Toyota. They can leave. Bring on the pure racing teams, Lola, Litespeed, ProDrive. Who want to be in F1 to compete for the pure love of racing.
People on here talking about how '40m' is such a small figure. No its not! 40 million is a ginormous figure. Its absurd, as far as sports go. Clearly F1 cars can be made for that amount of money, and that figure excludes marketing etc...
The budget cap is just what this sport needs. I can't wait.
robculver101, you say 'Frankly, the fact that some of our tax is used to fund something that brings us so much enjoyment every two weeks is relatively reassuring. '
what a ridiculous statement - what about the millions of people who DONT watch f1? I enjoy watching F1, but I certainly would NOT want my money subsidising a sport for rich people to play. It's hardly a mute point, the total opposite in fact.
Complain about this comment
A 747 more impressive than the A380????? Are you crazy Mr F1 Mole??
Complain about this comment
"Your average F1 fan is happy to watch these teams go round in circles on a Sunday afternoon burning money, but they might not be so comfortable if they knew their taxes were paying for it."
I think many F1 fans would rather their taxes went on paying for the continuation of the sport they love than some of the questionable causes the UK government chooses to support. I know I would.
Complain about this comment
A1 has a completely level playing field but no one watches it. if F1 is to stay at the top teams need to innovate and push boundaries, the FIA appear to be stifling that what with the cap and also wanting to make the teams use the same engines F1 will lose what make it F1. Bring costs down yes but you can't do it in one fowl swoop.
Complain about this comment
What the taxpayer is paying for, and has been for some time through his terrestrial television networks, is Bernie's lifestyle (he sold out some of his interests to a tribe of bankers in a leveraged buyout) and those bankers who are paying themselves wads of interest on the leveraging.
Half the money that comes into F1 goes to these bankers. F1 is NOT BROKE, and doesn't particularly need to make budget cuts. There just needs to be a system which rewards properly those who actually put on the show - the teams. Before this problem is sorted, anything else, including Max's pet schemes, is simply birdfeed.
Complain about this comment
To oigioeiee:
"what a ridiculous statement - what about the millions of people who DONT watch f1? I enjoy watching F1, but I certainly would NOT want my money subsidising a sport for rich people to play. It's hardly a mute point, the total opposite in fact."
Firstly if one considers the percentage of tax of a UK homeowner that would go toward the sport, one would recognise the money at stake is very little.
Secondly, whether Formula One receives this sort of subsidy or not, tax would NOT be affected. This income would be invested in the government elsewhere - most likely into a black hole, a series of MP's expenses accounts perhaps. *wink*
I concur with the F1 mole, that such a suggestion was raised primarily to swing public support, but I feel it is using shock tactics to sway people who don't already have an opinion on the matter.
Surely bringing this sport into chaos like this, presumably causing Sponsors to reevaluate whether this arena is credible enough to sell their products, is doing more damage to the sport than good. With the way Mosley's behaviour affected the sport's reputation last year, and the seemingly uncomprimising nature he has treated this issue with, I'm unsure as to just how much he is costing Formula One.
I just wanted to mention oigioeiee's comment:
"putting more of the emphasis on ingenuity and teamwork, and who has the best brains, rather than 'who has the most money to spend"
I'm unsure if I am correct in saying this, but aren't wages not affected by this budget cap? If I'm right on that, surely teams with greater cash flow will just throw money at those "best brains" and other talent, and as such we'd be back to square one?
Complain about this comment
I think most people are missing the implications of the budget cap. I work for one of the larger teams who are threatened with huge cuts, I doubt the public really appreciates the huge amount of work we do not just between races but also in the closed season. I've been in the factory testing a rear wing at 2am after one failed in practice, under the capping process it's unlikely we would be able to do that, no, we'd just be sending the drivers out regardless.
At the minute we're all wondering if we're going to have jobs by the end of the year, because that's what budget cuts will do, the cars will still need to be run, will still need to be manufactured, but with fewer people doing the job. As with all businesses there is wastage but is it really for someone else (in this case the FIA) to decide how to resolve the issue. Maybe some of us will be fortunate to get jobs with the new teams joining the sport, but I really don't see that as being an ideal solution.
For those of us further down the ladder an alternative series would be an ideal solution, many of the track organisers would love to have a second prestigious race at their track each and every year, especially if it meant tracks which have fallen from favour could be reintroduced, Montreal, Indy, Silverstone. Someone really should be thinking about putting together a consortium to plan for this sort of a contingency, less money to the middle men, more to the teams and the tracks, everyone wins.
Complain about this comment
So...the 2010 F1 championship will be decided by the team with the cleverest accountant, not the fastest car or driver.
Complain about this comment
Max, although completely bonkers and not someone I'd choose as a dinner guest, is right if you think that F1 needs the manufacturers to survive.
We are only seeing the tip of the iceberg in this financial crisis. The whole world rotated on this big bubble of credit, born of confidence by the banks to lend it. The greedy banks are restricting their lending now, but won't be paying back the massive profits they've all made over the last ten years. As people can't borrow so much they actually have to start paying back their bit of the credit bubble. So they spend less on products. This means less money for employers so they start to cut costs, people lose their jobs. Insurance companies, also hugely profitable over the last decade, say "whoa we need to cover our asses here, let's withdraw credit insurance!" (what all the borrowing confidence is based on) the credit bubble shrinks as the insurance companies won't insure the risk etc etc. It's going to keep spiralling down until the banks realise their profits will be impacted and lend anyway or we all learn to live on what we have, instead of red-lining all our credit.
The manufacturers are laying off people because they can't sell cars (reducing credit bubble), dropping out of F1 won't change that, but it's a bit of the old "let them eat cake" if they stay isn't it. Sorry about your job, we're ok we won an F1 race, would you like some champagne.
I think F1 can survive without the manufacturers, it has to and has done. The budget cap will prick the conscience of every manufacturing entrant's board. "Why do we have to spend £200m to compete, when we can compete on much less?" they will rightly ask 5 years too late. There is some pain in that the budget cap will lead to job losses, but F1 is an industry supporting many other businesses it touches, by spreading the pain hopefully more can survive on less.
I don't want to go all hippy or anything, but lets put this in perspective. Imagine what a £40m budget would do for a charity, or even the £160m they can no longer spend finding a tenth of a second here or there. I know the money saved won't end up doing anything worthwhile for anyone who hasn't already got enough, but at least we'll still be able to watch cars going quickly around tracks all over the world, and not choke on our sandwich when we're told a wheelnut cost £1500 or a steering wheel £20-£40k (depending on your source).
F1 needs to survive, and just leaving it to the greedy more more mores to sort it out will just get messy.
Rant over, time for a cup of tea, have a nice day!
Complain about this comment
to robculver101:
'I'm unsure if I am correct in saying this, but aren't wages not affected by this budget cap? If I'm right on that, surely teams with greater cash flow will just throw money at those "best brains" and other talent, and as such we'd be back to square one?'
i guess. well i'm not sure, I thought it was only driver wages that are affected. i think it does affect peoples wages otherwise they wouldn't have to lay off people. but i'm sure finding best brains or the most talented people costs less than countless hours using the wind tunnel, and whatever other methods the big teams have/using more resources.
as for the tax issue, you're right, god knows where our money seems to be going nowadays, but its the principle. even if it is 'very little'. thats still more than nothing. this ties in with the issue of people losing their jobs in the car industry due to lack of demand.
surely people losing their jobs in the motorsport divisions, compared to the people on the factory floor making the core product, the lesser of the two evils?
it boils down to this, motorsport, and F1 particular, is not up there with education, health, social services etc... on the priority list. ultimately the budget cap's positives override the negatives by a long shot.
this situation is analogous to government regulation (the FIA) and car manufacturers(banks). lack of regulation leads to disasters, and the FIA need to put their foot down as Mosley wants to do, and bring F1 back to reality.
with regards to MattSpur's 'the best accountant winning, not the best driver/car'.
thats not really how business works...the best businesses don't simply have 'the best accountants'. accountants are given a budget to work with - how well that budget is distributed is a massive team effort, and no different to the current situation. there's simply less money to work with. The budget cap will force people to thinking up more value-for-money solutions, fundamentally change design and production processes.
i think the fact the 'common man' is happy to go 'let the teams spend what they want! 40m is such a small amount!' shows how disillusioned the public are with what the bigger issues in life. quite frankly.
Complain about this comment
Here is a thought!
Don't place any technical restrictions on teams who decide to operate outside of the budget cap. Consider the following:
1. Teams who opt into the budget cap score double points.
or
2. Teams who opt out get a 10 place penalty on the starting grid (this usually equates to about a 1 second penalty). They say that it costs about 100m per second. So if they want to spend that amount of money, let them do it. This way the competition is raced under the same technical regulations, and there is some form of penalty against the teams who decide to opt out of the budget cap.
Complain about this comment
I take the point on many car manufacturers now using tax payer's money, but in light of the recent political storm on MP's expenses, I for one would rather pay taxes to watch F1 than pay for someone's holiday home or new swimming pool. Don't get me wrong, having to subsidise either is unacceptable, and F1 has always been known for it's extravagances. It is a big worldwide business that is currently losing many financial sponsors, so like any other business who's books don't make as good reading as they once did, costs need to be assessed for long term survival. A cap makes sense but the cap figure is for the so called experts to sort out. The trick will be in cutting costs but still allowing teams to invest in new technology. For F1 to remain as the pinnacle of motor sport, the technology part is a must.
Complain about this comment
I think the media have done the teams a disservice over all this. They have focused on the money issue when the problem is much wider & deeper.
All the teams agree with cost-cutting. Their main grievance is having constantly changing rules forced onto them at short notice & without consultation.
The budget cap, 2 tier system etc. are just part of a much bigger problem.
Complain about this comment
Jaguar, Land Rover, Toyota, Honda & Nissan. All car companies with factories in this country & with the exeption of Toyota, none are involved in F1 & as such none of my tax money is going to be used in F1. It might be used to pay for redundancies in another country or big bonus's for the bosses, but as a taxpayer it's not for me to say where the cash should go.
Max & F1 probably owe more to the taxpayer for bailing out the banks than the car companies.
Complain about this comment
I know I'm getting tedious but I really can't stand this column pretending to be something its not.
It's not The Mole, you will find that here http://www.grandprix.com/mole/mole21476.html this is a "news review" column which, if this entry is anything to go, by is slowly getting its act together.
So come on be honest and title it correctly.
That's it no more moaning from me............promise
Complain about this comment
Not sure if it's been said quite this way above, but there'd be no need for a budget cap if the teams were given more of the proceeds.
I also think that if the reductions apply to team budgets, they should apply to everything - ticket prices, Bernies cut, the FIA's cut, TV fees, everything.
Complain about this comment
"Mosley's side of the argument completely dominated the reportage" - and to get to this page I clicked on...Mosley's side of the argument, in great big letters.
Sort your headline writers out. This is no time for soundbites (as Tony Blair once said) and the team bosses know it.
Complain about this comment
Why can't Ferrari, Renault and McClaren get it through their heads? There is now a level playing field and if their cars and staff are really as good as they say they are then they still win the championships every single year!
If they wanna go then go! F1 will survive without all three with them. But Ferrari will suffer from leaving F1 and so will McClaren, Renault have their own problems and may not survive either way so the F1 Supermo's have zero reason at all to fear their threats. Just let them go...
Complain about this comment
Mosely can say what he wants and attempt to implement rule changes but, if he persists and half the teams turn their back on the sport - he has nothing left to control except for subservient teams and Bernie has only half a formula to market to disgruntled fans.
FOTA members when unified have more collective power than the FIA and if they use it wisely (not mentioning names here *ahem* Toyota!) the FIA will have to back down.
Complain about this comment
@ overseasTOON
it doesn't matter if the half the teams turn their back on the sport. because of mosley's cap, theres already 4 new teams waiting to enter F1. there's only 3 slots available so far.
i cannot see mosley backing down on it, theres no reason to really.
Complain about this comment
"it doesn't matter if the half the teams turn their back on the sport. because of mosley's cap, theres already 4 new teams waiting to enter F1. there's only 3 slots available so far."
I don't want to keep coming to blows about this but still -
That's the equivalent of taking Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool, and Arsenal out of the English premier league, and filling their spots with Championship teams. Some of the names that we talking about losing are major players in Forumla One. Lose these teams, lose the fans, lose the venues that host F1..lose the franchise.
Complain about this comment
Raising the issue of taxpayers is just a diversionary tactic by MM. A. It's untrue. B. Ecclestone has for year been saying the British Government (ie the taxpayer) should subsidise Silverstone, so I don't think he or Max cares a hoot what effect any F1 decision might have on taxpayers, as long as the two of them continue to prosper.
Because of Mosley's chumminess with Ecclestone, any official objectivity by the FIA in this matter is completely absent. Max and Bernie are in cahoots in a power game against the teams, and the wider interests of motorsport seem a long way away from their minds. Mosley should have gone long ago.
Complain about this comment
firstly the fia make a balls up of running the sport - and this is just another one - maybe in 2011 we should make the cars fly.
secondly - i do the extreme element of f1s politiking - moseley is by far the worse - can't we have someone who'll at least run it decently if not effectively
last - mosseley seems to happy to play chicken with the teams - this time i think he'll get flattened!
Complain about this comment
I dont have a problem with a budget cap but it has to be compulsory and you cant have two sets of technical standards. That would just create two new formulas racing at the same time. Daft. Anyway this year has seen how unpredictable technical rule changes can be.
Complain about this comment
Take a look at the WRC if you want to see how a well run competative sport can be ruined by the FIA & Max. Teams are quitting & Loeb, probably one of the best ever rally driver, has said that if Max's new rules are taken up then he will walk away from the sport as he dosen't want to drive a second rate formula.
Complain about this comment
Now a appricate the view that teams can't keep spending hundred of millions on the sport but just says it's a credit crunch join the cap doesn't solve this issues facing the teams if a cap come in. maybe just maybe for once this isn't just about F1 maybe it's about the team owners and car manufacturers
ok picture this your a Car company that spends millions on research and development alot of that R and D money goes into say motorsports.
most big advanves in engineering in sports and road cars has come from various motor sport teams especially F1(even max won't argue with that) for people like ferrai and mc it's vital to the company business model for BMW RENAULT less so as they have other series to get this data in. but ferrai Selling themselfs on being the best sports cars so they have to be in the pinicle of motor sports
right thats the engineering angle now some ones bound to say "the best ideas come when needed so the cap would be good for inovation" which is ture but there is another angle to cover here from the owners/team view as to why a cap would be bad and thats the value of the team.
currently ferrai spend over £200 million most of which comes from sponsorship the rest from fiat. that makes ferrai F1 worth around say a low guestamate at £120mill as a banking asset you cap the spending at £40mil the teams max spend is then say £80 million. the as soon as sponsorship deals run out the companies are only going to other half or less of what they are paying now (reducing the teams income) or they go off and for the same money they were paying ferrai they can go to brawn and be a title sponsor so your £120mil asset is now worth only £40million a third of the orginal price so any money you barrowed against that asset by the owners (and lets not muck about here they will be barrowing there) is now in deep trouble and the owners will have to clear that debt.
now it maybe the teams have barrowed that money against themselves which puts them in deep trouble as lower income means these no money to clear it equals bankruptcy.
Now make no mistake the Teams and owners will be looking at these angles not just the racing ones as much as i hate to say if F1 is a business first
Now i'm not a ferrai fan was honda now brawn but they are the team easiest to make the case for in this regard
A. as they are the most out spoken against the gap
B. because fiat there owners have been in cash troubles for years and the italian government are holding them up
max isn't stupid he knows all this and knows a £40 mill cap is to small but it's a good opening ploy i'd guess the end figure will be between £60-£80 mil (probable 80mill moveing to 60in a year or two ) this cuts the top teams spending and spreads the sponsorship around more helping the smaller teams. while only halfing the teams value as total spend will still be over around £120million mark.
now the figures i based this off are from about 2 years old so i knocked 60millish for the cost cutting measures from that time frame
for there current spend,
but i think the points stand and people should look at all angles before moaning about the teams not joining.
Complain about this comment
"That's the equivalent of taking Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool, and Arsenal out of the English premier league, and filling their spots with Championship teams. Some of the names that we talking about losing are major players in Forumla One. Lose these teams, lose the fans, lose the venues that host F1..lose the franchise."
Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool, and Arsenal used to play in something called the Football League (Division One). Over which they had little or no control. And so the Premier League was born.
What I've never understood is why Mosely (a public disgrace who is not welcome on some, notably Arab, circuits) and Ecclestone rule the roost anyway. Who elected them?? Who do they represent?? Why do Fota not simply break away from FIA and start Premier League Formula One racing??
Complain about this comment
@ oigioeiee,
As robculver101 has mentioned; losing the most prestigious team in F1 and also a large swathe of the main manufacturers would be detrimental to the future of F1.
How do you market a product that is supposed to be the pinnacle of motor racing when the quality on offer is suspect?
How many fans will turn out to watch Force India standard (no offence to Force India fans) cars race each other? How many circuits will pay to have these races?
Lose the top teams and top manufacturers and F1 loses it's allure...
Complain about this comment
#40 (oigioeiee):
Tell that to the Tifosi who form the majority of the crowds at most European races, not just at MONZA....
I bet you won't find ONE tifosi willing to come to even ONE race if FERRARI is absent... And mind you, not all TIFOSI are millionaires waiting to throw money away. Majority of them are paying F1 fans(which ironically is a minority these days, considering most non-European races need to force in school-children to fill a few seats[China anyone? ])....
F1 without the traditional teams is like letting China, Singapore & UAE play the cricket world cup instead of Australia, South Africa & India...
Even you can tell how many will turn up to watch...:)
Complain about this comment
NewsFlash:
Ferrari's appeal rejected!!
I can't begin to fathom the fallout of this decision. Can't everybody just unanimously agree to throw MAX and BERNIE out? That would solve most of the mess....
Complain about this comment
Honda dropped out of F1, as Ford/Jaguar had ealier, to large extent because of the cost. Is there a learning point there? With no budget cap, we shall eventually have either Toyota racing by itself.
We as F1 fans are happy for the governments to subsidise our sport, but a lot of other taxpayers are not.
Why do we keep watching F1? I think that I do mainly because I always have. The spectacle has improved of late. But, there have been many years that I kept following it just in the hope of a return of good racing.
Complain about this comment
"the A380 is quieter, but despite its greater size, is still less impressive than the 747" - Totally agree with you!!!
As for formula1 hope this politics comes to an end soon and we can watch ferrari vs mclaren and other great battles on track.
Complain about this comment
Why cant we just have a mandatory £40m cap instead of a voluntary cap? Ferrari have not, as far as I am aware, criticised the budget cap - just the fact that it will create a "two-tier championship". If everyone has to stick to £40m then I dont think the teams currently threatening to withdraw will do so. Problem solved.
Complain about this comment
Interesting development, and good news too. So they've called Ferrari's bluff - let's see if they really do pull out now. I think they won't. And if they do, it will look like a tantrum thrown by a spoilt child, garnering little sympathy except from their die-hard fans.
I also like the two-tier racing being scrapped, what's wrong with setting the budget cap and having the same specifications for everyone (except that it hurts the teams who currently gain an advantage by throwing the most money at it). Anyway, if they really are the best, then they should be able to prove their adaptability and work within the fixed limitations.
Complain about this comment
Ferrari have long since forgotten a simple thing they are not the sport they are not bigger than the sport they are just part of it.
If they had their way they would still have their techincal veto with all the advantages that entails. Some would even say it gave them an unfair advantage for the last 10 years.
The two tier has been scrapped and that was made clear in the articule so why are people going on about it.
without a doubt the cap will cause job losses but without some form of cap how much longer till F1 was dead due to no one being able or willing to pay the silly amounts that F1 now costs.
Complain about this comment
ferrari should go in indy cars.
Complain about this comment
F1 should be the pinnacle not "GP3". Let the sponsors and investors decide how much the teams spend by how much they give the team. And if you don't like how much the sponsors are giving then don't put your money in their bank, don't buy their products or become a shareholder and vote against. [Part nationalised companies (in theory) should be regulated by the government on how much they spend on advertising via F1.]
FOTA get out of this regime now and set your own race agenda up!
P.S. I'm happy to run it for you if you want. Just let me know : )
Complain about this comment
I can't see why many are compalining about budget cap?
Is that because they feel they have less chance to win?
I really feel budget cap is good. Surely most people do prefer watch competitive sports and because of new budget cap, then manufacturers do have to put some effort in improving their cars with their technical ability.
Spending more money = win races isn't simply a fair game.
I can say same thing with other sports, I hope other sportd do follow same footsteps.
Complain about this comment
I DISAGREE WITH THE COMMENTS FROM DEMOING FERRARI ARE THE SPORT. THE SPORT NEEDS THEM NOT TEAMS LIKE BRAWN LOLA FORCE INDIA.
Complain about this comment
I'm sorry, but many of you are missing one of the key points Ferrari made - albit drowned out by some arguments of lesser value. A budget cap is unworkable. Period.
Mosely has already conceded that the FIA cannot expect to go through the books of Ferrari - or any other parent company. Facilities can therefore be paid for by the head company, and leased/sold to the team for a fraction of the true cost. But even if they COULD go through the books, what IS the true cost?
Let me give you an example. A wind tunnel if owned by Brawn costs whatever it costs. But what about one owned by Ferrari, which sits idle for 3 days a week. What is the 'true' cost of leasing that to the team when it's not in use? So Ferrari charge their team £500. They will argue that's pure profit for the head company, and they cannot lease it to anyone else because somewhere in their insurance policies will magically appear a clause they cannot let personnel from outside companies onto the premises to use company equipment - not an entirely unreasonable clause actually. So, the team get their wind tunnel for £500. Brawn's costs £X million. Brillaint system. And you could think of thousands of other ways round it.
Capping as such is a non-starter. Ferrari's proposal - to limit the cost of specific items, eg banning £10,000 wheel nuts - is a much more practical idea. And no, I am NOT a Ferrari fan.
Complain about this comment
F1 R.I.P.
Complain about this comment
Let's remove Furher Mosley
Complain about this comment
I honestly don't see why people are suddenly all up in arms about this "level playing field" business. McLaren, Ferrari, Renault etc have been developing cars (not just F1 cars) for years - why on earth should some nobody be able to join up and be at their level right away? The best drivers, technicians, designers, facilities, materials etc all cost money, so why are people intent on pretending that the richest team shouldn't have an advantage? Preventing a team from spending money that they rightfully have is, in my mind, at least as unfair as one team having more money than another.
Look at the Premier League - we have the "Big 4" who have (with a few exceptions) essentially dominated everything since the PL began. They have bigger stadiums, richer owners, better youth development and a whole host of other advantages? So? Does someone in London, Manchester, New York, Johannesburg, Tokyo or New Delhi care at all that Stoke City or Sunderland will probably never win the league in their lifetime? Of course not. The fact is that millions more fans all around the world care about Ronaldo, Gerrard and their other heroes, just like millions more care about legends like Schumacher and challengers like Hamilton, than they do about whoever drives for whatever perennial bottom-feeder is trying to get their only point of the season. For the better part of the last decade, Ferrari, McLaren, Williams and Renault duked it out for every major honour in F1, and we got exciting racing and spectacle and absolutely loved it. Who cares if it would take a real manufacturer like Honda or Toyota to join that club? Bring it on, and stop trying to fix what isn't broken - arguing that "it's OK if Ferrari and Renault leave because we have Lola and Lightspeed to step in" is like a CEO saying that a strike won't damage his company at all because he can fill the jobs with some random unemployed blokes off the street.
Complain about this comment
I am a Ferrari fan and I will concede that F1 will survive without them, but its reputation will be greatly dimminished.
Even though I hate to see them (and Mclaren) suffering midfield it might make them stronger (changing people around who make race decisions & race stratigies etc.)(i'd also like to add that I don't like Hamilton much, but he can still drive a bad car well)
My suggestion is to offer capped teams small but significant advantages.
1)They are not compelled to use both sets of tyres(hard & soft).they can use hard or soft tyres for the entie race.
2)No limit on the amount of tyres they use (Important for qualifying they don't have to save tyres for race).
3)Give capped teams extra hour or two to set up the cars.Uncapped teams are given standard time.
4)Kers could be designed to give capped teams 50%(OR 25%) more power so uncapped teams get the standard 70-80HP and capped teams get 105-120HP more power.
5)And finally Capped teams get 1 or 2 free engine and/or gearbox changes a year without incuring a penalty.
These advantage should give small teams a level playing field while allowing them to compete for £40m (more likely £80m)or so.
Thus allowing more teams to compete and keeping all teams on the same technical guidelines and not creating a two tiered championship.
Complain about this comment
no thanks, not interested to have my post cenzored, thats another Mosley's. What the heck is going on with this world?
Complain about this comment
Good suggestions splashlog, your idea would work very well, and would give big teams a few yeard to adjust to the cap.
Does anyone not feel sympathy for Ferrari and the other big teams? All these idiots jump on the bandwagon to lambast Ferrari et al for their 'unsustainable spending'. Well, in case you havent been watching all these years (which you probably werent), the big teams have spent ludicrous amounts since the 1990s. They should have been capped way before they reached the insane £2-300m mark. But they spend as they do because the FIA has been sweet talked out of budget caps. Suddenly, along comes a gloabal recession, and the FIA decide to round against all the teams which put so much money into the sport. What hypocrites.
The big teams will have to cut hundereds of jobs and millions of dollars of equipment from their factories - in the space of less than a year. Its not all about wanting to monopolise the front of the grid.
Complain about this comment
There are a queue of seven teams queuing to join Formula 1. Right now with the lack of overtaking on most of the circuts, the teams that get in
will be the 'high nuisance' for the leaders to lap.
Ferrari are right; the established teams who have built the sport to the spectacle it now is, cannot, and will not, be reduced to the standards
of the poorest newcomers.
Mosley has become power-crazy, and thus dictatorial.
To apply the same logic, does Manchester United have to use the same budget as say, Birmingham City, and if so, would that budget be decided by a single egotistical individual. No, simply because that's what makes football, football.
Bernie Ecclestone is no doubt, a very worried individual right now. The
gravy train for him may be about to end, and Mosley, well.......
Complain about this comment
Where are the moderators
Complain about this comment
I thought the original idea of formula 1 was to develop safety features for road cars. The escalating costs of these features are now impractical and more economic ideas are needed. Lets bring in more teams and drop those who are only interested in buying a championship. Ferrari have repeatedly bent the rules because they know they can get away with it. IT SHOULD STOP! F1 do not rely on any team to survive. Ferrari build impractical noisy uncomfortable cars which have relevance to the average motorist. So what is the point?
Complain about this comment
When will people begin to realize that the sport cannot have one man in Paris ( Max Mosley ) dictating to everyone? The man lacks credibility as we have already seen from past performance. The diffuser debacle at the start of this year proves it. It's about time the teams broke away from the FIA. Almost impossible, I know
Complain about this comment
I see Mr Moseley is up to his old tricks of winding up the teams with his extravagant demands again. This whole issue has been blown out of all proportion due to his comments lacking one word. There would not be all these threats and counter threats in the upper echelons of Motor sport hierarchy if he had used the word temporary! The current economic global downturn is temporary so needs a temporary solution. When the temporary economic situation changes and an upturn occurs then the temporary ruling could be reviewed. This would have caused less furore, firing up the media to expand the argument by reporting silly aggressive and confrontational remarks from both Mr Moseley and the teams and manufacturers. If one day Mr. Mosely sees sense and takes a positive and non controversial stance against the teams instead of taking the "Ron Deniss school of polite conversational mediation (sarcasm intended) then it might leave the important people i.e. the fans, drivers and track operators have a clue whether there will be any F1 races, teams, motor sport or FIA for that matter next year! Seriously though that one word would have done wonders and helped speed up an agreement over cost cutting measures. There will be an economic upturn maybe next year or the year after, so without that magic word imagine the media & press rubbing their hands over which team owner jumps in first to get the cap removed and be spending the balance they couldn't in 2010 to ensure constructors & drivers trophies are in their cabinets. My parting shot is that all the good Max Moseley has done in the past is a benefit to you but sometimes the old adage "put brain into gear before opening mouth is probably more pertinent in this great sport than anywhere else. Sorry about the essay but thought the teams and owners needed a little positive comments on their side for a change. Yes i am an old git F1 fan since late 1960's and have seen a lot of it before, it was so much calmer when Bernie was running Brabham and Max running March!!!
Complain about this comment
come the 29th -Ferrari don't sign up - other teams withdraw their applications for 2010 - then the showdown - who will break first - meanwhile the sponsors don't want to sign up - too risky. Ferrari start to build their next generation Indy Car - loss of fans and viewers - BBC moan then reschedule to 3am showings - Oil rich companies begin proceedings against Bernie for lost revenue on their new polished venues - Bernie turns on Max - Richard Branson sets up "Formula Virgin world series"......
Complain about this comment
i know people bang on about it's great the cars being equal etc, but who preffered it like last year?
you have two big teams fighting for the championship, a selection of teams battling out for the spaces below and teams at the bottom trying to get a few points and providing excitement with overtakes etc.
compare it to the premier league. if every team had a chance of winning the league this weekend, it would suck. but no, you have two teams as of last weekend (liverpool and man u) which was a two/three (inc. chelsea i guess) all season, which has been great, in the same way mcclaren and ferrari were last year. there are similar comparasons throughout, i.e. battles for uefa cup spots, relegation can be compared to the fights for the 3rd/4th spot etc.
so you see, its rubbish this way, thats why that other gp thing never took off, where the cars are all the same but represented by nationalities. people want to get behing a team, have a rival and have passion, like i do with mcclaren, i dont want to see an equal race between 20-odd cars, i want to see hamilton and massa battling for race after race with the odd shock result, not a lottery.
hope you agree.
Complain about this comment
Sopwith_Camel, that's a very poor argument. So, foreign fans have more say about english football than I do as a West Brom fan? If that's the case, I'll do what Ferrari threaten to do by leaving football which is absolutely boring. Take the number of fans of the clubs out of the top 4 and this amounts to about 20,000 / club * 16 - well over an estimated 170,000 top 4 fans.
back on the F1 issue here - if you don't limit ferrari now then you never will be able to - the same applies to Man Utd - they get richer and richer - I can't see them ever falling off their perch. How can you expect other F1 teams to be able to ever bridge that gap? Football hasn't been a level playing field for quite some time now. The same in F1.
Also, who's to say that football or F1 can't be interesting without Man Utd, Liverpool, Ferrari, or Mclaren? The excitement always comes at the end regardless of who's involved. If Stoke City vs Hull City were the deciding game in the premier league do you really think that nobody would watch it? At the end of the day, those who claim that the sport will suffer if Ferrari pack their bags are the one who support them.
As for FIA killing the sport, there's an analogy with football here as well. Alex Ferguson and many others have very little respect for the FA. Regardless of the personalities at FIA and their politics, some form of authority is required. Ferrari are certainly, as Man Utd, are as well, not interested in the good of the sport but for themsleves. Of course, they allow concessions to ensure that the system around them doesn't fail but no more than that.
As an oustider to f1, I'm all for other teams getting a chance. From the oustide, it seems to me that F1 = Ferrari (is as good as). The same applies to boxing with its numerous associations all pulling in different directions. Modern sport is nothing without money and that's the sad fact of life. On the other hand, amateur sport at the top level is not practically possible anymore......
Complain about this comment
FAO adswba
I see your point of view, but would like to make a point.
In a way F1 does = Ferrari
From almost the beginning Ferrari road cars were literally race cars with slightly different bodies + road tax. They sell to a niche market a high value product, their main "shop window" or dealership was F1. Win a championship produce a track car with similarities to the race winner stick on road tax sell for huge amount of money job done. It's how Ferrari have worked for decades. Without F1 or some form of motorsport to promote the cars they would fail. Look at caterham here in the UK they bought the rights to the lotus 7 refined it produced a track car that you will find at every race driving school race circuit open day etc. It is available as a road car but it sells because of what it can do on the track same as Ferrari. If Ferrari carry out their threat and leave, others will follow and what would be left would be a glorified A1GP style race with spectators in the tens of thousands instead of the hundreds of thousands today, tracks would close as not financially viable etc. Ferrari could in a joint venture set up a competing series which would water the sport even further. They were there at the beginning and have built their reputation as a car manufacturer on F1 results. Although i would be sorry to see them leave if it came to it i must point out that i speak from 30 years experience in the automotive industry and i am not actually a Ferrari fan, i follow drivers rather than teams. I think that both Ferrari and the FIA need to get off their high horses stop squabbling, get in the real world and work the problem out with the rest of the teams and everyone needs to consider making concessions to ensure that there is a future for F1 for everyone not just themselves. "Bangs heads together"
Just my tuppeny's worth.
Complain about this comment
"[Mosley] made the entirely sensible point that, as governing body, the FIA can't have Ferrari and the other teams dictating the rules." But why does F1 need the FIA, which is not primarily focussed on the sport, and in whose interests does the FIA act when it arbitrarily dictates to the teams change after change, the lack of consistency drawing attention away from the racing? The teams want fans and tv coverage, they fund the sport, design the cars, find and pay the drivers - surely they are far better placed to determine sensible rules conducive to good racing and crowd support than are the FIA?
Mole, you often seem to take a pro-FIA view - what do you find so good about the dictatorial FIA?
Complain about this comment
I think Mosley and Fota should sit together and find what is more good for F1.
Mosley has a point - he does know how many times the Jordan team has swapped hands to become Force India now. He also knows how Honda was shown its own exit by failing to control its cost.
Ferrari has a point too - should we have 2 rules defining one championship? DEFINITELY NOT. Can they control their expenditure to 40M pounds in 6 months time. They can if they take away the bread and butter of 500 famililes. Do they want to? DEFINITELY NOT.
So how do we solve the problem? Introduce the budget cap in phases:
200M in 2010
175M in 2011
150M in 2012
and so on. In 6 years time, we will have what Mosley wants and it will be good for everyone?
I think its the approach to take but Mosley won't do it because he won't be there till that time to take the credit.
Complain about this comment
From 1980 to 1999 Ferrari did not win one championship. F1 survived without Ferrari dominance for 20 years and it will again. Ferrari cannot demand rules that are to their advantage.
Complain about this comment
There is already a budget cap, it's called economic forces dictated by the market. A team can only spend what it can afford. Most of the teams are backed by a large company, whether it be a car manufacturer or soft drink maker. Why a budget cap now in these economic times? Why not a cap in the last recession, or the one before that? The reason is that economic reality is imposed upon every team without interference from the FIA. If they do decide on a cap then it should not be at a pathetically low level as to stifle technical research and innovation. THAT is what makes F1 the pinnacle of motorsport. Any cap introduced should of course, also cap ticket prices, Bernie's revenues, FIA super-licence fees, etc. What must be good for the teams must also be good for the rest of the sport and its fans. OK Max?
Complain about this comment
rjginblueoz wrote:
From 1980 to 1999 Ferrari did not win one championship. F1 survived without Ferrari dominance for 20 years and it will again. Ferrari cannot demand rules that are to their advantage.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't forget that Ferrari didn't win for 20 years, not because of an introduced budget cap, but because other teams were better. I fail to see why not having a budget cap is to Ferrari's advantage. Toyota, Red Bull, McLaren, Renault, BMW, Williams are all able to compete with Ferrari without budget caps. There have always been big teams and small teams in F1, and some teams disappear and new teams take their place. It has all been done without FIA interference.
Complain about this comment
Is this the same Max Mosley and FIA which imposed $100M fine on Mclaren last season!? When the going is good milk the sport for all it is worth and resort to heavy handed financial constraints when it looks like the sport may not be financially viable (Mosley and Max perhaps unable to demand the incredible fees they have been). Is F1 not supposed to be the pinnacle of motor sport? And here I thought the sport might just be picking up again as a competition.
Complain about this comment
Plenty of sports have a budget cap and are still extremely popular. Baseball, basketball and football in the USA have massive followings, albeit mostly within the US, but try to work on the basis that all teams come to the first match of the season on a level playing field. Rugby League and Rugby Union in the UK also operate a budget cap on wages and this has not in any way affected the popularity of the sports.
The fact that the Premier League is currently dominated by a group of 4 teams is in my opinion a bad thing, unless you happen to be a supporter of one of those teams. Each season should start with every team in the Premier League believing they have a realistic possibility of winning the league. As things currently stand, each season there a number of sub-leagues within the 20 teams that comprise the Premier League, ie to win the league; to qualify for Europe; to finish in mid-table mediocrity or to avoid relegation. Having a small group of 4 teams as the only ones currently who are able realistically to compete for the title means that for me, as someone who does not follow soccer, the race for the title is virtually meaningless and certainly entirely boring each year.
F1 has actually been pretty similar to the Premier League in this regard in recent years and so it's great that the new rules this season have changed things around. I for one won't shed any tears if Ferrari leaves F1. Nor for that matter will I shed any tears if any team currently in F1 decides to leave. Think of all the teams that used to be in F1 that no longer are. Is the sport any better or worse off because they have left? Of course not. Just because Ferrari have been here since day 1 doesn't mean that they have to stay in F1 for the sport to be F1.
I don't agree with the A1 GP approach to a level playing field by putting everyone into the same car but it can't be right that F1 can produce such an uncompetitive sport by allowing a situation to develop whereby a handful of teams are the only ones with sufficient resources to produce a car that enables their drivers to compete for the title.
I don't know why people are objecting to the possibility of a two-tier championship when that's in reality what we've had for the past 10 years or so. Up until this season, there was no realistic possibility that anyone other than the driver of a Ferrari, McLaren or Renault would be in a position to compete for the championship and that was because these were the teams with the massive budgets.
I have no problem with a realistic budget cap being imposed on all teams but this has to be on the basis that there is level playing field for all teams and this means that the same rules have to apply to all teams. How they interpret those rules is of course part of what is great about F1.
The whole point of F1 is that it is about great racing and that is most certainly not what we have had over the past few years. Any new rules that return the sport to what it's meant to be about - and putting new innovations into road cars is certainly nothing to do with F1 in its original format - should only be welcomed with open arms.
Complain about this comment
Lower the Cost of F1? Don't make me laugh. What they need to do is keep the money F1 makes in F1, and not in Bernies family trust. Just think what the teams could with the money he takes out.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS