F1 financial problems

F1 financial problems

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

RYH64E

Original Poster:

7,960 posts

250 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
If this is the case, why on earth introduce a radical set of rule changes that must have cost an absolute fortune to implement? Apparently, Red Bull spent over $130,000 on 5 spare fuel sensors, and Mercedes are rumoured to have spent over 500 million euros developing their new engine package. Hardly budget racing.

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns27656.html

Grandprix.com said:
Jean Todt has named Williams as one of the teams "crying out" for a budget cap.

The FIA president was asked by Germany's Welt am Sonntag newspaper about the highly controversial cap, opposed by many top teams as unworkable in practice.

But Todt claims: "They all want this limit and it must be in writing. Then it will be binding.

"The teams came to me and Bernie Ecclestone and implored us to finally introduce a budget limit.

"Lotus has reportedly not paid its driver. I hear that Sauber and also Williams have problems. It can't go on," the Frenchman insisted.

"I am worried that we will lose teams. Many are crying out for help, and our job is to listen to these cries.

"Formula one is in intensive care and time is running out -- by the end of June, a solution to this problem must be found," said Todt.

Crafty_

13,431 posts

206 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
Money has always been an issue in F1 and motorsport in general - its always been that way.

Engine money is irrelevant - the manufacturers wanted the new engines are were prepared to spend the money, its already attracted Honda back to the fold.

There are mixed reports on exactly how much those sensors cost - the 130k figure is the top end of what I've read by quite some margin.

AlexS

1,558 posts

238 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
Look at it another way. Without the new engine rules Renault would have pulled out and Honda wouldn't be joining.

RYH64E

Original Poster:

7,960 posts

250 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
Crafty_ said:
Money has always been an issue in F1 and motorsport in general - its always been that way.

Engine money is irrelevant - the manufacturers wanted the new engines are were prepared to spend the money, its already attracted Honda back to the fold.
Yes and no, apparently the team's engine costs have increased from about 7m euro to around 20m euro per season, hardly small change.

DHB07

80 posts

127 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
RYH64E said:
If this is the case, why on earth introduce a radical set of rule changes that must have cost an absolute fortune to implement?
Quite an easy answer. If we'd stuck with V8s it was a complete loss making exercise, chucking money at the sport for the sake of only the sport. Now at least the engines are more relevant to the road cars that the engine manufacturers produce. It's not a complete loss, more an investment.

From your other posts in other topics it would see you can't get your head around this point. This isn't meant as a dig, it's just the impression I get.

Whether or not it's good for the racing, is a different question. It's irrelveant to mention the likes of Williams and the non-engine-producing teams. I'm all for the said cap. But a potential cost cap and the new engine regs could work hand in hand.

Engine manufacturers with the big money stay in the sport because it's justified (y) and the teams now limit their expenses (y). Two very different things.

RYH64E

Original Poster:

7,960 posts

250 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
DHB07 said:
Quite an easy answer. If we'd stuck with V8s it was a complete loss making exercise, chucking money at the sport for the sake of only the sport. Now at least the engines are more relevant to the road cars that the engine manufacturers produce. It's not a complete loss, more an investment.

From your other posts in other topics it would see you can't get your head around this point. This isn't meant as a dig, it's just the impression I get.

Whether or not it's good for the racing, is a different question. It's irrelveant to mention the likes of Williams and the non-engine-producing teams. I'm all for the said cap. But a potential cost cap and the new engine regs could work hand in hand.

Engine manufacturers with the big money stay in the sport because it's justified (y) and the teams now limit their expenses (y). Two very different things.
You've obviously bought in to the idea that F1 should sell it's soul to the car manufacturers and become little more than another tool for their marketing departments, I think that is a fatal move for F1.

F1 and road cars have always been at opposite ends of the automotive spectrum, F1 is about speed, noise, glamour and entertainment, road cars are about economy, reliability, practicality and utility. People don't visit the Monaco GP to watch souped up hybrids purring round the track, they go to see exotic F1 cars thundering through the streets.

Imo the price of pandering to the car manufacturers is too high for F1.

vonuber

17,868 posts

171 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
If CVC were not taking so much money out of the sport then it would not be an issue.

zac510

5,546 posts

212 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
You have to look at the cost of the engine over the lifetime of the regulations rather than just one point in time.

The V8s were cheap because the regulations on engine life were very effective at meaning fewer units needed to be purchased and the rule freeze stiffled investment costs. Thus as with the V8s, if you use the V6s for several years then they will get cheaper. I do recall complaints of development costs when they switched to V10 -> V8s so really your argument is just history repeating itself.

But the engine's not really the problem as we've had these cost problems even during the life of the old V8s - see the introduction of the 'cost cap' , while it didn't seem to work, was at least a recognition of the problem.

No doubt some teams are in trouble but I don't know how to fix the problem.

Crafty_

13,431 posts

206 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
RYH64E said:
You've obviously bought in to the idea that F1 should sell it's soul to the car manufacturers and become little more than another tool for their marketing departments, I think that is a fatal move for F1.
Errm, hate to tell you this but Manufacturers got in to F1 about 60 years ago...

RYH64E

Original Poster:

7,960 posts

250 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
Crafty_ said:
RYH64E said:
You've obviously bought in to the idea that F1 should sell it's soul to the car manufacturers and become little more than another tool for their marketing departments, I think that is a fatal move for F1.
Errm, hate to tell you this but Manufacturers got in to F1 about 60 years ago...
But 2014 is the first year it's been neccessary for F1 to be 'relevant' to road cars, why now not before? I don't see Pielli insisting on low profile treaded tyres, why must engines be 'relevant' when it's not been an issue for the last 50 years at least?

Who's more important for F1, Williams, Sauber, Lotus, Force India, or Renault and Mercedes?

DHB07

80 posts

127 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
RYH64E said:
You've obviously bought in to the idea that F1 should sell it's soul to the car manufacturers and become little more than another tool for their marketing departments, I think that is a fatal move for F1.

F1 and road cars have always been at opposite ends of the automotive spectrum, F1 is about speed, noise, glamour and entertainment, road cars are about economy, reliability, practicality and utility. People don't visit the Monaco GP to watch souped up hybrids purring round the track, they go to see exotic F1 cars thundering through the streets.

Imo the price of pandering to the car manufacturers is too high for F1.
No, i haven't. There's nothing to be bought in to here. It's facts alone. At present, the sport would cripple without the big manufacturers.

I am completely in agreement with you on what the sport should be about. All of those things is what F1 SHOULD be. But, right now, without Merc, or Renault or Ferrari the sport would be much worse off and people would be complaining that it was too much like Indy Car, or there wasn't enough glitz and glamour.

Going forwards there has to be other ways around the issue, to manage costs and to not give the manufacturers all the power, but for now it was a pretty understandable move and that's why it is the way it is, in answer to the question.

It would appear you're just bitter about the matter.

RYH64E

Original Poster:

7,960 posts

250 months

Sunday 30th March 2014
quotequote all
DHB07 said:
But, right now, without Merc, or Renault or Ferrari the sport would be much worse off and people would be complaining that it was too much like Indy Car, or there wasn't enough glitz and glamour.
Don't think Ferrari would have a problem with proper engines, unlike the others their brand is all about glamour, power and speed. I doubt they're building their model range around 1.6l hybrids...
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED