Is F1 about to die?
Discussion
I can't help but look at Marussia and Catherham sniffing about for the next wide-eyed billionaire to bankroll them for a few years before deciding he's bored of it and it'll never make any money and think it's not going to happen.
Sauber, Lotus and Force India are apparently skint too, and were told in no uncertain terms Sunday night by Bernie they're getting nothing more to help them, perhaps they're using the Marussia/Caterham situation to try to leverage for a fairer deal, or perhaps they too might find themselves not making it the end of next season.
It's not out of the realms of possibility we could lose 5 teams within months.
Who's left?
Williams, have done better than anyone expected, but will their points bonus money be enough, they weren't exactly swimming in cash last year - are Martini really paying them so much?
Ferrari & McL have buckets of cash, but it seems it's mostly because F1 pays them to exist, if F1 loses the mid to back markers, will it be enough of an event to keep the money rolling in.
RedBull / TR and Mercedes have big budgets, but they're not there for the love of it, they're there to sell a brand and will that budget stay if F1 starts to look a but weak? If the figures keep falling will RB pull Torro Rosso to save RedBull, or will they pull out completely.
Perhaps my tin-foil hat is too tight, but it seems to me Bernie has decided that small teams can't afford F1 anymore so he'll give a coup de grace to any that don't die of natural causes and this 3-car team plan is Plan A now - but what if the teams say no?
I can't help but this Max was right all along, a budget cap in 2008 would have averted all this.
Sauber, Lotus and Force India are apparently skint too, and were told in no uncertain terms Sunday night by Bernie they're getting nothing more to help them, perhaps they're using the Marussia/Caterham situation to try to leverage for a fairer deal, or perhaps they too might find themselves not making it the end of next season.
It's not out of the realms of possibility we could lose 5 teams within months.
Who's left?
Williams, have done better than anyone expected, but will their points bonus money be enough, they weren't exactly swimming in cash last year - are Martini really paying them so much?
Ferrari & McL have buckets of cash, but it seems it's mostly because F1 pays them to exist, if F1 loses the mid to back markers, will it be enough of an event to keep the money rolling in.
RedBull / TR and Mercedes have big budgets, but they're not there for the love of it, they're there to sell a brand and will that budget stay if F1 starts to look a but weak? If the figures keep falling will RB pull Torro Rosso to save RedBull, or will they pull out completely.
Perhaps my tin-foil hat is too tight, but it seems to me Bernie has decided that small teams can't afford F1 anymore so he'll give a coup de grace to any that don't die of natural causes and this 3-car team plan is Plan A now - but what if the teams say no?
I can't help but this Max was right all along, a budget cap in 2008 would have averted all this.
The Martini deal with Williams is a bargain and I doubt is costing much more £14 million a year. McLaren are burning through the Honda advance money and their commercial division is having a really hard time. Ferrari still have huge 'invisible' backing from Marlboro who re sell the space on the car and F1 needs to look very closely at how the business is run very soon before it just vanishes and the fans and TV broadcasters just walk away and say no thank you.
The corporate market is not currently interested in F1, as most of the cars will clearly show. Hospitality is well down too, most of this is legal issues however.
The corporate market is not currently interested in F1, as most of the cars will clearly show. Hospitality is well down too, most of this is legal issues however.
With the best will in the world, love him or hate him, Bernie ain't gonna be around for too much longer. I've never been too sure how much influence has has over rules and regulations but they seem to have become more restrictive over the years.
I may be in cloud cuckoo land, but surely the engine configuration needn't be written in stone? V6, V8, V10, V12; NA, Turbo or SC; hybid, electric, diseasal, petrol; so long as the power does not exceed x BHP and the cars exceed x kgs in weight and have four wheels.
I may be in cloud cuckoo land, but surely the engine configuration needn't be written in stone? V6, V8, V10, V12; NA, Turbo or SC; hybid, electric, diseasal, petrol; so long as the power does not exceed x BHP and the cars exceed x kgs in weight and have four wheels.
http://www.f1today.net/en/news/offtrack-civil-war-...
I really could see the three ( or 4 ) smaller teams just walking out and leaving F1
I really could see the three ( or 4 ) smaller teams just walking out and leaving F1
There is too much money at stake for it to 'die'. What is it? £1.8bn per annum?
I think there are some huge internal battles going on with many outcomes possible. Whether Bernie can contrive his preferred outcome, and who knows what that really is, we shall see!
He usually gets his way in the end though.
I think there are some huge internal battles going on with many outcomes possible. Whether Bernie can contrive his preferred outcome, and who knows what that really is, we shall see!
He usually gets his way in the end though.
mollytherocker said:
There is too much money at stake for it to 'die'. What is it? £1.8bn per annum?
It's only worth that if a) enough teams enter to make it interesting, and b) people find it interesting enough to pay money to watchThe way it's going at the moment it is set to become a sport between 3 or 4 mega-teams, which just isn't very interesting at all
MartG said:
The article shows a problem with having manufacturers in the sport. They control it. Merc can leave at any time, and now would be good for them. They've dominated the races this year to a degree reminiscent of the Honda engine years. Yesterday, after the final pit-stop, we had a demonstration of the dominance again. They've proved what they can do and can milk it for years.Such a move might be disaster for the sport.
One way I've thought of limiting costs is for the engine manufacturers to produce an engine to a price. They must make them available to two/three teams at that agreed cost, let's say £1m for the season.
The manufacturer could, of course, still spend £billions on their engines but it might not be cost effective.
Engines would arrive at the circuit in a box and teams could choose which one they want.
Cost kept low, or rather lower, for all teams and throwing money at development might be seen as a waste.
The idea of reverting to V8s in a nonsense. Any change costs, and such a basic change as engines costs a great deal. It's not as if it is as simple as unbolting the engine and replacing it with another. The suggestion shows the paucity of ideas.
I doubt F1 will die. It is, after all, just a formula. In essence the old F1 died at the end of last season as the cars for this one are radically different. A new formula in fact. Little was carried over.
However, there can be little doubt that the sport is in trouble. Who could have predicted that, eh? What is especially irritating is that this season has been very exciting, with lots happening up and down the field. I didn't predict that. So if the show is in trouble despite the racing, what's the answer? It certainly isn't just to make the cars louder.
Gary C said:
How would you ever implement a budget cap ?
Mr Ferrari says "Well we buy these chassis parts from fiat for £2.50 ? "
Maybe they should allow testing through the season for teams in the bottom half of the points table as it's probably cheaper than the simulators top teams use.
no, but things like engines you could...Mr Ferrari says "Well we buy these chassis parts from fiat for £2.50 ? "
Maybe they should allow testing through the season for teams in the bottom half of the points table as it's probably cheaper than the simulators top teams use.
for example, if you mandate an engine contract for a two car team will be $5M fixed cost, then if Ferrari want to spend $500M building it, that's their problem, they have to sell it for $5M
Chassis get's harder, but the actual build cost is not really the issue, it's the design time/testing that's the real cost (and they are already limited to one design a year).
Next up is wind tunnel and CFD costs, these are big ones, tunnels costs millions to build/operate, as so sever-farms for CFD work.
then you get to staff numbers, etc etc etc...
Derek Smith said:
The idea of reverting to V8s in a nonsense. Any change costs, and such a basic change as engines costs a great deal. It's not as if it is as simple as unbolting the engine and replacing it with another. The suggestion shows the paucity of ideas.
disagreein the context of cars for next year, would be pretty straight forward to swap to a much simpler engine install.
Admittedly it was a report of a report in the Fail on Sunday, but Force India's auditors have expressed doubt over the team's future viability. It didn't quite say the accounts wouldn't have a going concern statement in them, but wasn't far off.
If true (and Force India are audited by Grant Thornton, who are a decent outfit), it's worrying news.
If true (and Force India are audited by Grant Thornton, who are a decent outfit), it's worrying news.
Scuffers said:
disagree
in the context of cars for next year, would be pretty straight forward to swap to a much simpler engine install.
I've not designed an F1 car for some time but I would assume that a change from the current engine to the 'old' 2.5 V8s would be anything but simple. It would mean a new chassis, new location for ancillaries, new aero, and more and more. Research costs.in the context of cars for next year, would be pretty straight forward to swap to a much simpler engine install.
Unless, of course, you want them to run their old designs without changes.
The teams would have budgeted for the development costs for the new design to be spread over a number of years. To suddenly tell them that it has all been wasted will drive more to the wall.
Substantial changes year on year is hardly a sensible business model. It is not for nothing that in some of the years when the DFV was competitive, the grids were over-subscribed.
Derek Smith said:
Scuffers said:
disagree
in the context of cars for next year, would be pretty straight forward to swap to a much simpler engine install.
I've not designed an F1 car for some time but I would assume that a change from the current engine to the 'old' 2.5 V8s would be anything but simple. It would mean a new chassis, new location for ancillaries, new aero, and more and more. Research costs.in the context of cars for next year, would be pretty straight forward to swap to a much simpler engine install.
Unless, of course, you want them to run their old designs without changes.
The teams would have budgeted for the development costs for the new design to be spread over a number of years. To suddenly tell them that it has all been wasted will drive more to the wall.
Substantial changes year on year is hardly a sensible business model. It is not for nothing that in some of the years when the DFV was competitive, the grids were over-subscribed.
When teams who aren't backed by a major manufacturer or sponsor are failing, when circuits are making a loss on every GP they host ( unless topped up by the local regime ), when TV coverage is increasingly moving to pay-to-view and viewing figures are falling, when even successful teams are finding it hard to attract sponsors...yet CVC continue to siphon off a large proportion of the proceeds 
The current structure of F1 is simply unsustainable
The current structure of F1 is simply unsustainable
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff