Archive for The Motor Forum "We are mature men in the highest cadres of our careers"
 


       The Motor Forum Forum Index -> Racing Posts
Dr. Hfuhruhurr

And another one

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/...ormula-one-us-grand-prix-caterham

More surprising too, as they seemed a better-run team than Caterham
BeN

Well I was surprised too, until I learnt that Marussia the sports car company went bankrupt earlier this year.
PG

Sadly, Bianchi's accident may also have been the last straw. He had lots of sponsorship that came to the team and I don't suppose that is continuing.

It seems that F1 is now a sport that is unaffordable unless you have serious manufacturer backing. And even then, only just.
gooner

No surprise really, I think you're right about Bianchi. I've not heard any more so don't know what his situation is but no news is not a good thing so it's understandable that his sponsors may be balking at the idea of continuing to bankroll the team.

So there all three of the newer teams gone. One wonders if there are more casualties to come.
JohnC

Lotus must be a prime candidate and Sauber are apparently far from healthy.

Something will have to be done to keep these teams in F1 and perhaps bring in a new team (rebadged Marussia/Caterham?) otherwise the popularity will fall off a cliff. I can't see sponsors being happy with 12 or 14 car grids.
gooner

JohnC wrote:
Lotus must be a prime candidate and Sauber are apparently far from healthy.

Something will have to be done to keep these teams in F1 and perhaps bring in a new team (rebadged Marussia/Caterham?) otherwise the popularity will fall off a cliff. I can't see sponsors being happy with 12 or 14 car grids.


Why not let the bigger teams have 3 cars? None of the smaller teams are ever going to win a race let alone a championship in their current state so all they are doing is being a rolling advert and even then it's not often that easy to see who all the sponsors are. To my eyes the business model of the bottom 5 or 6 teams is pretty much unsustainable without significantly curtailing the ability of the top teams to invest in technology. Why is F1 so obsessed with having more teams who race on the cheap. Why not allow the big guns (McLaren, Ferrari, Williams, Red Bull and Mercedes) run three cars each and spend however much they like developing them? You might actually get more top drivers in too. There's been a glut of top draw drivers over the years who've gone to a smaller F1 outfit and had their reputation ruined by a shit car and I think that ours off some of the big names from endurance racing and Indy Car etc.
Chris M Wanted a V-10

It's time that Bernie distributed the F1 income from TV Rights etc in a much fairer way. There is so much money in F1 as a whole that none of the teams should be struggling financially.

Lotus seem to be talking about 2015 in a very confident manner at the moment. Sauber are most likely IMHO to be next to fail.
The only new prospect on the horizon is the Haas / USA team (unless you count the Audi speculation)
Eff One

It's teetering on the edge due to the greed and shortsightedness of Bernie and the big teams. The sport generates well over 1 billion a year but a huge chunk of that disappears straight into the coffers of a faceless bunch of accountants with no interest in F1 other than its bottom line.

The TV and prize money pot is ridiculously tilted in favour of the big teams, who have all apparently negotiated their own deals separately. No attempt at transparency or fairness for all.

Caterham in particular is certainly guilty of mismanagement, but ever since 2010 when the cost cap under which the new teams agreed to enter evaporated, the odds have been stacked against them. The FIA added a nail by greenlighting a set of regulations guaranteed to triple engine costs.

Various individuals within F1 and the motorsport media have been shouting about this for four years - Autosport are particularly vociferous on the subject - but the Powers That Be have kept their heads well buried and caused a crisis that could easily have been avoided.

Rank idiocy.
Eff One

gooner wrote:
Why not let the bigger teams have 3 cars? None of the smaller teams are ever going to win a race let alone a championship in their current state


Because

1. They don't want to. It would cost them tens of millions more per year.

2. Any big-money team having a bit of an off year would suddenly find themselves constantly out of the points which would hurt them in obvious ways.

3. It would hurt the spectacle. Variety is what we need, not weekend after weekend of Mercedes 1-2-3s.

4. The smaller teams are 'in their current state' because of a set of regulations and a TV/prize money structure which screws them in two ways: by making F1 too expensive to be sustainable, and failing to adequately compensate them for their efforts.
gooner

Eff One wrote:
gooner wrote:
Why not let the bigger teams have 3 cars? None of the smaller teams are ever going to win a race let alone a championship in their current state


Because

1. They don't want to. It would cost them tens of millions more per year.

2. Any big-money team having a bit of an off year would suddenly find themselves constantly out of the points which would hurt them in obvious ways.

3. It would hurt the spectacle. Variety is what we need, not weekend after weekend of Mercedes 1-2-3s.

4. The smaller teams are 'in their current state' because of a set of regulations and a TV/prize money structure which screws them in two ways: by making F1 too expensive to be sustainable, and failing to adequately compensate them for their efforts.


Point 2 would prevent teams who have had a poor start to their season giving up on car development halfway through and leaving their drivers to struggle round for the second half of the season looking like they can't drive properly.
PhilD

Eff One wrote:
gooner wrote:
Why not let the bigger teams have 3 cars? None of the smaller teams are ever going to win a race let alone a championship in their current state


Because

1. They don't want to. It would cost them tens of millions more per year.

2. Any big-money team having a bit of an off year would suddenly find themselves constantly out of the points which would hurt them in obvious ways.

3. It would hurt the spectacle. Variety is what we need, not weekend after weekend of Mercedes 1-2-3s.

4. The smaller teams are 'in their current state' because of a set of regulations and a TV/prize money structure which screws them in two ways: by making F1 too expensive to be sustainable, and failing to adequately compensate them for their efforts.


Completely agree. F1 can't become a closed shop with all the success and money going to a few teams. There's a thread on here somewhere where we lament the demise of Williams (someone even stating categorically that Williams would never win anther GP). 3 car teams may have seen Williams die back the when things weren't going well, but look at them now.
Humphrey The Pug

PhilD wrote:
Eff One wrote:
gooner wrote:
Why not let the bigger teams have 3 cars? None of the smaller teams are ever going to win a race let alone a championship in their current state


Because

1. They don't want to. It would cost them tens of millions more per year.

2. Any big-money team having a bit of an off year would suddenly find themselves constantly out of the points which would hurt them in obvious ways.

3. It would hurt the spectacle. Variety is what we need, not weekend after weekend of Mercedes 1-2-3s.

4. The smaller teams are 'in their current state' because of a set of regulations and a TV/prize money structure which screws them in two ways: by making F1 too expensive to be sustainable, and failing to adequately compensate them for their efforts.


Completely agree. F1 can't become a closed shop with all the success and money going to a few teams. There's a thread on here somewhere where we lament the demise of Williams (someone even stating categorically that Williams would never win anther GP). 3 car teams may have seen Williams die back the when things weren't going well, but look at them now.


Three car teams for me would be a big turn off and if it actually happened I would seriously consider giving up on F1, I don't see the benefits to the competition all.

Can you imagine the top three steps being predominately taken up by Mercedes, how boring, imagine team orders if one of the teams were running 1-2-3, it would just end up as a procession.

F1 does need sorting however I'm not sure how, the budget cap seemed to die a death, something needs to give but what?
Big Blue

PhilD wrote:


Completely agree. F1 can't become a closed shop with all the success and money going to a few teams.


Why not? Football, RU, NFL, NHL, Tennis etc. all run on this premise so why not F1. For instance, if the FA were serious about spreading the money in the Premiership they'd have 10-up, 10-down each season; in tennis the prize money at majors would be less top-heavy. F1 is just doing what all sports do: hand out money where the interest is at the commercial level.
PhilD

Big Blue wrote:
PhilD wrote:


Completely agree. F1 can't become a closed shop with all the success and money going to a few teams.


Why not? Football, RU, NFL, NHL, Tennis etc. all run on this premise so why not F1. For instance, if the FA were serious about spreading the money in the Premiership they'd have 10-up, 10-down each season; in tennis the prize money at majors would be less top-heavy. F1 is just doing what all sports do: hand out money where the interest is at the commercial level.


You are missing the point BB. "F1 can't become a closed shop with all the success and money going to a few teams"  the top teams/people in football, tennis etc aren't the same ones as 10/20 years ago are they? My point was about allowing new teams to come through and start to challenge for the top.
Big Blue

I see the point but Man U, Barcelona, Real Madrid, 1.FC Bayern, Marseille etc. are the same bunch of teams and forever will be; NFL and NHL are effectively closed shops with the franchise system and players in sports such as tennis get to the top of their commercial potential and their earnings might not match their skill (e.g. Anna Kournikova; even Maria Sharapova had media coverage (and earnings) that outstripped her results for about a decade).

It says something about F1 costs, hierarchy and culture when one of the most successful F3 teams of all time, Carlin, has low interest in making the step up. My understanding is that Trevor Carlin thinks it's for a bunch of c***s - why would he struggle with that shit and make his brand look weaker?
PhilD

Stewart GP, Jaguar, Redbull, World Champions 2011, 12, 13, 14

Jordan, Midland, Force India, Podium at Bahrein.

For football look at the current Premier League and you will see Burnley, Leicester, Hull.  

The small teams are the life blood of sport providing opportunities for everyone involved to learn their craft, develop and improve.
gooner

PhilD wrote:
Stewart GP, Jaguar, Redbull, World Champions 2011, 12, 13, 14

Jordan, Midland, Force India, Podium at Bahrein.

For football look at the current Premier League and you will see Burnley, Leicester, Hull.

The small teams are the life blood of sport providing opportunities for everyone involved to learn their craft, develop and improve.


Yes but the difference in the Premiership is that there are plenty of teams to fill the void when badly run clubs like Leeds and Pompey get their finances in a mess. F1 doesn't run a relegation system with lower formulas so with the bottom three teams having gone out of business and a couple of other looking shaky, unless more new teams take the plunge the risk is that there will be ten empty grid slots next year.

Giving the remaining teams the option of putting a third car on the grid would help fill it up. Perhaps the rule could be that the third car must be driven by a rookie in order to get some of the younger talent in to the sport. There's always the risk that this would lead to one team getting a 1-2-3 for several races but I don't see that being the case every race.
PhilD

gooner wrote:
PhilD wrote:
Stewart GP, Jaguar, Redbull, World Champions 2011, 12, 13, 14

Jordan, Midland, Force India, Podium at Bahrein.

For football look at the current Premier League and you will see Burnley, Leicester, Hull.

The small teams are the life blood of sport providing opportunities for everyone involved to learn their craft, develop and improve.


Yes but the difference in the Premiership is that there are plenty of teams to fill the void when badly run clubs like Leeds and Pompey get their finances in a mess. F1 doesn't run a relegation system with lower formulas so with the bottom three teams having gone out of business and a couple of other looking shaky, unless more new teams take the plunge the risk is that there will be ten empty grid slots next year.

Giving the remaining teams the option of putting a third car on the grid would help fill it up. Perhaps the rule could be that the third car must be driven by a rookie in order to get some of the younger talent in to the sport. There's always the risk that this would lead to one team getting a 1-2-3 for several races but I don't see that being the case every race.


I didn't start the football analogy, and don't particularly like it, so there's no point in arguing against it with me. Eff 1's points above still stand, 3 car teams is not the answer.
Scouse

PhilD wrote:
gooner wrote:
PhilD wrote:
Stewart GP, Jaguar, Redbull, World Champions 2011, 12, 13, 14

Jordan, Midland, Force India, Podium at Bahrein.

For football look at the current Premier League and you will see Burnley, Leicester, Hull.

The small teams are the life blood of sport providing opportunities for everyone involved to learn their craft, develop and improve.


Yes but the difference in the Premiership is that there are plenty of teams to fill the void when badly run clubs like Leeds and Pompey get their finances in a mess. F1 doesn't run a relegation system with lower formulas so with the bottom three teams having gone out of business and a couple of other looking shaky, unless more new teams take the plunge the risk is that there will be ten empty grid slots next year.

Giving the remaining teams the option of putting a third car on the grid would help fill it up. Perhaps the rule could be that the third car must be driven by a rookie in order to get some of the younger talent in to the sport. There's always the risk that this would lead to one team getting a 1-2-3 for several races but I don't see that being the case every race.


I didn't start the football analogy, and don't particularly like it, so there's no point in arguing against it with me. Eff 1's points above still stand, 3 car teams is not the answer.


Especially since that's the poison dwarf's preferred option.
Chris M Wanted a V-10

gooner wrote:
[Perhaps the rule could be that the third car must be driven by a rookie in order to get some of the younger talent in to the sport.

An excellent idea in theory, but what happens if the rookie is found to be totally out of their depth, and causes (directly or indirectly) loads of crashes, or becomes a mobile obstruction cruising round at 85% - 95% of his team-mates' speed?
Eff One

gooner wrote:
unless more new teams take the plunge the risk is that there will be ten empty grid slots next year.

Giving the remaining teams the option of putting a third car on the grid would help fill it up.


That's in the rules already. If the grid falls below 20 cars, the remaining teams - presumably starting with the frontrunners - must field third cars to plug the gap. It's not happening this weekend because the FIA chose not to enforce the rule at such short notice.
Tim

I've copied this from the BBC website:-

"F1 boss Bernie Ecclestone says teams have signed contracts agreeing to help competitors which get into financial trouble by supplying a car to them"

I wonder how it would work given that the teams with problems are the ones at the back who are striving to finish slightly better than each other for next-season prize money reasons.
Could we see, say, Max Chilton in a Marussia branded car that was really a Mercedes underneath?
That might give him the opportunity to finish on the podium while, say, Caterham might only get a re-branded Lotus and still finish at the back thus missing out on substantial financial benefits for the following season.
Giant

James Allen made a good point (wonders never cease!) on the 5live American GP preview, that whilst losing teams is a problem for the sport, at a human level it's a far more fundamental problem. these teams have hundreds of employees, all of whom are facing unemployment and have family's to support and mortgages to pay, most of whom don't earn huge salaries. For an industry that is awash with money but chooses not to distribute it fairly, that is pretty disgusting.
Big Blue

Giant wrote:
For an industry that is awash with money but chooses not to distribute it fairly, that is pretty disgusting.


And this scenario is different to other industries in which respect?

       The Motor Forum Forum Index -> Racing Posts
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum