Saving F1 (2018 edition)

Discussion in 'Formula One Discussion' started by Ruslan, Jul 28, 2018.

  1. RasputinLives

    RasputinLives Happy to be me again Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    54
    The above me reminds me of the time Manor went into adminstration with 30 million debt but we're owed 33 million in prize money from the year before that they weren't allowed to collect unless they completed that season.

    F1 is a crazy world.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to remove all adverts.
  3. Galahad

    Galahad Not a Moderator Valued Member

    Featured Threads:
    6
    My point is just that there is going to be some natural fluctuation in participant numbers over time, and this is not necessarily indicative of an impending doomsday scenario. HRT, Lotus/Caterham and Virgin/Manor contributed nothing, were lost and have not been missed. What's important is having competitive teams.

    If Force India - arguably the most competitive team of all, certainly the most efficient - cannot find a buyer and goes out of business, that would be a real concern, but at this point that looks unlikely, hence let's wait for the verdict before drawing conclusions.
     
  4. RasputinLives

    RasputinLives Happy to be me again Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    54
    I miss HRT everyday. So many jokes.
     
  5. Il_leone

    Il_leone Champion Elect

    Featured Threads:
    3
    Force India: F1 power struggle over team's future

    The concern is if Force India become a MercedesB team therefore privateer and non manufacturer teams will have no chance to compete

    The bid that concerns most is Lawrence Stroll buying Force India because he wants a B team
     
  6. cider_and_toast

    cider_and_toast Everything in moderation Staff Member Premium Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    25
    What would define a 'B' team?

    Basically, all we are saying is that it would be a spot for reserve drivers to stretch their legs and another team on the grid who would immediately leap out of the way if the 'A' team car came up behind them in a race.

    If there was to be a formal arrangement allowed in the regulations i.e. the sharing of chassis, aero parts etc, the solution is a simple one. B teams don't score points in the constructors championship and therefore are not eligible for prize money.
     
  7. cider_and_toast

    cider_and_toast Everything in moderation Staff Member Premium Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    25
    Talking of prize money.

    When they finally see sense and stop paying those silly sums of money to the top teams for no real reason at all, I would introduce massive success prizes to the drivers. That would throw the cat among the pigeons. Imagine a sliding scale starting at say 2 million for the race winner, 1.5 million for second, 1 million for third and then downwards until the last place finisher. The conversation could end up like this...

    "Kimi, Seb is faster than you"
    "not half a million pounds faster he isn't"
    "ok we'll make up the difference"
    "right, next time I pit I want that in writing"

    I would certainly make driver contracts more interesting.
     
    FB, Road of Bones, Andyoak and 2 others like this.
  8. Angel

    Angel Points Scorer Supporter

    Featured Threads:
    1
    cider_and_toast that's fine if you're in a potentially race winning car. Imagine the poor devils at the back of the grid who won't get a sniff of a podium all season.
    I do like your idea of the conversations on the radio though, that I would enjoy hearing!
     
  9. cider_and_toast

    cider_and_toast Everything in moderation Staff Member Premium Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    25
    Angellica true but they would have more motivation to out perform their car and hopefully prove they deserve a place further up the grid. Also, it would be down to the teams to make up the shortfall if they have a driver who they feel is doing an outstanding job. Further more, it may even reduce pay to race drivers because the teams could put some sort of contract together where they share the drivers winnings so the better the driver does, the more cash he makes and some of that goes back to the team.
     
  10. Angel

    Angel Points Scorer Supporter

    Featured Threads:
    1
    cider_and_toast maybe they could have a payment for how many cars they pass on track. So if you start say 19th and end up 12th, you'd make your money up by so much per pass. That of course could lead to some questionable moves on track and I don't know how you'd work it if say you'd moved up the grid then had an issue and ended up behind where you started or something.

    All these ideas are full of problems as well as positives.
     
  11. cider_and_toast

    cider_and_toast Everything in moderation Staff Member Premium Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    25
    True but they're fun to kick around.
     
  12. Izumi

    Izumi Test Driver

    I was always an odd child, and bad habits are hard to shake off. Today, not surprisingly, I am in odds with several ideas presented here as improvements on state of the F1.

    1. A proposition I am reading about suggested that a pool of money should be awarded to drivers on sliding scale, and that would motivate them to perform better.

    Really?

    This proposition implies that drivers are basically lazy and they do need monetary motivation. There is no other way to interpret such suggestion. In contrast, I rather think that drivers actually do drive at performance level their abilities and equipment allows them.

    There is no incentive for a leading driver to finish with a gap of certain magnitude to P2. In reality, they protecting equipment from unnecessary high wear and tear, and as long the leader has his car nose ahead, victory is his. Pool of money (Liberty will pay?) will not improve the show IMHO.

    Solution - Normative references have to significantly change for the start before we would be talking about money.

    2. I am not so sure what's behind desire to pillage top team of some cash. Monetary reward denied will not go to McLaren or similar "poor" teams. FOG will pocket it, and spend it as they like, I don't doubt it. So what would be gained by looting Ferrari or RBR and MB? What problem would be solved other than demotivating them to stay in F1?
     
    gethinceri likes this.
  13. Angel

    Angel Points Scorer Supporter

    Featured Threads:
    1
    Money doesn't motivate everyone, you're right on that. But it works for some, after all did you ever meet anyone who said they have more than enough money? I'm sure I haven't.

    You're right, you can only drive to the level of your car, but at the same time some drivers are lazy and don't push as hard as they can. Kimi is a classic example of this, others push to the limit all the time, Alonso for example. Saying that, when Fernando feels there is little point, he does give up, but then who wouldn't? You can only put up with rubbish things happening for so long can't you?

    If there was an easy solution someone would have come up with it by now, what the answer is, who knows? But it's nice to throw some ideas around for a while.
     
  14. Izumi

    Izumi Test Driver

    The answer is, there never will be peace in current configuration for conflict of interest is irreconcilable. Regardless of rhetoric, various teams joining F1 series for their own reasons. F1 became a branding series, and lets face it, struggling teams like Williams are not exactly good ROI for Liberty at the moment, as BB are involved.
    Liberty has an option to let automakers go and try to turn clock back a few decades (crazy idea IMHO), or reconfigure series with 5 teams racing in tier 1, and allowing for B-teams in tier 2. (That might work.)

    My recommendation however would focus on definition of a composite profile of potential customers who will carry them in next decade, and tune up series into a body which will cater to this new generation of fans of the sport. Product on the track, and MO of viewing delivery has to go hand in hand, regardless if same older fans (myself included) will fall off. Program might not be implemented in full by 2021, but should transition into new world asap. End of CVC's CA should follow with surgical like cut with the past. It will be painful, shocking, yet necessary if this series is to survive. Last point - make it less British, and spread it globally. Ferrari is a good example it could be done.
     
  15. Bill Boddy

    Bill Boddy Professional layabout Premium Contributor

    Personally I find the thought of Williams having a "B" team rather odd. Unless the idea is to show that "B" teams can be quicker than the "A" team?
     
  16. Izumi

    Izumi Test Driver

    I think it is up to Williams to prove where they stand. Despite all past glory they are not today in a position to claim the tier 1 status, and to struggle aimlessly from a race to race is no fun for anyone. They have to swallow hard, hitch with a front team as a B-team until they can return back to self-sufficiency. Imposition of a low racing budget upon teams will not correct their financial position IMO, nor I believe that Lowe will built a winning car. (I am sorry if I sound harsh, but that's how I see them.)

    A-teams currently are: Ferrari, Mercedes, RBR, and Renault. We need one new entrant as a team owner, preferably from the automotive business. McLaren is nowhere at the moment. I am not sure what those people were thinking.
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2018
  17. cider_and_toast

    cider_and_toast Everything in moderation Staff Member Premium Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    25
    Izumi I think you failed to notice I was joking.

    I would however stop paying Ferrari vast sums of money just for being Ferrari. And the same goes for what ever excuse they use to give extra cash to Red Bull and Mercedes.
     
  18. RasputinLives

    RasputinLives Happy to be me again Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    54
    The real people have profited from F1 are the shareholders in his own company that Bernie paid 'projected' profits too 5 years in advance. Liberty are still having to cover the cost and will be until at least 2021
     
  19. Izumi

    Izumi Test Driver

    "Our logic must be understood - we want an F1 for the fans and not for the teams."

    Mr. Carey will have to forgive me, but that one sound really stupid.

    Liberty Media: "Marchionne agreed about the future of F1"
     
  20. Izumi

    Izumi Test Driver

    Barnard: I'd like to know how F1 cost-cap will operate | GRAND PRIX 247
    Barnard said, “These cost caps… I’d like to know how they’re going to operate those.
    That's what I have been asking for years, and still waiting for explanation even from most ardent proponents of that idea. Personally I think it's total nonsense which will hurt F1 on a long run.
     
    Galahad likes this.
  21. siffert_fan

    siffert_fan Too old to watch the Asian races live. Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    2
    Class B split and talk "damaging F1 a lot"

    It isn't the talk that is damaging F1, it's the lack of competition! How can the powers that be in F1 not understand that basic fact?
     

Share This

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use it, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice