Bernie returns F1 to survival of the fittest

[John S]

Only top ten teams will get end of year prize money in future. 

Since it's now 3 years since Mosley and the FIA bought budget teams in to F1  moneybags Bernie is delighted to stick the boot into the remaining back markers. Survival of the fittest
Well $10 mill not spent is a nice extra profit for him and the suits at CVC.    Can't help thinking this decision just might come back to haunt FOM, if these rear end teams wither away where is the protection for the series promoter if one of the other teams calls it a day, there's a minimum grid Bernie must field - isn't there?  

The team that finishes last will no longer receive any formula one income, Bernie Ecclestone has revealed.

Marussia officials have been puzzling as to why they were not offered a new Concorde Agreement for this season and beyond.

The truth now emerges: F1 chief executive Ecclestone has revealed he has scrapped the $10 million prize-money for any teams that finish the constructors’ world championship outside the top ten.

"They (Marussia) don’t have a commercial agreement because they are not in the top ten. We pay the top ten, that’s what we do," he told F1 business journalist Christian Sylt in the Telegraph newspaper.

"For three years we did something different because we had an agreement with (former FIA president) Max (Mosley) but from now on we will pay the top ten and that is it."

Ecclestone also revealed that the sport is pushing ahead with plans to float on the stock exchange.

"We have agreed to do it," he said. "It will happen this year and it will be up and running.

Nextgen-auto.com, Today.

[F1fanaticBD]

I think Bernie has issued this now to ensure there is no late scrap from the Marussia lawyers for the money at the end of season.

[Dare]

I think it's a lowdown blow fitting of FOM  .What's 10 million
to them to keep a struggling team on the grid?

It makes me   

[lkjohnson1950]

Bernie has stated in the past he only needs 10 teams, and isn't particularly interested in maintaining back-markers. If the other teams have signed, I hope Marussia beats Caterham at least, just to embarrass the dwarf.

[Ian]

That's another door shut on up and coming drivers.

[Irisado]

It's such a retrograde step.

It makes me really angry that Ecclestone is such a miserable little miser.  It's hardly a major problem to pay out for eleventh place, and without payments outside the top ten, we'll just lose teams.

Formula 1 needs more than ten teams.

[cosworth151]

A terrible, stupid, short sighted idea that will do real damage to the sport. Just what I'd expect from Gollum I mean, Bernie.

[Jericoke]

F1 doesn't need a team that's on the grid just to collect $10 million.  It needs teams that are trying to win, constantly improving, and are financially sound.

Let's face it, if $10 million is the difference between racing and staying home, the team isn't going to be competing with the big boys anyway.

I agree that the three 'budget teams' were hamstrung from the get go (at least US GP realised it, and folded before they could embarass themselves), and there is a big barrier to entering the sport.

A gold star for perfect attendance won't fix it.

[cosworth151]

I'd say just the opposite. F1 needs the small teams. First, they are the traditional nurseries for new drivers. They are also the into to F1 for new fans. How many new F1 fans would there be here in the States if USF1 had gone ahead? Also, they exist for F1. As we've discussed before, the big budget manufacturers can and do withdraw at a moment's notice.

Do you really think that F1 would be a better place if it never had Minardi, Jordan, Stewart, Super Aguri, Brabham, Hesketh and so many others?

[Scott]

I agree.  New fans flock to the sport every time a new team starts, especially if it is a team from a new country or at least funded from a new country (as in a country not yet involved in F1).  $10m means so little to Bernie, yet so much to the small teams. 

[F1fanaticBD]

F1 doesn't need a team that's on the grid just to collect $10 million.  It needs teams that are trying to win, constantly improving, and are financially sound.

Let's face it, if $10 million is the difference between racing and staying home, the team isn't going to be competing with the big boys anyway.

Its not just 10 million Jeri, its a cushion of 10 million for the team. You may raise your money from sponsor, pay drivers and many other methods and can spend it with a 10 million cushion, which makes a whole lot of difference to that team. So instead making a 8 million loss, they could make a 2 million profit, and thus ensure the viability of the team.

[vintly]

I think ten teams is fine in terms on new drivers getting into the sport. This year may be slightly unprecedented, but there are 5 new rookies on the grid. Five! The sport doesn't need anything like that, nor should it. One or two maybe.

With ten teams, there are twenty drivers. If three drivers leave the sport every two years, that equates to an average career time in F1 of 15 years per driver - which is plenty. This makes for 3 new drivers every two years. Sounds about right to me.

[Scott]

But Vintly, Bernie lured the last few teams into F1 with the promise of a more even playing field, budget limits, and of course appearance money.  So when the next couple of teams pull out, I hope anyone new out there wanting to put up the money to start an F1 team reads the details and makes sure they sign at least a 10yr contract with Bernie including guarantees.

If 10 teams is the minimum, and I've heard 12 teams is the maximum, why on earth wouldn't the bottom two teams at least get appearance money?  When one of the big manufacturers pulls out, isn't it better to have a one or two team cushion?  I like the backmarkers being there.

[Monty]

Sometimes Bernie does something which actually makes sense if properly explained (I will explain my reasons below) but his arrogant 'dictates' explain nothing and everyone believes (on most occasions, accurately) that there is self-interest at the heart of it!

I do think there is some sense to this decision. The back-marker teams are not helping the sport.
They are not in the real race (let's face it they are generally over a second a lap off the pace, and several laps down at the end of a race); they are not a 'breeding ground for young drivers' because they are taking pay-drivers so they are just a 'breeding ground for rich drivers'; they will never catch the big teams on $10million. In effect they are in a different series to the main stream F1 and other F1 feeder series already exist so F1 does not need a two-tier race structure.
This said, I would still like to see something done to encourage the addition of more competitive teams and I suspect this will need some serious cost controls, lower cost of entry and some long term consistency to the regs.

[lkjohnson1950]

Actually it wasn't Bernie who lured the new teams in, it was Max. He was the one who badgered the teams about cost control, and promised the new teams a budget cap. But why choose Caterham over Marussia? Yes they have beaten Marussia in the points (so to speak), but Marussia has been creeping closer and now that they have KERS, they seem to be fairly even. Nothing against Caterham, but I hope Marussia gets 10th this year just to embarrass Bernie.