Bernie plans to boost F1 grid with 'Super GP2' cars

[John S]

Must be why Sauber's Monisha feels small teams are unloved.   

Proposal for two-tier F1 put forward in meeting at Brazil GP. 
 

https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/formula-1-super-gp2-plan-boost-f1-grid-085039208--f1.html

[Scott]

Another idiotic deflection.  Fix the financing.  Where are the GP2 teams going to find the funds to join F1 even with spec customer cars? Come ON Bernie!

[lkjohnson1950]

I stopped watching NASCAR when they introduced the COT standardized chassis, I'll stop watching F1 when they introduce Super GP2.

 

[Jericoke]

If they're going to allow 'customer' cars, why do they have to be standard?

Here's my new proposal:
The top 5 teams are required to provide their own entries next season
The bottom 5 (or more) teams are allowed to use customer chassis from the top 5 teams (but not required to do so)

Keep the pay scales the same, top teams will be kept on their toes as a lower team runs identical machinery.  Lower teams will have a chance to use a successful season to build a 'war chest' for funding development of a future chassis.

Also, while we're at it, maybe the rules for a season shouldn't be set so early.  If McLaren and Ferrari are hard at work on the 2015 cars right now, while Sauber and FIF1 are hard at work trying to fund 2015, that's a room for both cost savings, and keeping the competition closer.

If an F1 car has to be designed from the ground up in 3 months, that puts everyone on (more) even footing, doesn't it?

[Scott]

Sounds good, but I still don't agree that the pay scales should stay the same.  F1 revenue sharing really needs a good re-do.  I would tear up all the contracts and see who goes and see who sticks around. 

I am sooooo tired of hearing the 'Ferrari should get the most because of who they are' argument.  I couldn't care a less who they are.  Except for the Schumacher years and once with Kimi, they haven't put a winning car on the grid for 30 years.  If they can't do that with the money they get from the FOM and in fact from the other teams, then do they really DESERVE to get the most? 

[Dare]

Righto Scotty,all teams should receive a reasonable amount
to operate their yearly expenses with a separate pool based
on performance.

[Jericoke]

Sounds good, but I still don't agree that the pay scales should stay the same.  F1 revenue sharing really needs a good re-do.  I would tear up all the contracts and see who goes and see who sticks around. 

I am sooooo tired of hearing the 'Ferrari should get the most because of who they are' argument.  I couldn't care a less who they are.  Except for the Schumacher years and once with Kimi, they haven't put a winning car on the grid for 30 years.  If they can't do that with the money they get from the FOM and in fact from the other teams, then do they really DESERVE to get the most?

I'm all for a proper reorg of the sport's finances. 

I don't think that will solve any problems, Ferrari and McLaren will continue to have unlimited budgets, maybe Mercedes and Red Bull will stick it out once they lose their advantage, maybe not.

There needs to be a way for smaller teams to get a competitive leg up. 

If we just hand them money, there's a risk of owners who are showing up for the money, not the sport.  Of course no one seems to care about Lotus being owned by some sort of financial conglomerate trying to squeeze blood from a rock.

[Scott]

Of course no one seems to care about Lotus being owned by some sort of financial conglomerate trying to squeeze blood from a rock.

Like CVC? 

[John S]

Sounds good, but I still don't agree that the pay scales should stay the same.  F1 revenue sharing really needs a good re-do.  I would tear up all the contracts and see who goes and see who sticks around.

Sounds lovely and fine in principle, however the reality is FOM/CVC is a highly leveraged and highly profitable business - none of us if we were in charge would really jeopardise the fat profits for total uncertainty - so neither will they.

I don't like the idea of Super GP2 anymore than the rest of you, but I seem to recall discussions amongst us in the past about having a promotion/relegation method similar to Football leagues. At least this idea, as opposed to customer cars from F1 teams, could keep the second half of the grid on it's toes since it becomes possible to look at relegation instead of just no funding for the last team in the championship.

[Scott]

I'm not suggesting CVC give up their share.  I'm talking about how the rest is distributed.  Tear up the appearance fees for the top 4-5 teams and start fresh by giving every team a basic, but generous appearance fee and then split the rest by finishing order.

[cosworth151]

One of the biggest fallacies of modern business management is that businesses are supposed to make money. They can't "make money." They can only make a product or provide a service that people will trade their money for. As silly as it sounds, that vital step is largely overlooked these days.

CVC/FOM/SPECTRE/Whoever can only continue to rake in huge profits by providing a racing series that people will watch. More than that, that people will become fans of. Right now, they are hemorrhaging not only team, but also fans. Only by shifting some of those huge profits to maintaining the product (i.e., F1 racing) will there continue to be any profits to divvy up.

[Jericoke]

One of the biggest fallacies of modern business management is that businesses are supposed to make money. They can't "make money." They can only make a product or provide a service that people will trade their money for. As silly as it sounds, that vital step is largely overlooked these days.

CVC/FOM/SPECTRE/Whoever can only continue to rake in huge profits by providing a racing series that people will watch. More than that, that people will become fans of. Right now, they are hemorrhaging not only team, but also fans. Only by shifting some of those huge profits to maintaining the product (i.e., F1 racing) will there continue to be any profits to divvy up.

That's always been the problem though.  Bernie doesn't treat FOM like a business, he treats it like a game.  He doesn't like to lose, but since he makes up the rules as he goes along, he has to get closer and closer to the edge in order to get a thrill out of it.

[Irisado]

It's a terrible idea, it really is.  How would they even integrate spec GP2 chassis with an F1 engine?  I can't see it working out too well.

The whole thing with customer cars was tried in the mid to late 2000s.  It didn't work then, and it wouldn't work now.  It robs teams of their identity, and puts them at the mercy of the quality of someone else's car, which doesn't always work out too well.  Also, if it does work out well, and the customer team beats the manufacturer team, the manufacturer team soon loses the will to help out its satellite team, and it can crumble very quickly (just ask Aguri Suzuki).

The financing of Formula 1 needs sorting out.  End of story.  Ecclestone should do that, and stop coming up with these half-baked and ill-conceived ideas.