Mosely:axe Ferrari's bonus

[Dare]

A fairer distribution and Manor would still be around


http://www.planetf1.com/news/mosley-urges-new-owners-to-axe-ferrari-bonus/

[Jericoke]

It's a tough decision.  F1 needs Ferrari more than Ferrari needs F1.  The problem is that F1 ended up with all their eggs in Ferrari's basket.  They need to create more awareness of their other teams so that casual fans don't have to figure out who Manor or Sauber are, but just cheer for them.

[Alianora La Canta]

Five teams get special payouts, it's not just Ferrari - theirs is simply the biggest and best-known.

F1 needs to make it so that teams don't need special payments to stay solvent, and then abolish them. Also, it needs to expand the performance payments across all 13 potential slots - I'm sure nobody would object if unused slots were redistributed equally to teams that actually exist, though using those to create a "fighting fund" for teams in temporary trouble would not be a bad plan either.

[lkjohnson1950]

What, just leave money laying around when it could go in someone's pocket? Not gonna happen.     

[Jericoke]

Five teams get special payouts, it's not just Ferrari - theirs is simply the biggest and best-known.

F1 needs to make it so that teams don't need special payments to stay solvent, and then abolish them. Also, it needs to expand the performance payments across all 13 potential slots - I'm sure nobody would object if unused slots were redistributed equally to teams that actually exist, though using those to create a "fighting fund" for teams in temporary trouble would not be a bad plan either.

The underlying issue is if Formula One is interested in being a 'sport' or a 'business'.  It's possible to do both, of course, however the structure literally mandates that the 'sport' and the 'business' are run separately, and by human nature, people interested in 'business' are better at getting their way than people interested in 'sport'.

FOM is only interested in making money.  FIA is only interested in putting on a fair competition.  In theory, fair competition would be key to making money, but since the FOM can't influence the competition, and the FIA can't influence how the money is distributed, the sport continues to fall short in both areas.

If F1 wanted to be truly fair, all teams would receive equal payments from the FOM period.  No complicated formulae, no reward for doing well, no punishment for doing poorly.  Teams still make their own sponsorship deals, and winning will attract better sponsors.

[John S]

 
If F1 wanted to be truly fair, all teams would receive equal payments from the FOM period.  No complicated formulae, no reward for doing well, no punishment for doing poorly.  Teams still make their own sponsorship deals, and winning will attract better sponsors.

Whilst I agree with a fair distribution of base amounts to all teams who take part there still needs to be a big pot extra for the Winners & places of the championship. Competition is what it's all about so the best have to have their reward otherwise why will they all continue to compete at the highest level all year.

 

[Jericoke]

 
If F1 wanted to be truly fair, all teams would receive equal payments from the FOM period.  No complicated formulae, no reward for doing well, no punishment for doing poorly.  Teams still make their own sponsorship deals, and winning will attract better sponsors.

Whilst I agree with a fair distribution of base amounts to all teams who take part there still needs to be a big pot extra for the Winners & places of the championship. Competition is what it's all about so the best have to have their reward otherwise why will they all continue to compete at the highest level all year.

I disagree on two levels:

One, are they in the sport to win races, or to win money? 

Two, if the winning team has more money than the losing team, and money = speed, how are the losing teams supposed to catch up?

I understand this is how the sport was always run (indeed, 'Grand Prix'), but that doesn't mean it continues to have to be run that way.

[John S]

So on your logic Jeri all money winnings in sport needs to go then. Does Golf or Tennis need to award such huge sums to the winners and runners up, surely they should just do it for the title and/or trophy? 

[Jericoke]

So on your logic Jeri all money winnings in sport needs to go then. Does Golf or Tennis need to award such huge sums to the winners and runners up, surely they should just do it for the title and/or trophy?

The NHL champions, the winners of the Stanley Cup, split $1 million amongst all players on the team.  That is to say men who are paid a minimum of $1million per season, plus endorsements, get  approximately $30,000 for winning.

So yeah, as a Canadian sports fan, I don't see the need to pay winners in a sport that has a scheduled season.

Golf and Tennis are different, as you're not required to attend each event.  If F1 teams were allowed to come and go like tennis and golf, then it would make sense to race for a cash prize.  However, F1 isn't run that way.  Sauber can't skip the Australian Grand Prix to focus on Malaysia.

[Scott]

I tend to agree with Jeri.  In reality, the TV money distribution is actually for agreeing to compete at every event, and therefore put on a show for TV.  Using the bulk of it as motivation to win has probably brought in more of the cheating and underhandedness between teams and lost much of the sportsmanship since the teams are actually competing for financial survival.  If the TV money was split relatively evenly and only a fraction of it put aside as a fund for 'winnings' (could have one for the constructors points and another for the drivers), it would make the competition less of a war and more of a sport.

[Dare]

So on your logic Jeri all money winnings in sport needs to go then. Does Golf or Tennis need to award such huge sums to the winners and runners up, surely they should just do it for the title and/or trophy?

The NHL champions, the winners of the Stanley Cup, split $1 million amongst all players on the team.  That is to say men who are paid a minimum of $1million per season, plus endorsements, get  approximately $30,000 for winning.

So yeah, as a Canadian sports fan, I don't see the need to pay winners in a sport that has a scheduled season.

Golf and Tennis are different, as you're not required to attend each event.  If F1 teams were allowed to come and go like tennis and golf, then it would make sense to race for a cash prize.  However, F1 isn't run that way.  Sauber can't skip the Australian Grand Prix to focus on Malaysia.


Let's see a million dollars to split among the team and they get
30 thousand a piece.Just how many players are on this team?

[Scott]

Let's see a million dollars to split among the team and they get
30 thousand a piece.Just how many players are on this team?

30-35, like most pro hockey teams...

[lkjohnson1950]

It's not always just the players who get a share. Teams often give shares or half shares to trainers, equipment managers, anyone they feel played a role in the championship.