Lola confirms 2010 F1 entry

[John S]

So Lola aims to play with the big boys, will they get it right this time?

Lola has confirmed it has submitted its entry to the FIA for next year's Formula 1 world championship.

The Huntingdon-based company had already expressed its interest in returning to grand prix racing last month, after the FIA announced plans to introduce a budget cap system in F1.

On Friday, the last day to lodge entries for 2010, Lola confirmed it had submitted its entry.

The company said it would not many any further comments until the results of the entry submissions are made public on 12th June.

Lola last appeared in F1 in 1997.

By Pablo Elizalde autosport.com, Today

[Willy]

At the risk of getting slammed by any and all for this comment.......one good thing about a budget cap is the possibility of more teams and action on the track.
 
I long for the old days when there were well over 20 cars on the grid.

[Jericoke]

At the risk of getting slammed by any and all for this comment.......one good thing about a budget cap is the possibility of more teams and action on the track.
 
I long for the old days when there were well over 20 cars on the grid.

That was one of the main ideas of the cap.  I think the cap is a greats idea, but it hurts the existing dominant teams, so I can understand why they weren't fans of the idea.

It's crazy on days where you can watch an F1 of 20 cars spaced out so far you normally see one car on screen, and then a NASCAR race where you can see a pack of 10 cars pulling up on another pack of 10, and know there are 20 more cars off screen!

[Steven Roy]

I don't think a cap can be controlled.  I like the idea of anyone who can build a legal car and can persuade someone eligible for a super license to drive it being able to enter but the cap is the wrong answer.

Most F1 problems come from the tech regs and most solutions are there too.  It should be perfectly possible to write a set of tech regs that limit the benefit gained bey spending money.  There are quite a few simple measures that can be taken.  First all suspension members should be round in section and made of a specified metal.  That instantly kills of a load of materials and aero research.

Second I will nick this one from Chameleon.  Ban carbon fibre for everything but the chassis.  Again a specified metal would save even more money.  You cannot create the complex shapes with metals that you can with composites so you cut down aero research.  You also don't have carbon shards all over the track brining out a safety car every time there is a minor bump.

There are numerous measures like this that can be taken that limit the advantage gained by spending vast amounts of money.  The advantage is all of this can be checked before the car goes on the track.  So no waiting two months after the last race to see if the guy you think won the championship did or whether the team spent too much on pencils

[lkjohnson1950]

I am still not convinced Ferrari or BMW will let a forensic accountant examine their books, and I don't see how else this can be policed.

Lonny

[Jericoke]

I am still not convinced Ferrari or BMW will let a forensic accountant examine their books, and I don't see how else this can be policed.

Lonny

Ferrari is part of Fiat, a publicly traded company.  It would technically be illegal for them to hide this information.  I don't know how it is in Europe, but these days when companies are found to lie about their financials, the corporate officers are doing serious jail time.

I think BMW is privately owned, which would make it trickier to police.

[lkjohnson1950]

Most CEOs don't do jail time unless there is a crash. At that point the forensic accountants are called in to see what happened. No one opens their books to scrutiny by just anyone who asks. Enron was believed to be a solid company until shortly before the end. I still don't see how this can be policed without a lot of outside inspection of the books that any company would be reluctant to allow. Some financial info is confidential even in publicly traded companies. Max had an idea he thought was brilliant, but as usual he did not think it all the way through. There will be problems down the line if this is implimented, bet on it.

Lonny

[Alianora La Canta]

Some financial information legally cannot be given to just anyone, so if for example a team has a Dutch supplier, the details of that arrangement from the supplier's side could not be given to the FIA unless a court order was secured - which itself would require reasonable evidence of a crime having been committed. Yet the FIA is insisting that suppliers to F1 teams open their books in the same way as the teams themselves.

A lot of expenditure could easily be hidden under alternate categories - for example road car R&D or marketing - within even the most public manufacturer. Legally, there would be problems in how far the FIA could investigate such potential anomalies against the will of the parent company. Remember the parent company does not make entries into F1; only the element housing the F1 team (frequently registered as a separate company) actually makes an entry.

The standardised approach to determining the cost of an item is fraught with danger, both in terms of under- and over-estimating expenses. It's hard enough keeping under a budget cap under normal circumstances without the additional problems with currency exchange and incorrect (and virtually unchallengable) valuations being made after the fact.

[Jericoke]

Some financial information legally cannot be given to just anyone, so if for example a team has a Dutch supplier, the details of that arrangement from the supplier's side could not be given to the FIA unless a court order was secured - which itself would require reasonable evidence of a crime having been committed. Yet the FIA is insisting that suppliers to F1 teams open their books in the same way as the teams themselves.

A lot of expenditure could easily be hidden under alternate categories - for example road car R&D or marketing - within even the most public manufacturer. Legally, there would be problems in how far the FIA could investigate such potential anomalies against the will of the parent company. Remember the parent company does not make entries into F1; only the element housing the F1 team (frequently registered as a separate company) actually makes an entry.

The standardised approach to determining the cost of an item is fraught with danger, both in terms of under- and over-estimating expenses. It's hard enough keeping under a budget cap under normal circumstances without the additional problems with currency exchange and incorrect (and virtually unchallengable) valuations being made after the fact.

I'd hate to see an unintended consequence of the cap to be driving suppliers out of the sport.  That would only raise costs, and reduce development.

[Alianora La Canta]

If it did, things would get extremely messy because the suppliers could sue the FIA for anti-competitive behaviour. The EU has already taken the FIA to court for this once and the FIA has to meet several conditions as a result. One of these is to separate itself as much as possible from the commercial side of the sport...