GPWizard F1 Forum

F1 News & Discussions => General F1 Discussion => Topic started by: Scott on April 08, 2014, 12:05:42 PM

Title: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Scott on April 08, 2014, 12:05:42 PM
They don't want to, so we aren't doing it - Todt

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/26923436

What I found interesting, that I didn't know before was:

'Under F1's new governance structure, the six teams in the strategy group - Ferrari, Red Bull, Mercedes, McLaren, Williams and Lotus - have one vote each, while Ecclestone and Todt have six each. Votes pass by a simple majority.'

Bernie and the FIA each have 6 votes, which is twice as many as the 6 teams.  Seems a bit lopsided.  I would say Bernie and the FIA can have 3 each.  And why can't the rest of the teams have a vote?  They pay their entry fees (to F1), pay their fair share of expenses, yet get no votes, and a minuscule share of the money.  Oh boy, do I ever want to join THAT club  :fool: :fool: :fool: :fool:
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 08, 2014, 03:08:02 PM
They don't want to, so we aren't doing it - Todt

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/26923436

What I found interesting, that I didn't know before was:

'Under F1's new governance structure, the six teams in the strategy group - Ferrari, Red Bull, Mercedes, McLaren, Williams and Lotus - have one vote each, while Ecclestone and Todt have six each. Votes pass by a simple majority.'

Bernie and the FIA each have 6 votes, which is twice as many as the 6 teams.  Seems a bit lopsided.  I would say Bernie and the FIA can have 3 each.  And why can't the rest of the teams have a vote?  They pay their entry fees (to F1), pay their fair share of expenses, yet get no votes, and a minuscule share of the money.  Oh boy, do I ever want to join THAT club  :fool: :fool: :fool: :fool:

Those are the extant teams with championships.  I don't know if that's how they were chosen, but that's what separates them from the excluded teams.

Kinda weird to think that F1 only has 6 teams that have won a championship. 

Anyhow, back to the points at hand.  I agree with scrapping the cap.  In a multinational sport where sponsors want to guarantee their big bucks buy a competitive advantage, it just wasn't feasible.

As for the FIA and FOM having a bigger say than any one team:  they're the ones enforcing the rules and writing the contracts.  They're supposed to have the power.  I agree that the teams should have more power, but since they can't agree, we do need some adults in the room.  Alas, the FIA and FOM are as close as we can get.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: J.Clark on April 08, 2014, 03:40:49 PM
Additionally, since the cap, the rules have changed a few times in ways which left me scratching my head.  Spend less and develop a totally new system.  We went from V-10s to V-8s under this rule and now to V-6s, not to mention KERS, each of which caused significant increases in particular areas of the team's budgets.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: John S on April 08, 2014, 05:00:32 PM
Additionally, since the cap, the rules have changed a few times in ways which left me scratching my head.  Spend less and develop a totally new system.  We went from V-10s to V-8s under this rule and now to V-6s, not to mention KERS, each of which caused significant increases in particular areas of the team's budgets.

Supposedly the change to new powertrains is to help exploit the technology for road use, an unfortunate side effect is higher costs to the customer teams at present. The theory is with increased transfer of the tech to the engine builders road car businesses more of the engine budget can be written off in R&D depts, costs should stabilise and probably even reduce to customer teams.

Trouble is some theories never work out, however most of projected aims of changing the engine regs appear to be working - for most anyway. ;)  A new engine supplier Honda has been tempted back, who knows maybe others will follow and more of the grid will get cheaper or even free power plants. 

I'm not convinced a cost cap is enforceable anyway, to much wriggle room with so much money sloshing about at the top end of the sport. Team's lawyers and accountants would simply add massive extra costs for the regulators by running rings round them with clever challenges and creative accounting, if such a cap is ever enacted.  :(     



 
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Irisado on April 08, 2014, 09:38:46 PM
They could enforce a cost cap if there was a will to do it.  As Todt said himself, it's the fact that they (the big teams) don't want it that's the only thing preventing it.  The fact that the FIA let them get away with that, while at the same time allowing daft things like double points into the rules, portrays the organisation in a very dim light in my view.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 09, 2014, 03:30:42 PM
They could enforce a cost cap if there was a will to do it.  As Todt said himself, it's the fact that they (the big teams) don't want it that's the only thing preventing it.  The fact that the FIA let them get away with that, while at the same time allowing daft things like double points into the rules, portrays the organisation in a very dim light in my view.

F1 is an international sport, governed by the laws of Britain, EU, Switzerland, France, Germany, Italy, not to mention the countries where the races are held.

Any team that wants to avoid an enforced cap can simply point to the set of laws they wish in any jurisdiction.  For example, the USA has antitrust laws.  It is illegal for different companies to collude to limit the salaries of their employees.  The only way they get around that with sports teams is by collectively bargaining with unionized players.  This only limits the costs of on field talent though.  Many 'rich' teams spend their money on extensive executive and scouting staffs, and fancy training facilities.  Even though the caps supposedly level the playing field, it's still the same teams with the same advantages.

If Ferrari wanted to spend above the cap, they would be able to ask the Italian government to make it illegal to limit the size of an SpA organized for the purpose of motorsport, and poof, Ferrari (and STR) would have an uncapped budget.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Irisado on April 09, 2014, 08:01:39 PM
I'm no lawyer, so I cannot comment on that.

The wording Todt used, however, tells me that is possible to achieve a cost cap, and it's not happening because of a lack of will, not for legal reasons.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 09, 2014, 08:10:05 PM
I'm no lawyer, so I cannot comment on that.

The wording Todt used, however, tells me that is possible to achieve a cost cap, and it's not happening because of a lack of will, not for legal reasons.

Right, at the end of the day any cap would have to be voluntary, as it's simply unenforceable from a legal standpoint.  Since the 'Big Teams' can't trust that the other guy isn't cheating, they're not even going to pretend to follow the cap.

I don't like the FIA mandating 'standard' parts, but it's a decent work around for keeping costs limited.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Irisado on April 19, 2014, 12:19:31 AM
I still don't see why the FIA cannot audit budgets and publish them for all to see.  Why do lawyers even need to be involved?
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 19, 2014, 12:27:53 AM
I still don't see why the FIA cannot audit budgets and publish them for all to see.  Why do lawyers even need to be involved?

Because we're talking about hundreds of millions of dollars.  I'd like to think no one would cheat, but they do. 

That's why lawyers have to be involved.   :'(
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Irisado on April 19, 2014, 12:29:54 AM
The FIA does its own policing of such matters, so I still don't see why we need a whole raft of lawyers.  The FIA's word has to be final, and that's that.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 19, 2014, 12:35:27 AM
The FIA does its own policing of such matters, so I still don't see why we need a whole raft of lawyers.  The FIA's word has to be final, and that's that.

The FIA needs Ferrari more than Ferrari needs the FIA.

They will always quibble over details, but the fact is, whatever Ferrari needs to stay in F1 will happen.  If Ferrari doesn't want to open their books to a public organisation, they're not opening their books to a public organisation.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: vintly on April 19, 2014, 06:41:19 PM
The FIA needs Ferrari more than Ferrari needs the FIA.

They will always quibble over details, but the fact is, whatever Ferrari needs to stay in F1 will happen.

What if another seven years go by without a Ferrari champ. Would they still hold their ace?
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: John S on April 19, 2014, 08:35:03 PM
The FIA needs Ferrari more than Ferrari needs the FIA.

They will always quibble over details, but the fact is, whatever Ferrari needs to stay in F1 will happen.

What if another seven years go by without a Ferrari champ. Would they still hold their ace?

Oh yes,  ;) and they will be using it more and more if all that time goes by without a championship.  :D

Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Irisado on April 20, 2014, 12:02:53 AM
The FIA needs Ferrari more than Ferrari needs the FIA.

They will always quibble over details, but the fact is, whatever Ferrari needs to stay in F1 will happen.  If Ferrari doesn't want to open their books to a public organisation, they're not opening their books to a public organisation.

Maybe you are right.  I find it all very depressing.  It should be possible to cap budgets.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 20, 2014, 07:11:14 PM
The FIA needs Ferrari more than Ferrari needs the FIA.

They will always quibble over details, but the fact is, whatever Ferrari needs to stay in F1 will happen.  If Ferrari doesn't want to open their books to a public organisation, they're not opening their books to a public organisation.

Maybe you are right.  I find it all very depressing.  It should be possible to cap budgets.

I find it more depressing that there is serious discussion of budget caps.  F1 engineering should be fabulously extravagant, not afraid to try something new and exciting every weekend.  F1 should have 13 teams with unlimited budgets, 26 multi millionaire drivers all paid to bring the fight to the very last corner every 2 weeks.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: F1fanaticBD on April 21, 2014, 05:19:53 AM
The FIA needs Ferrari more than Ferrari needs the FIA.

They will always quibble over details, but the fact is, whatever Ferrari needs to stay in F1 will happen.  If Ferrari doesn't want to open their books to a public organisation, they're not opening their books to a public organisation.

Maybe you are right.  I find it all very depressing.  It should be possible to cap budgets.

I find it more depressing that there is serious discussion of budget caps.  F1 engineering should be fabulously extravagant, not afraid to try something new and exciting every weekend.  F1 should have 13 teams with unlimited budgets, 26 multi millionaire drivers all paid to bring the fight to the very last corner every 2 weeks.

You need the desperation of survival to induce the genius inside, and create new intelligent designs and solution. With unlimited budget teams will be more attracted to bring attention with non-racing related issues and matters. I always believed F1 should be survival with innovation & intelligence. Bigger teams should be forced to think like small teams to keep coming up with innovative ideas of racing, rather than hiring all the goodies and taking away the bigger share. I also believe the restriction should be made to ensure an even field for innovative technologies to prosper, not making the biggest spender the winner.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Scott on April 21, 2014, 08:10:35 AM

I find it more depressing that there is serious discussion of budget caps.  F1 engineering should be fabulously extravagant, not afraid to try something new and exciting every weekend.  F1 should have 13 teams with unlimited budgets, 26 multi millionaire drivers all paid to bring the fight to the very last corner every 2 weeks.

 |-( |-( I thought you were always (until now?) in support of the regs to keep costs down, Jeri.  But I like the new you  ;) I say go and spend what they like, where they like...let the back markers remain back markers until they can scare up the sponsors or backers to bring them to the front. 
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 21, 2014, 03:52:46 PM

I find it more depressing that there is serious discussion of budget caps.  F1 engineering should be fabulously extravagant, not afraid to try something new and exciting every weekend.  F1 should have 13 teams with unlimited budgets, 26 multi millionaire drivers all paid to bring the fight to the very last corner every 2 weeks.

 |-( |-( I thought you were always (until now?) in support of the regs to keep costs down, Jeri.  But I like the new you  ;) I say go and spend what they like, where they like...let the back markers remain back markers until they can scare up the sponsors or backers to bring them to the front.

Means to an end.  I'm in favor of 'cost controls' because F1 needs more than 2 healthy teams.  I think that sport is capable of so much more stability, once the struggling teams are allowed to get their legs under them.  If Caterham or Marussia get a few podiums, I don't think they'll be struggling, but it's hard to get podiums while they struggle.  There needs to be a way to help them.  Since no one is throwing them money (which I understand), we need to stop the powerful teams from widening the gap.  Otherwise Caterham, Marussia (and the sponsors) will realize there's no point and just quit. 

I've said that F1 needs Ferrari, well, F1 needs 10 teams too.  If Caterham and Marussia quit (that is to say, do the logical thing), F1 is screwed.  The sport needs to find a way to help them.  Once they're stronger, the whole sport benefits, and then hopefully they can open the formula up again.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Scott on April 21, 2014, 04:57:41 PM
Well, see that's where we agree again.  I believe F1 needs 10 healthy teams, and there is such an easy way to do that.  Split all the TV money evenly to each team.  Distribute trackside revenue according to WCC finishing order.  Teams with strong sponsorship will receive more money to play with, the others less so, but not a tiny fraction, like today.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Irisado on April 21, 2014, 07:03:29 PM
Jeri, having 13 teams with unlimited finances and resources is even more improbable than implementing a cost cap.  If fixed budgets isn't the solution to Formula 1's financial problems, and to a more even playing field, then what is?  The current system of homogenisation doesn't work at all, and produces overly reliable cars, customer cars didn't work, and if there's going to be no budget cap to take away that advantage from the tops teams, then what is the solution?
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 21, 2014, 08:33:22 PM
Jeri, having 13 teams with unlimited finances and resources is even more improbable than implementing a cost cap.  If fixed budgets isn't the solution to Formula 1's financial problems, and to a more even playing field, then what is?  The current system of homogenisation doesn't work at all, and produces overly reliable cars, customer cars didn't work, and if there's going to be no budget cap to take away that advantage from the tops teams, then what is the solution?

I didn't say the cap isn't a good idea, just not enforceable.  If one team believes another team is cheating (and getting away with it) they'll cheat too.  It's the only way to win.

There are two solutions:
1)  Use the National Football League model.  In this American sport each team is run independantly, but certain monies earned are split evenly, and all teams are considered to have an equal voice in how the league is run.  Teams in New York and Texas might might make the most money, but their owners realize that having strong teams from across the country brings in fans, and makes their own slice of the pie bigger. 

2)  Assemble Formula One under a single umbrella where each team is a separate department (legally speaking) of FOM (or whatever).  Then the company can determine the budgets of each department, and voila, caps are easily, and legally, enforced.

3)  Lets be open about the goals of F1.  F1 teams aren't going to make money.  Ferrari is in it to sell road cars.  Red Bull is in it to sell drinks.  Sorry Frank and Peter, there's no room for racers anymore.  Gene Haas gets it.  Maybe there are others who can be convinced that F1 is just like Google:  it's about selling stuff.

Option 2 seems very unlikely, as I doubt Ferrari or McLaren are willing to turn over their hard earned companies.

Option 1 would work.  It would still be a myriad of international laws to deal with (the NFL's advantage is they operate out of a single nation, though they do have to deal with local/state laws).  The issue is convincing Ferrari that Caterham is an 'equal'

I don't like Option 3.  I'd hate to see the spirit that built the sport completely squelched, especially given that deep pocketted corporations seem to be quite okay with giving up and quitting at the drop of a hat.  All the same, if Google, Disney and Sony could be convinced to run teams, that would benefit the sport.  (I don't think Kimi or Vettel would be on the short list for Disney drivers though...)
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: John S on April 22, 2014, 09:54:31 AM

The trouble with your solutions Jeri is that the teams don't own F1 and never have. The FIA is the rights owner and has contracted the rights to FOM for at least the next 90 years.

When you own such lucrative rights you are not going to give up the huge earning potential without a real good reason, and a few teams being in financial trouble - or even going under- is not a good enough one to the money men.

Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Cam on April 22, 2014, 12:56:43 PM
Minnows on the brink are a core element of the F1 myth.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 22, 2014, 03:05:44 PM

The trouble with your solutions Jeri is that the teams don't own F1 and never have. The FIA is the rights owner and has contracted the rights to FOM for at least the next 90 years.

When you own such lucrative rights you are not going to give up the huge earning potential without a real good reason, and a few teams being in financial trouble - or even going under- is not a good enough one to the money men.

Well, I did propose that FOM take over ownership of all teams.  I think they could handle that.

I also proposed that FOM work closer with the teams.  They might get a smaller piece of the pie, but the pie itself will be larger.  I'd rather have 10% of 5 billion than 20% of 2 billion.

I also proposed that FOM would do well to convince owners that Formula One is about losing money in the name of advertising.  If it works for Red Bull, why wouldn't it work for any other of hundreds of equally sized companies?

FOM or FIA don't have to give up anything
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 22, 2014, 03:12:14 PM
Minnows on the brink are a core element of the F1 myth.

It was different when anyone could stroll up with a chassis, engine and pile of tires and give it a shot.  For every 'minnow' that failed, there were three more scraping together nickels for their own shot.

Caterham and Marussia aren't 'plucky minnows'.  They're teams that are struggling to become genuine F1 competitors.  They don't have the option of trying something crazy.  They can't bring in some breakthrough new engine design.  They can't afford to build a car with inventive aerodynamics that might be declared illegal. 

Basically, all they can do is hire the best people who aren't already working for 'established' teams.  Without the budgets of bigger teams, they can't hope to hire away the big names who might make a difference.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Irisado on April 23, 2014, 02:24:35 PM
I prefer option 4.  Pay the teams more money, get rid of the prohibitive deposit rule for new teams, and force the major manufacturers to supply engines to their customer teams at an even further discounted rate.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: cosworth151 on April 24, 2014, 12:27:16 PM
Most of all, get rid of the FIA. They bring nothing of value to the table and harm the sport greatly. Just look at the nosedive sports car racing has taken since the FIA-WEC took over. They're the ones who thought that the mini-motored kitten kars would be a good idea. Dump them while there is still something left.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: John S on April 24, 2014, 08:42:09 PM
Most of all, get rid of the FIA.

You can't, they are F1, and a lot of other racing series besides.

They only sold the commercial rights, under licence, to Bernie as they were forced to separate the regulatory and commercial functions by European Union laws. However no law exists - and probably never will - to make them give up their ultimate ownership of F1.

 
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 25, 2014, 01:16:11 AM
Most of all, get rid of the FIA.

You can't, they are F1, and a lot of other racing series besides.

They only sold the commercial rights, under licence, to Bernie as they were forced to separate the regulatory and commercial functions by European Union laws. However no law exists - and probably never will - to make them give up their ultimate ownership of F1.

I know we've been over this before, but it's a North American thing.  We don't understand why any sport requires legally distinct administrative and commercial entities to function.  The NFL, Baseball, NBA, NHL, IndyCar, NASCAR all operate as their own entities.  They are all run by one 'Commissioner' or 'President' who is responsible for the league. 

The FIA and FOM each have their own interests, which pulls the sport in two directions.  That doesn't benefit the sport to try and fulfill two visions, since more often than not they'll fail at one, or compromise and fail at both.

The trademark 'F1' isn't as valuable as people think.  I'm quite happy with GP Wizard.  If Ferrari, McLaren and Mercedes agree to form SuperHappyRaceCars, their fans will follow.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Scott on April 25, 2014, 11:33:37 AM
I know we've been over this before, but it's a North American thing.  We don't understand why any sport requires legally distinct administrative and commercial entities to function.  The NFL, Baseball, NBA, NHL, IndyCar, NASCAR all operate as their own entities.  They are all run by one 'Commissioner' or 'President' who is responsible for the league. 

The FIA and FOM each have their own interests, which pulls the sport in two directions.  That doesn't benefit the sport to try and fulfill two visions, since more often than not they'll fail at one, or compromise and fail at both.

The trademark 'F1' isn't as valuable as people think.  I'm quite happy with GP Wizard.  If Ferrari, McLaren and Mercedes agree to form SuperHappyRaceCars, their fans will follow.

Couldn't agree more.  The FIA's 'power' has far more to do with contracts with tracks than it does 'F1' as it stands today.  Certainly if the sport was ready to pay some contract penalties, it could form SuperHappyRaceCars today - maybe have to race a few older tracks to start with, but really no big deal when you think of the benefit of ditching the FIA.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: cosworth151 on April 25, 2014, 12:13:36 PM
I agree. Let them keep the name F1. Without the teams, the name would be as worthless as the rest of the FIA. The sooner they're gone, the better.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: lkjohnson1950 on April 26, 2014, 06:09:58 AM
If you lose the name Formula 1, you lose all the history of the championship. Hamilton might win the series championship, but it wouldn't be the WDC; it wouldn't be the same championship that Clark, Stewart, Senna and Schumacher won. That is a considerable loss.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: cosworth151 on April 26, 2014, 04:53:02 PM
In a year or two, F1 would be dead as a doornail. The new series could then purchase the name, and history, for practically nothing. Just like what IRL did with CART and NASCAR just did with ALMS.

Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 26, 2014, 05:02:14 PM
If you lose the name Formula 1, you lose all the history of the championship. Hamilton might win the series championship, but it wouldn't be the WDC; it wouldn't be the same championship that Clark, Stewart, Senna and Schumacher won. That is a considerable loss.

Corvettes used to be manufactured by General Motors Corporation, now they're manufactured by General Motors Company.  I think there's still plenty of demand for Corvettes AND a respect for the history of the car.

Same with Fiat's Dodge and Ferrari divisions.  Plenty of history despite changes of ownership.

Car people are very good at respecting history, while not really caring who 'owns' it (just so long as it is respected).

If 'F1' is owned by Snapple, I'd still watch if they put on a good show.

If 'F1' ceases to exist, and we have 'World Championship Racing Brought to you by Bounty Paper Towels', and they put on an exciting race, I will watch.

I'd rather F1 continue on, but I'm not following along for the name, I'm interested in what's going on the track.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: vintly on April 27, 2014, 12:07:17 AM
F1 will be the uppermost formula of racing cars worldwide in 2024.

Offering even money, taking bets now.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: lkjohnson1950 on April 27, 2014, 05:38:57 AM
Sorry, the Corvette analogy doesn't hold up. What if Corvettes were built by Chery Motors of China and called Dragon 5000s? That would be the equivalent of losing the name Formula 1. I'm sure it would be great racing and I would watch as well, but the history would be gone. This sort of break away assumes the teams are unhappy with the new rules, and I din't think they are. Renault and Mercedes have both said they are happy with the change, Honda is returning after several years. The larger teams all oppose the cap, and are relatively happy with the payout. Why would they leave?
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: John S on April 27, 2014, 11:51:20 AM
In a year or two, F1 would be dead as a doornail. The new series could then purchase the name, and history, for practically nothing. Just like what IRL did with CART and NASCAR just did with ALMS.

Yeah but the FIA would still own the rights to F1 and the right to regulate it. Doesn't matter to them so much really if it falls in value as long as any commercial promoter can pay them over 20m a year for the privilege of them overseeing regulation of the race series.

The enforced split on regulatory and commercial sides of F1 means the FIA has only a relatively minor monetary interest in F1. The FIA during Max's tenure sold the commercial rights for a hundred years to Bernie for about $300m. 

FOM is the big money operator and has a contract to run F1 til about the end of this century, it's them that would take the massive hit - maybe 2bn or more - if F1 becomes devalued as you suggest. Somehow I don't see them being keen for that to happen.  ;)

   
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: cosworth151 on April 27, 2014, 07:05:48 PM
If Ferrari, McLaren, RBR, Merc and the other teams start there own series, how much will the name "F1" be worth? Will people really go to some boring Tilke-drome in the middle of nowhere to stare at an empty track? Will sponsors and TV pay to be involved?
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: Jericoke on April 27, 2014, 07:52:47 PM
Sorry, the Corvette analogy doesn't hold up. What if Corvettes were built by Chery Motors of China and called Dragon 5000s? That would be the equivalent of losing the name Formula 1. I'm sure it would be great racing and I would watch as well, but the history would be gone. This sort of break away assumes the teams are unhappy with the new rules, and I din't think they are. Renault and Mercedes have both said they are happy with the change, Honda is returning after several years. The larger teams all oppose the cap, and are relatively happy with the payout. Why would they leave?

I'm saying that as long as top level racing is respected, that motor racing fans will continue to watch, no matter who puts it on, or what it's called.

And the Corvette example stands up, it's owned by a different company, but I'm pretty sure no one cares, because they're still Corvettes.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: lkjohnson1950 on April 27, 2014, 08:13:14 PM
Yes, they're still Corvettes. Formula 1 without the name Formula 1 is not Formula 1 any longer. It may be the best of the best and great racing, but it's not Formula 1.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: cosworth151 on April 27, 2014, 10:17:16 PM
Pre-war Grand Prix racing wasn't F1, but we still consider it to be part of the history of F1. I'd hate to see the name F1 go away, but that would be far better than having the FIA run the sport into the ground.
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: John S on April 28, 2014, 12:25:27 AM
Pre-war Grand Prix racing wasn't F1, but we still consider it to be part of the history of F1. I'd hate to see the name F1 go away, but that would be far better than having the FIA run the sport into the ground.

Cos any new series that seeks to replace F1 is still likely to ask the FIA to regulate it. The FIA is really the only organisation with worldwide coverage to be able to provide the back office and at track officials, after all it has almost all the national motor racing clubs & motoring organisations affiliated to it, and each continent is represented on it's World sports council.

The FIA, who happen to be in favour of cost capping, was outvoted on the F1 strategy group by the big teams and FOM. Now that's the new style F1 democracy in action - however odd it may seem. The FIA may regulate F1 but it certainly doesn't make unrestricted decisions on what happens anymore.

Sure motor racing pre F1 is interesting, but it's simply motor racing history, most of us can easily recall "Nino" Farina as the original WDC for the 1950 season. Who remembers champions before that, I know I certainly don't, anymore than we can easily recall champions of Formula 2 or 3, or Formula 5000 for that matter.



 

 
Title: Re: F1 Cost Cap ditched
Post by: cosworth151 on April 28, 2014, 01:10:05 PM
I can recall names like Tazio Nuvolari, Hans Stuck, Richard Seaman, Bernd Rosemeyer, Achille Varzi, Hermann Lang, Antonio Ascari and Rudolf Caracciola as well as I can remember the likes of Nino Farina and Alberto Ascari. Were there ever any greater open wheel race cars than the Alfa P3, The Mercedes W154 or the Auto Union D?

The FIA is the problem, not the solution. Just look at the damage they've done to sports car racing since they got their claws into it.
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal
Menu Editor Pro 1.0 | Copyright 2013, Matthew Kerle