GPWizard F1 Forum

F1 News & Discussions => General F1 Discussion => Topic started by: bo bruce on April 30, 2009, 02:49:48 PM

Title: only one man's opinion?
Post by: bo bruce on April 30, 2009, 02:49:48 PM
Upon sharing the latest "cap" news with a fellow F1 fan, he replied the following. i thought it was good enough to have this informed group to read and comment. i did get his permission to post this :)
____________________________________________________________________________________

Some cost-capping is probably a good thing, at least in theory.  Having a
double-standard (some with caps and others without) seems like comparing
apples and oranges (some teams can use technological advances, others
cannot).  I don't like that.

Tyre warmers out - definitely.

Refuelling ban.  I understand the cost cutting implications, but it seems
more logical to me to have refueling as a more realistic happenstance in a
race, than this dopey necessity to use widely different tyre compounds (oh -
and don't teams pay Bridgestone for this? - and what about the costs
involved with all that development and logistics of traipsing them around
the world?).

I agree it is a very wasteful sport.  However, it is freakin' F1 for
goodness sakes.  Get rid of all the stinking aero crap, create a reasonable
budget cap, and let the teams loss to develop what they want (i.e. different
engine configurations).  I'm tire of hearing all the proposals for spec
items.

Ultimately, it's all about Bernie's show and the ability for him to keep
lining his pockets.  Racers want to go race!!  I don't like watching parades
instead of races either, but FOTA hasn't come up with anything to help with
passing.  The diffusers work against it and all the aero aids disrupt the
air.  It's become more about the cars than the drivers, in some aspect.  Who
ever has the better car wins (stupid statement, but all these drivers are
good oar they wouldn't be in F1 - ok, with a couple of exceptions, but you
know what I mean).  There ARE a few drivers that seem to be able to work
with a difficult car - Alonso comes to mind.

Hey - wanna save some money?  Don't be taking the circus to the far corners
of the earth!!  Oh yeah - they're the one willing to pay the ransom for the
races.

I love F1, but like so many others, it has become this huge political
beast, with all the entities intertwined.  Teams buy in , get cuts of
revenues.  It truly has become a business above and beyond the crux of the
whole point (for a spectator, to go back to that for a moment), which is to
see interesting, competitive racing.  And, diversity, for me, can add to
that.  At the rate it is going, it will be F1 (one Formula).  If I want
that, there are a number of other racing series I can watch.  I'm surprised
Max hasn't proclaimed that restrictor plates (ok, some form of fuel
regulation, since there aren't carburetored).  Look at DTM - these cars
slide around, it's competitive (from what little I've seen), and fun to
watch.  Too bad that's not more coverage of that!

Seems like the regulations are like band-aids, and not logical progressions
to get to an end point.  They change and flip-flop form year to year.  Hmmm,
likt that doesn't cost money (and I've already alluded to the cost of
night-racing).
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Steven Roy on April 30, 2009, 08:34:06 PM
The team that wins the budget cap clas will probably be th team with the best currency traders/  Each team is going to have to operate a hedge fund to stop any one currency from moving and putting them over the cap.
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Jericoke on April 30, 2009, 08:58:18 PM
The team that wins the budget cap clas will probably be th team with the best currency traders/  Each team is going to have to operate a hedge fund to stop any one currency from moving and putting them over the cap.

So who gets the advantage here?
English Teams?
Italian Teams?
Toyota?
BMW?
Which teams are in the Euro Zone?
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: johnbull on April 30, 2009, 10:03:27 PM

So who gets the advantage here?
English Teams?
Italian Teams?
Toyota?
BMW?
Which teams are in the Euro Zone?

All the ones you mentioned. ;)
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Jericoke on May 01, 2009, 12:28:04 AM
I didn't think that Britain or Switzerland used the Euro
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Scott on May 01, 2009, 08:00:15 AM
You're right...but for BMW, I'm not sure if they deal in Euro's or Swiss Francs. 
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: johnbull on May 01, 2009, 02:10:42 PM
I didn't think that Britain or Switzerland used the Euro
Absolutely right Jerri. Blame it on brainfade. :fool: :fool: :fool:
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Jericoke on May 01, 2009, 02:20:50 PM
The National Hockey League operates in Canada and the USA, but all players are paid in american dollars.  When the Canadian Dollar tanks, the Canadian teams can't afford the best players, and the Canadian teams tank along with the dollar.

I'd guess that a cap favours teams based in Britain, there's more teams for employees to work for, but also a larger pool of people for teams to pick from.  A team can probably make do with the second best for half the price of the best.

There is a big risk that the people who would get into F1 might move on to where they will be paid better for their talents.  Assuming there are any engineering companies willing to pay these days!
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Chameleon on May 01, 2009, 09:15:56 PM
There is a big risk that the people who would get into F1 might move on to where they will be paid better for their talents.  Assuming there are any engineering companies willing to pay these days!

You know, when I was at school (way back in the mists of history) I had excellent teachers.  Seriously, they were brilliant, although I may not have appreciated them then as I do now.  I have written about this elsewhere (http://www.madtv.me.uk/goneaway.aspx?BlogID=67 (http://www.madtv.me.uk/goneaway.aspx?BlogID=67)) so I won't go into detail here, my point only being that they were paid peanuts.  Teachers genuinely were paid a pittance in those days and so each and every one of them was a teacher because he really wanted to be one; they were prepared to suffer the low wage to be what they were designed to be.

Thinking about your point regarding F1 engineers going elsewhere because the rewards are greater, I have to say, "Let 'em."  If they care that little about the sport we love, we don't need them.  In fact, maybe this is the real reason why the day of the great F1 engineer is over (and the good teacher too) - they're there for the money, not the joy of designing a car that beats all the rest.  If the pay were lousy, you can bet that the only designers and engineers in the sport would be the truly great ones like Chapman and Gordon Murray.

Chapman started building racing cars because he was a racing fan and not because it paid big money.  His enthusiasm combined with his engineering knowledge made him the best designer for twenty years and, in all that time, he probably wasn't paid enough to keep Adrian Newey in paper clips.  I doubt he even knew how much he paid himself - it just wasn't relevant.

And, if you think Bernie paid Gordon Murray big bucks to work for Brabham, you certainly don't know Bernie.  It was the racing that mattered and brought them, then kept them there.

If the budget cap ever works, it may well bring back those times when team members raced because they wanted to, not because the money was too much to be ignored.  The cars of today are marvels of expensive technology at the so-called cutting edge; they are also all the same with a boring lack of originality and brilliant innovation (disregarding Ross Brawn's clever circumvention of the rules).  With less money but more technical freedom, we might again see real genius in the design of the cars, advances that depend less on space age technology and more on human ingenuity.

Call me an optimist if you will, but I think the possibility is there.  Sometimes even Max gets it right, albeit accidentally!
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: johnbull on May 01, 2009, 09:44:59 PM

You know, when I was at school (way back in the mists of history) I had excellent teachers.  Seriously, they were brilliant, although I may not have appreciated them then as I do now.  I have written about this elsewhere (http://www.madtv.me.uk/goneaway.aspx?BlogID=67 (http://www.madtv.me.uk/goneaway.aspx?BlogID=67)) so I won't go into detail here, my point only being that they were paid peanuts.  Teachers genuinely were paid a pittance in those days and so each and every one of them was a teacher because he really wanted to be one; they were prepared to suffer the low wage to be what they were designed to be.

Thinking about your point regarding F1 engineers going elsewhere because the rewards are greater, I have to say, "Let 'em."  If they care that little about the sport we love, we don't need them.  In fact, maybe this is the real reason why the day of the great F1 engineer is over (and the good teacher too) - they're there for the money, not the joy of designing a car that beats all the rest.  If the pay were lousy, you can bet that the only designers and engineers in the sport would be the truly great ones like Chapman and Gordon Murray.

Chapman started building racing cars because he was a racing fan and not because it paid big money.  His enthusiasm combined with his engineering knowledge made him the best designer for twenty years and, in all that time, he probably wasn't paid enough to keep Adrian Newey in paper clips.  I doubt he even knew how much he paid himself - it just wasn't relevant.

And, if you think Bernie paid Gordon Murray big bucks to work for Brabham, you certainly don't know Bernie.  It was the racing that mattered and brought them, then kept them there.

If the budget cap ever works, it may well bring back those times when team members raced because they wanted to, not because the money was too much to be ignored.  The cars of today are marvels of expensive technology at the so-called cutting edge; they are also all the same with a boring lack of originality and brilliant innovation (disregarding Ross Brawn's clever circumvention of the rules).  With less money but more technical freedom, we might again see real genius in the design of the cars, advances that depend less on space age technology and more on human ingenuity.

Call me an optimist if you will, but I think the possibility is there.  Sometimes even Max gets it right, albeit accidentally!

Great post Chammy ol' boy. I do love it when guys like you start talking about ...... the middle ages :D. It brings back so many wonderful memories.
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Chameleon on May 02, 2009, 03:40:44 AM

Great post Chammy ol' boy. I do love it when guys like you start talking about ...... the middle ages :D. It brings back so many wonderful memories.

Hah!  The middle ages - very appropriate.  The important thing, John me ole mate, is that we're still in there, kicking the young uns around a bit...   ;)
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: lkjohnson1950 on May 03, 2009, 01:24:36 AM
Originally in F1 the idea was to have as few rules as possible. That left room for Chapman and Murray to innovate. The rules now are much more restrictive, generally in the name of reducing speeds or making the racing safer, that there's not as much wiggle room. Remember when Mercedes brought an envelope body to Avus, or are you all too young? Can't do that anymore.

Lonny
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Chameleon on May 03, 2009, 02:18:49 AM
Blimey, Lonny, how old are you anyway?  I've read about the Mercedes on the Avus track but I don't exactly remember it...  :D

There is a way to return to those days of no restrictions, however.  Just set the engine limit to tiny (1.5 litres would be a good start) and let 'em go for it!
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: lkjohnson1950 on May 03, 2009, 11:22:47 AM
Well I am old enough to remember it, but I wasn't aware of F1 then. I have seen one of the cars in person and I have a lovely CMC model sitting on my bookcase. ;)

Lonny
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: johnbull on May 03, 2009, 02:59:17 PM
That still doesn't tell us how old you are Lonny.

Chammy's a real ol' fart. You can't be as old as him ! :yahoo:

Getting back to F1 regs, the situation is really getting ridiculous. Max changes the rules as often as he changes his underwear. I just wish they'd just set some rules and stick to them for say 10 years - like it used to be in the good old, pre Max days.
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: cosworth151 on May 03, 2009, 04:12:44 PM
Just in case a few of the young folk haven't seen one, here's a pix of a Mercedes W-196 Streamliner I put in the Image Gallery section a while back. I took the picture in the Indianapolis Motor Speedway Museum. Most people wouldn't even recognise it as an F1 car.

Cos (Another old greybeard)
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Chameleon on May 03, 2009, 07:03:14 PM
...Max changes the rules as often as he changes his underwear...

Please don't mention Max's underwear.  It brings back terrible memories of a video I once saw...

 :stop:
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Ian on May 03, 2009, 08:58:24 PM
That car just oozes sex appeal don't it Cos, those curves are superb.  :P
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: lkjohnson1950 on May 11, 2009, 02:39:18 AM
10-07-1950  :D

Lonny
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: John S on May 11, 2009, 12:16:51 PM

I think the major teams have been shaken to the core this year by Brawn's performance, without this happening they may well have all signed up dutifully to budget caps. 

By agreeing to capping they feel their ability to respond to one or more new underdogs fielding inovative and fast cars will be compromised or destroyed completly. There is plenty of evidence this year that the established top teams are still having to find big money to keep developing their turkeys.

Asking the big teams to change their profligate spending habits overnight was always a non runner, the credit crunch has trimmed, or is about to trim, budgets enough I would think for the next couple of seasons. F1 has always been about freedom to innovate, in big teams this will mostly be driven by the money available whilst smaller teams rely on ingenuity and passion.

With capped budgets all the teams will have to cut their workforces, what is to happen to all the staff they will have to let go.  >:(  Oh and will the redundancy payments be included in the cap?

The idea of a two tier entry is plain nuts. What is the point of having unlimited funds but nothing you can spend it on to improve your car, or perhaps worse,  plenty of freedom to add & change things on the car but no money to carry it out.

All of this change in F1 is much too fast! We have not yet seen the full impact on the sport of the 2009 regs so how the hell are they going to make the even bigger changes required by budget capping.  :DntKnw:
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Scott on May 11, 2009, 12:34:38 PM
Good points John.  I think it is always best to let the market forces dictate the budgets.  If sponsors are paying attention, they will see which teams will be the most effective billboards for them and go in that direction.  If someone like Brawn or Williams can come up with a front runner while Ferrari and Mclaren beg for a few points here and there, then the budgets for those teams will reflect that next year.

The fact that Ferrari is still flaunting tobacco money, which doesn't care about winning, just about publicity (it's not as if they will start an ad campaign with Massa and Kimi with cigarettes hanging out of their mouths) is still troubling.  Ferrari still accepts it because it is almost unlimited.  If they had to find non-tobacco sponsors, they might find themselves struggling with a much smaller budget and a need to be more innovative and reactive. 
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: monty on May 11, 2009, 03:36:47 PM
It is very rare for me to agree with Eddie Jordan but his point on BBC F1 about the money spent on corporate entertainment suites was spot-on.
I assume that when Ferrari say they have spent £XXX million per year it includes corporate entertainment, PR, admin and legal fees (of course).
If a financial cap is to be imposed I have no idea how the FIA will track how much money the teams spend on the car (i.e. development, wind tunnel, factory staff, etc. etc.).
However, I think it is important that the 'capped' amount is reasonable and ensures that sufficient money is spent on the car.

If some of the teams decide to find and spend fortunes on corporate entertainment etc. then let them.
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Jericoke on May 11, 2009, 03:49:24 PM
If a financial cap is to be imposed I have no idea how the FIA will track how much money the teams spend on the car (i.e. development, wind tunnel, factory staff, etc. etc.).

It's not really all that difficult for all team employees to become FIA employees, with the teams 'leasing' their services.  FIA handles the paycheques from money supplied by the teams.  FIA can also handle any facility contracts that would be covered as well.  Obviously there will be attempts to get around this system, but that should be as easy to enforce as 'tax cheats'.  Working for an F1 team will mean a little less financial privacy.

However, I think it is important that the 'capped' amount is reasonable and ensures that sufficient money is spent on the car. 

I'm surprised FOTA hasn't already come up with a decent number.

If some of the teams decide to find and spend fortunes on corporate entertainment etc. then let them.

That's what Formula One is REALLY about, isn't it?
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: monty on May 12, 2009, 09:22:45 AM
Quote
It's not really all that difficult for all team employees to become FIA employees, with the teams 'leasing' their services.  FIA handles the paycheques from money supplied by the teams.  FIA can also handle any facility contracts that would be covered as well.  Obviously there will be attempts to get around this system, but that should be as easy to enforce as 'tax cheats'.  Working for an F1 team will mean a little less financial privacy.

That's a very concise idea. Are you in Finance Jeri?
I'm an engineer first and a business manager second. My background tells me that too much input from a centralised management (FIA) will limit radical ideas and entrepreneurial spirit. In short, I think the capping idea could kill F1. However, if the FIA continue with the idea I vote they put Jericoke in charge!
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Jericoke on May 12, 2009, 03:32:09 PM
Quote
It's not really all that difficult for all team employees to become FIA employees, with the teams 'leasing' their services.  FIA handles the paycheques from money supplied by the teams.  FIA can also handle any facility contracts that would be covered as well.  Obviously there will be attempts to get around this system, but that should be as easy to enforce as 'tax cheats'.  Working for an F1 team will mean a little less financial privacy.

That's a very concise idea. Are you in Finance Jeri?
I'm an engineer first and a business manager second. My background tells me that too much input from a centralised management (FIA) will limit radical ideas and entrepreneurial spirit. In short, I think the capping idea could kill F1. However, if the FIA continue with the idea I vote they put Jericoke in charge!

I manage a small business, and we outsource our payroll.

I'm not suggesting FIA manage anything, just act as a trust to ensure employees are paid under the cap.  It would actually save a little money, having one payroll administration in place of a dozen.

I doubt many F1 teams make their creative leaps in the back office, but with more people like Branson and Malia coming in, that business expertise might be able to cut costs off the track.
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: monty on May 14, 2009, 03:50:51 PM
I didn't put it very well but basically I agree with you.
The problem is that the FIA (on past performance) would almost certainly get over-involved, they would charge too much for their services, they would not be consistent, they would leak the Maclaren pay structure to Ferrari (OK I made that one up!). In general I just do not think it is workable.
The competition that makes F1 what it is, goes from the track, right down to grass roots. It has always had big spenders and little entrepreneurs and yet it has always survived. I just wish Max would keep his nose out of a business he still doesn't understand (which is why he has never managed a successful F1 team).
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Scott on May 15, 2009, 04:18:04 AM
Absolutely.  I would NEVER give the FIA the power to browse the books.  If there was to be a budget cap, I would say that an independent accounting firm should be awarded the contract by FOTA, not the FIA.  That would be the most objective way to do it.

While they're at it, they could have a peek at the FOM's books. 
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Jericoke on May 15, 2009, 02:01:11 PM
Absolutely.  I would NEVER give the FIA the power to browse the books.  If there was to be a budget cap, I would say that an independent accounting firm should be awarded the contract by FOTA, not the FIA.  That would be the most objective way to do it.

While they're at it, they could have a peek at the FOM's books. 

That makes sense.  More power to FOTA is what the sport needs.
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Alianora La Canta on May 17, 2009, 03:27:14 PM
The FIA was banned from interfering in the financial side - at all - in 2001 by the EU due to concerns about monopolistic behaviour. The whole budget-cap issue is moot because the FIA can't, technically speaking, be involved in forcing financial change.
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: lkjohnson1950 on May 17, 2009, 07:21:48 PM
Tell that to Max, as if he would listen.

Lonny
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Jericoke on May 18, 2009, 12:33:59 PM
The FIA was banned from interfering in the financial side - at all - in 2001 by the EU due to concerns about monopolistic behaviour. The whole budget-cap issue is moot because the FIA can't, technically speaking, be involved in forcing financial change.

Monopolistic behaviour?  Since when does the FIA have any competition at all?
Title: Re: only one man's opinion?
Post by: Alianora La Canta on May 22, 2009, 06:58:04 PM
Monopolistic behaviour?  Since when does the FIA have any competition at all? {Jericoke - previous comment}

The FIA doesn't organise A1GP or most of the American series (though they are inscribed in its international calender). It also doesn't organise MotoGP (though the regulations for it are set by sister organisation FIM) or the IRC. The likes of Tony George, the FIM leadership and whoever runs the International Rally Championship all have an interest in the FIA being prevented from being a monopoly provider of motor sport.
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal
Menu Editor Pro 1.0 | Copyright 2013, Matthew Kerle