|
Whatever, there was no complaining about this back in LMP900 when Audi Sport were spending $75 million a year to win LM and $10-15 million to do ALMS a season. I don't see anyone defending Cadillac who's program back then was a mismanaged waste of money, time and energy with little to show for it.
And everyone gushes about Group C and IMSA GTP, yet you had in IMSA GTP Toyota and Nissan spending $25 million a year. That's equal to about 100 million today. That almost bankrupted the sport, and we also know that Toyota spent $75-100 million on the GT-One project that never won any of the three races it did. Where's the defense of what Toyota did.
Again, whatever, at least Audi Sport and Porsche have something to show for their spending. Racing is the biggest pay-to-play sport there is. Why don't we see Pescarolo out there anymore? Because most privateer teams started to outspend him by a significant margin, let alone the factory teams.
And I do feel that people who like to back up Porsche and Toyota--the two who benefited the most from the ERS incentive and the loosened up aero and engine rules--are missing the bigger picture.
The 2014 rules were a disaster waiting to happen. They did encourage teams to built new cars every season. They pushed for the "go big or go home" mentality. Three years also isn't enough time to get a worthwhile customer car program going, especially with such expenses and the factory teams wanting to do their own things.
Why the rapid expenditure of money? I'll say it again: instant gratification. When you have marginal stuff wide open (like the front floors) but close off other areas (active aero, blown diffusers, pushing everyone to go the big hybrid/small engine route), teams will spend big money on small things.
Just look at NASCAR. The gap from front to back is relatively small, but the bigger teams still dominate because they have the money and resources to exploit small, marginal performance gains. It's the law of diminishing returns.
But as I mentioned, racing is the biggest case of "pay to play" in sports. You don't see pro basketball, football, soccer and baseball players bringing money to get them on a team. You don't see teams dump millions of dollars on a mechanical device to make it a few tenths of a second faster in the stick and ball world.
Yes, cost should be controlled. But for that to happen, sacrifices will probably have to be made. One of which will probably be the big hybrid systems. Another will probably be some of the marginal, small, but expensive aero stuff.
Also look at the Perrin program that's gone bust. It seems that program needed money--and lots of it--to get going. Is that the message we want to send?
I know that sounds contradictory, but I refuse to blame car makers for spending what they feel like spending on racing. Racing is pay to play, no getting around that.
I seriously want to know what the fans really want: Do they want unlimited technology, or close racing? High tech can put on good racing, but you don't need high tech to have good racing.
But if you want high tech, someone's gotta pay for it. Even TMG's current WEC budget is probably a lot more than what Mazda spend on their entire motorsports programs worldwide.
As for the defense of Toyota doing things on a smaller budget, I'll say this: If Toyota didn't go hog wild on F1, TMG might not be able to save money by doing things in house. They build everything but the engine and parts of the hybrid system (which come from Japan) and the gearbox internals (sourced from XTrac) for the TS050. But they probably couldn't do that if they didn't have F1 level facilities (and if TMC/Toyota Group didn't own so many automotive companies).
Audi Sport and even Porsche outsource chassis and component building. That cost time, energy and money. Also, how much of their motorsports budget is spent on the cars and racing, and how much is spent on advertising and other events. We all know that Audi and Porsche's hospitality and VIP areas were much larger than Toyota's. Were Audi and Porsche price gouging their own companies on that stuff?
|