EJ on cost cutting in F1 - "disillusioned "

[Super Tourer]

http://www.f1racing.net/news.php?ID=68968

"Eddie Jordan has 'given up' a quest to cut costs in Formula One. The Irishman, whose Silverstone-based team runs on the sport's second-smallest budget, is disillusioned by his richer rivals' reluctance to embrace change."

For once (!) I agree with EJ on this, as it's a view I've held for sometime. Cost cutting is only ever mentioned by the privateer teams, you never really hear FW, McLaren, BMW or Mercedes on the subjetc - only in the 3rd party sort of way.

I firmly believe that while the companies can justify the cost to their shareholders or directors and can assign a commercial value to it , they will continue to spend whatever it takes to maintain their positiion in F1.

For cost cutting to work, it has to be implemented unilaterally, BMW aren't going to scale back their budget significantly without knowing that Ferrari and Mercedes will do the same. However Max Moseley, equally exasperated at the failure of manufacturers to reign in costs, has ruled out trying to regulate costs out of F1.

Sir Frank William's was recently commenting that teams are spending more money testing , than racing - therefore limiting testing would seem a way to cut costs - but will that acutally work, as surely it will drive teams back into the factory's, spending more on wind tunnels, race simulators, sophisticated rolling roads, computer simulating, etc.

The actual problem is that the disparity has become so great, that teams like Jordan are merely (IMO) surviving in F1, not competing. In the final analysis are factory teams going to be interested in savings of even $10M per year, on budgets of $250M, if they present the slightest chance of denting their 'edge'.

In the end, the manufacturers have the ultimate cost cutting measure to hand - pull out - none of then 'need' to be in F1 above all else, it's not their business and here lies the essential difference. Toyota are in the car making and selling business, without F1 they will still sell cars, at the moment they think that F1 will help their profile and maybe shift some more metal from the showrooms - to do this they will spend a certain amount and allow a certain timescale to acheive this - if it doesn't, one day the board will pull the plug regardless of whether this leaves F1 on a knife edge for entries.

Whereas EJ's business IS F1, without it his income is nil, but from his interview he is coming around to this way of thinking "Jordan reckons the only reason big teams like Ferrari and McLaren want to keep ten competitors in F1 is so they don't have to field a third car in grands prix. 'They don't care if we're uncompetitive,'."

Similarly the cost of entry to F1 is probably now prohibitive, any manufacturer eyeing the figures will see that they need to commit to around $200M per year to be in the same ball park as the other factory teams, and allow at least 3 years to see much of a return in terms of results, that is a big cheque to get signed by the CEO of any company . IMO.

However, the answer may be at hand, as surpisingly both Ron Dennis and Patrick Head are now open to the idea of customer cars, this is no doubt due to the fact that they probably question Jordan and Minardi's survival in the medium term and with no new entrant's on the horizon, they face having to run 3 cars if that happens.

EJ is equally suprisingly, publically anyway, defending Jordan's independence to build carry on building it's own cars - but trotting down to Oxford and 'buying' a FW26 looks a better option to me.

[climb]

Just llok at how many tests teams are doing... it seems like they never did so many.

[DriverT]

Well, the big teams will not commit to reduce costs until they have to and it is affecting them. It's called "I'm alright, Jack".

[Bononi]

Originally posted by DriverT
Well, the big teams will not commit to reduce costs until they have to and it is affecting them. It's called "I'm alright, Jack".

We see that everyday.

[DriverT]

Yes, indeed. Most people can only see as far as the end of their own nose when it comes to other people's problems. In this case, the same happens with the big teams.

[davebreen]

Originally posted by Super Tourer

EJ is equally suprisingly, publically anyway, defending Jordan's independence to build carry on building it's own cars - but trotting down to Oxford and 'buying' a FW26 looks a better option to me.

Eddie seems to think buying a FW26 will make him a Williams B team, ala Sauber. Here is a quote from him on Sauber and Ferrari

"Peter Sauber may have given up his chance of winning F1 races by launching the 2003 Ferrari-clone C23 ahead of this season. 'I admire him as one of the finest men in F1,' Jordan told the publication. 'But I wonder if he would ever be allowed to win if it meant beating a Ferrari.'"

http://www.f1racing.net/news.php?ID=68899

What are the chances that Jordan will ever win another GP (Incidents like Brazil aside)???? I think buying a ready made car is the only way they and Minardi will survive!

[DriverT]

... if they can afford it!

[Bononi]

Originally posted by davebreen
What are the chances that Jordan will ever win another GP (Incidents like Brazil aside)???? I think buying a ready made car is the only way they and Minardi will survive!

Exactly, or selling his team to a manufacturer.

[GP Racer]

Originally posted by Super Tourer
[B

The actual problem is that the disparity has become so great, that teams like Jordan are merely (IMO) surviving in F1, not competing. [/B]

That one statement really puts it in a nutshell. It makes me wonder, how and why Jordan, Minardi, and Sauber carry on at all...

[kdr]

i'd say each one of those teams would enjoy more success, satisfaction, and fun in other motorsport arenas.

didn't jordan once use to be a happy team??

[Kicking-back]

It's not necessarily an unhappy team now!

It is vital Jordan, Minardi etc stay in F1 - and stay building their own chassis.

When BMW, Mercedes, Honda, Toyota or Renault get bored and pull out, and half the grid are running Cosworths again, F1 will be as much a place for the privateer as ever.

[Gt_R]

Jordan used to be portrayed a "partying" team, with Eddie performing and all...even coming up with their Jordan's own drink.. Yellow seem such a suitable colour for them. However, it's sad that now they seem more suited to dull gray, as they brood when the next day will bring.

Firstly, it's indeed hard to control expenditure...as hard as restricting the rights to speak. I do think that we should simply have a 2-tier Constructors-championship, which derives from the final WCC. Simply, the best placed privateer/customer team/driver, which is not factory backed, is also awarded at the annual end of season prize presentation. This would raise awareness of the great performances of these lower team, and help recognise their efforts, taking some stress out of direct competition with their Full Factory rival.

There were some criticism regarding Ferrari's opposition to testing bans that may help cost, which i find unfair, simply because the teams that voiced such criticism are basically the ones which impose restrictions and rejections to help out small teams in other ways. Ferrari had supplied a 2nd team with competitive engines for years. So has Ford. But so far, Honda, Toyota, BMW and most obviously Mercedes all failed to commit by selling older but more competitive engines.

Perhaps, "test-teams" ought to be banned, and that testing at F1-venues are banned too. If possible, teams should even be restricted to how many personnels they bring to each race. Then, privateers are allowed to buy year old engines from any manufacturers they want, manufacturers can't reject unless they had already supplied at least one privateer.

A price cap of $20mil would be more relistic than the $10m they want.

Another practice which should be regulated, though not restricted, is the long time practice of out-right poaching of talented engineers/designers from small teams, especially if the small team is the one that uncovered those engineers in the first place.

[grumpy1]

Maybe EJ should call on Richard Branson as hes the only one with enough cash to by EJ out.I think the one engine rule is a start at cost cutting but where do you draw the line?Of course the teams backed by a manufacturor will have bigger budget(exception Jag) because they will be bearing half the cost.EJ needs to find his own engine manufactor to help him out of his money bind.

The Grumpy1

[Adam43]

Originally posted by grumpy1
Of course the teams backed by a manufacturor will have bigger budget(exception Jag) because they will be bearing half the cost.

Here are some interesting figures along those lines:
http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...threadid=49689

I'm sure EJ would love his own manufacturer, but, simply, I'm not sure there are enough of them to go round!

[Logrence]

It's a sport, competition - you can't artificially hold it back...besides, Eddie only wants everyone else to have less money because he can't get any.

That's like me saying everyone should be restricted to one night of sex a year.

[Super Tourer]

http://www.autosport.com/newsitem.asp?id=26056&s=5

Bernie E add's his thoughts on cost cutting.

"Ecclestone said: “We've got to reduce costs dramatically. We have to for the survival of F1."

Which is all very well, but surely at odd's with his plans to increase the number of races on the calendar to increasingly far flung destinations.

[BootsOntheSide]

Saving the smaller teams is crucial to the future of Formula 1. If we lost Jordan and Minardi it would mean 3 cars from each of the big teams, which would lead to an increase in processional team-orders-dominated farces. Also, the sheer corporate nature of the sport would eb even higher, and really drop the entertainment value.

It could get worse in a couple of years though, as people are pointing out. No one will be happy with finishing 5th or lower, as it just isn't good marketing. Once teams pull out, new privateers would be desperately needed to fill the grid. The whole affair would become even more corporate if Mercedes buy out McLaren (which Frank expects to happen in a couple of years, around Ron's 60th birthday), Honda buy out BAR (BAT have no use for it come 2006), or BMW buy up Williams (possible).

Eddie's case about not wanting to be in the controls of a factory team by runnign their old hardware is admirable and correct. One approach might be to force teams to sell their cars to the FIA at the end of each season, who could sell them on to other teams, but of course the Concord Agreement means it needs near-unanimous support. A company like Dallara or Lola coming in to build a spec car for Privateers to buy and run is another approach.

I've said that a Privateer's Championship alongside the main one, and more freedom of entry, is urgently required, and I'll keep saying it.

[Startline1]

When thinking about testing , i remember some years ago at Snett when we had Lotus,Tyrell and Benetton test there a lot it cost them £4000 per day and they ofset some of the cost by inviting a F3000 or Grp C team along.

Then came that silly rule where they could only test at Silverstone in the UK and the fee went up to approx £9000,now i know the reason stated was of safety but we had extra medical staff/marshals and a helo on site and from what i`ve seen there is no more at most other "approved" circuits.

Therefore with the right safeguards why not let teams test where they want.

[Teretonga]

Gt-R is correct.
The small teams like Jordan, Minardi and Sauber are effectively private teams now anyway. Its just that the FIA require them to build their own chassis rather than buy them.
The idea of a privateers cup (for those teams that do not have a manufacturers backing but build their own chassis along with any who buy their chassis from an 'maunfacturers team') is a good one this would also eliminate 'B' teams from running as 'private' teams. Eg Toyota couldn't run an A team plus run a 'B' in the privateers championship but Minardi could buy a Mclaren or Toyota chassis and run it with Toyota power as a 'private' team. Toyota couldn't buy Minardi and run it as a privateers team.

[Super Tourer]

A sub championship has been tried before. In 1987 the Colin Chapman Cup and Jim Clark trophy were created for normally aspirated cars and their drivers, who were hopelessly outclassed by the turbo engined cars.

Jonathan Palmer won the Jim Clark Trophy in a Tyrrell-Ford DFV, but you rarely hear it mentioned these days (except in the 10 tenths Christmas Quiz !- LOL).Little significance was placed on it then and even less now, you don't hear JP referred to as a 'world champion' for example.

The best idea I have heard recently is to create additional championships for engine manufacturers and tyre suppliers. This would have the effect of possibly galvanising more support behind the privateer teams, or at least get more customer engine deals. Imagine if Mercedes struck a deal with Sauber and Jordan to supply engines along with some technical support, and achieved the world championship for engines - it might actually get car makers courting teams to run their engines.

Similarly with tyres, if their was a trophy available it may get the tyre makers to cast a more serious eye over the 'customer' teams.

[Gt_R]

The idea of a sub-championship isn't really to make them on par with the big teams but rather to increase awareness and reward them for great performances, thereby helping them attract more $cash$ from smaller sponsors.

And yes, i agree that Engine-championship is a probable and good idea. I've long questioned why can't they simply add it in as a sub-championship title, simply to "pursuade" "selfish" engine manufacturers like BMW/Mercedes to actually go out and supply another team. And what's more, teams would no longer supply 2 year old engines (like Ford for Minardi) but rather a more updated, if not equal engine for their other teams in a bid to win the engine-championship.

Also, now that the last 6 teams effectively bring a 3rd car for Friday testings with their own 3rd driver, why waste it? They could have organised a 3rd car 8-lap demonstration sprint-race with a 6-car grid on Sunday morning, not only giving young 3rd drivers exposure and experience in wheel to wheel racing at various tracks in equal conditions (no pits), but also revv-up the mood prior to the main race.

Afterall, they've already paid so much for shipping the extra stuffs.

[Snrub]

Now that all the manufacturer teams are in the $200-300M budget bracket, it has to be asked what's the point? If all of the teams were limited to say $100M would anything be any different? It seems to me that everyone is stupidly throwing away $1-200M a year. What does that money accomplish? It's an absolutely stupid amount of money to spend on something that has zero bearing on how the sport effects fans who are ultimately the engine of F1's existance.

[StuiE]

Originally posted by Gt_R


Also, now that the last 6 teams effectively bring a 3rd car for Friday testings with their own 3rd driver, why waste it? They could have organised a 3rd car 8-lap demonstration sprint-race with a 6-car grid on Sunday morning, not only giving young 3rd drivers exposure and experience in wheel to wheel racing at various tracks in equal conditions (no pits), but also revv-up the mood prior to the main race.

Afterall, they've already paid so much for shipping the extra stuffs.

I had never thought of this, great idea!

[BootsOntheSide]

Certainly is a good idea. Allowing the thrid cars to run during the actual race itself is another option, but it could ultimately make it mcuh ahrder for Minardi etc to score points, and would make finishing 5th better than 4th in terms of the next season's chances, which would hardly be fair.