The madness of unneccessary F1 costs.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

to my knowledge most F1 teams are separate legal entities from their parent manufacturer, or in the case of Williams and Mclaren separate from their respective technology company's so this may just be a Ferrari problem.

Another thing I posted in the other thread is that I think there has to be a single entity that involves the forensic accounting and that would be a smaller legal entity that governs the racing team vs. the larger parent organization. As simple as that sounds I think that with the recent small team collapses you still had issues with one more than one entity involved and things like the physical assets being separate from the car IP, etc. So it would be tricky, but not impossible.

Also, I was pushing any power supply cost out of the team. So someone like Honda, Mercedes and Ferrari could spend what they want on the R&D for the engines, but maybe there is a fixed values assigned (not by the manufactures) to each PSU to prevent large budgets to create, but low cost being assigned to the teams. So for example... All teams using Mercedes PSU would be "charged" the same amount against their budget for their PSU and that include the actual Mercedes F1 team as well.

It is an interesting point about Ferrari. I have no clue about their structure or what is typical within Italy. But I would be surprised if they are running the F1 team entirely within the larger manufacture entity?

Richard

[SWCRacing]

Whilst the numbers paid to the teams in 2014 by F1WC Ltd look right, I believe Autosport are overstaing the turnover of the business. I would also question their numbers as the accounts have not yet been filed with Companies House so are not available to the public..

IF, and its a very BIG IF, Autosport's turnover figure is correct, then that would mean that BCE has increased F1WC Ltd's turnover by 25% in 12 months..... If true, why would any shareholder want to get rid of him?

The problem is how much money the teams are spending. The top 5 can bring in enough sponsorship $s to compete, the bottom 5 can't.....

[wolfhound]

It seems like all that was decided upon at the strategy group meeting were ways to increase costs like bringing back refueling.
What will that achieve?
I can't think of any advantage other than give the commentators something to talk about.

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/re...-to-f1-in-2017

[old man]

Not really true, they did decide to have another meeting!

[AoB Special Stage]

New rule proposal: the catering budget per team starting from FP1 through to race end must be below the amount of money defined by the host country as the poverty line.

-to FOM

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by AoB Special Stage

New rule proposal: the catering budget per team starting from FP1 through to race end must be below the amount of money defined by the host country as the poverty line.

-to FOM

That's one way to vary one's calorie intake.

[AoB Special Stage]

At least FP3.

[wolfhound]

An insight into possible cost cuts was carried out in a report by McKinsey. In it they outlined various ways for teams to save money. It seams like most methods of saving £30 million would have negative impacts on F1.
However an interesting note was that if the average of the teams share of F1 revenue was given equally They would get £90 million each a little less than it costs to run a competitive F1 team.

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/re...-customer-cars

[Moneyseeker]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

An insight into possible cost cuts was carried out in a report by McKinsey. In it they outlined various ways for teams to save money. It seams like most methods of saving £30 million would have negative impacts on F1.
However an interesting note was that if the average of the teams share of F1 revenue was given equally They would get £90 million each a little less than it costs to run a competitive F1 team.

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/re...-customer-cars

Interesting that they make the assumption that public interest in smaller teams with similar cars would wain, surely the drivers are of equal or more interest to the public?!

[Mystery]

Originally Posted by Moneyseeker

Interesting that they make the assumption that public interest in smaller teams with similar cars would wain, surely the drivers are of equal or more interest to the public?!

I think they've listened to a few interviews and concluded that in enough cases that's not true (although I think this generation isn't that bad to be fair)

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Moneyseeker

Interesting that they make the assumption that public interest in smaller teams with similar cars would wain, surely the drivers are of equal or more interest to the public?!

I think you are right on the money here Moneyseeker!

Given that all the technology in the cars is basically secret in that the differences between the cars is undetectable to anyone other than the engineering staff of that specific team.

The main interest has to be the DRIVERS!

I believe the new helmet regulations were an attempt to try and diminish the interest in the drivers.

Currently the drivers ability to make a real difference, carry a car, is extremely limited, and the public interest in F1 is diminishing!

I feel a thread coming on!

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by wnut

!
Currently the drivers ability to make a real difference, carry a car, is extremely limited, and the public interest in F1 is diminishing!

I feel a thread coming on!

If the ridiculous figures being quoted for the Hamilton- Mercedes contract are anywhere near true I think the overvaluing of drivers is a subject worth a thread.
If Mercedes were to spread that money over the engine customer teams as a cost reduction it would do a hell of a lot more for the sport than in the pocket of one prima donna.
Just what do drivers contribute outside of some "human interest" or "celebrity" stories?

[Keycube]

Waaaay back in the day, didn't F1 and Group C/Can Am/some other endurance racing moniker have similar engine regulations? I forget what engine it was (probably many), but it seems like the Matra V-12 was used in the 670 and in F1 as well? Probably Cosworths too, I suspect. Hopefully I'm not all wet on that and it turns out my mind is going.

Regardless though, could something like that help the situation; the WEC P1 engine specs seem to have good parity across MJ levels, and manufacturers don't seem to shy away from the series on economic grounds (Peugeot notwithstanding <very sad face>). You could have identical specs in F1 with maybe different mapping or something like they have in MotoGP; you could spice the up the outputs a bit to keep F1 "elite" and also account for the fact that they don't need the same degree of reliability.

You could then potentially have all sorts of cross-breeding of new teams in both series. Everybody wins!

F1 is sorely in need of the variation that the WEC has going on right now. F1 has the look of a spec series. I was a HUGE F1 fan in the mid-80's, and for the next 10 years you saw outrageous innovation, but then a continuous push-pull of reigning the sport in on the grounds of "safety" or "improving the spectacle", or some crap. Wooden planks. Grooved tires. Gah. It more or less looks like the IRL to me right now.

Anyhow, just a thought.

[wolfhound]

There were at least 2 occasions when F1 had the same or similar engine regs. One was in the seventies in the old Group 6 days where 3 liter engines were used in both. The other was the last type of Group C in the early nineties when similar engine regs were again used in the form of 3.5 liter motors.
Currently an F1 engine could be used in LMP1. However if somebody wanted to use any of the current LMP engines in F1 they couldn't as the LMP regs are so much more open.

[AoB Special Stage]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

There were at least 2 occasions when F1 had the same or similar engine regs. One was in the seventies in the old Group 6 days where 3 liter engines were used in both. The other was the last type of Group C in the early nineties when similar engine regs were again used in the form of 3.5 liter motors.
Currently an F1 engine could be used in LMP1. However if somebody wanted to use any of the current LMP engines in F1 they couldn't as the LMP regs are so much more open.

But the Group C switch to match F1 did lead to the downfall of the WSC.

Does anyone know how the F1 and WEC fuel flow regs compare?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Keycube

Waaaay back in the day, didn't F1 and Group C/Can Am/some other endurance racing moniker have similar engine regulations? I forget what engine it was (probably many), but it seems like the Matra V-12 was used in the 670 and in F1 as well? Probably Cosworths too, I suspect. Hopefully I'm not all wet on that and it turns out my mind is going.

In 1972 Group 6 Prototype and Group 5 Sports Car classes were both replaced by the new Group 5 Sports Car class and engine capacity was reduced to 3 litres, so yes the Cosworth, Matra's V12 and Ferrari's 312B were used in both F1 and in the World Sports Car Championship.

[wolfhound]

Vettel has a hit a nail on the head after Bernie's comments about him. Vettel said it is within Bernie's power to reduce ticket prices to allow more fans to come to F1 races. After all Bernie charges some GP hosts $50 million to host a GP.

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns31064.html

[wnut]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Vettel has a hit a nail on the head after Bernie's comments about him. Vettel said it is within Bernie's power to reduce ticket prices to allow more fans to come to F1 races. After all Bernie charges some GP hosts $50 million to host a GP.

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns31064.html

Bernie sold F1's soul to the devil long ago!
He has to live with the fall out, resign, or give the money back.
Only the third option would possibly solve the problem, and that will not happen!

Catch-22

[bjohnsonsmith]

An interesting article.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119399

[wolfhound]

Interesting piece by Joe Saward on the current stat of F1.

https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2015...in-f1-history/

I could have put it in any of a number of current threads. Interestingly he backs Max Mosley's idea of a 2 tier F1 where budget capped teams are given greater technical freedom.

[wolfhound]

Is it possible that one of the reasons that there has been no Indian GP recently because the Indian Government taxed FOM/Bernie/CVC more than they cared to pay?

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns31128.html

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Is it possible that one of the reasons that there has been no Indian GP recently because the Indian Government taxed FOM/Bernie/CVC more than they cared to pay?

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns31128.html

I don't think that this is one that should be laid at BCE's feet. The Indian government, or just possibly the relevant regional government, have some weird interpretations of their tax regimes and how they view Formula 1. The financial interests of FOM reside within CVC, and to the best of my knowledge, their tax affairs are regulated by the authorities in Luxenbourg where they are headquartered. For some reason, the Indians seemed to believe that they were also entitled to tax FOM on their activities in India, which is not how any other country deals with tax affairs.

There is also the problem that the Indian government do not consider F1 to be a sport , but deem it to be part of the entertainment industry. As such, they believe that the teams should pay an "import" duty on their activities, and in fact their has been an ongoing fear that their authorities might attempt to impound all the teams cars and equipment in order to leverage a payment.

From memory, the 1st or 2nd GP held in India only went ahead after 11th hour negotiations resulted in the authorities giving written guarantees that the teams' property would not be held to ransom.

[wnut]

That is the good thing about being a foreigner, if you don't like the way their government treats you, you can avoid it like the plague!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Todt complains about small teams complaining.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119674

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Todt complains about small teams complaining.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119674

If only I can find an article that says..

Small teams complain about Todt complaining!

Richard