The Budget Cap

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

While there are infrastructure restrictions if you didn't invest before the budget cap (with some exceptions that have been given to help out the Williams, Alpines & Saubers), the lack of progress of Sauber since the Audi announcement suggests Audi has NOT been investing anyway.

A bit off topic for this thread (this comment from me that is), but when you call out the lack of progress at Sauber as an indication of lack of investment, I also think it can indicate a lack of "seriousness" or "commitment" (recently discussed in another thread). While they have made changes recently, it puzzles me that Audi were clearly asleep at the wheel for quite awhile. I can only assume that the previous Sauber leadership was promising Audi that "things are on track to get better", but really never did, or not quickly enough.

Richard

[S griffin]

Certainly Sauber have fallen far down the pecking order. They need to get their act together if Audi don’t want to be the laughing stock. When even a talent like Bottas couldn’t do much with the car the last couple of seasons, it shows how badly things are. Let’s not get started on the pitstops

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Richard C

While they have made changes recently, it puzzles me that Audi were clearly asleep at the wheel for quite awhile. I can only assume that the previous Sauber leadership was promising Audi that "things are on track to get better", but really never did, or not quickly enough.

I'm not sure I follow that Audi have been 'asleep at the wheel'.

They only completed the takeover of ownership in March last year, and so any Audi influence on the car will not have been seen yet. Add to that the fact that the powertrain is still a Ferrari unit, and to me it seems logical that the 23-24-25 period would see a drop-off in performance. The team is setting itself for 2026, and is in a transition period.

Audi has been investing heavily in the powertrain side of the program, and also towards a UK-based technical site.

Loosely related to Budget Cap - there is also the benefit of more aero development time that comes from being last in the WCC. Perhaps it is a deliberate 'tank'.

Pay more staff from a Swiss registration (higher budget cap).
But, within the books, cleverly account for that cap to maximise the wind tunnel time permitted.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I'm not sure I follow that Audi have been 'asleep at the wheel'.

They only completed the takeover of ownership in March last year, and so any Audi influence on the car will not have been seen yet. Add to that the fact that the powertrain is still a Ferrari unit, and to me it seems logical that the 23-24-25 period would see a drop-off in performance. The team is setting itself for 2026, and is in a transition period.

Audi has been investing heavily in the powertrain side of the program, and also towards a UK-based technical site.

My perspective is that, while the timeline is relatively short, there is at least two years of history between Audi and Sauber as Audi transitioned from minority to majority shareholder. The point haul for 2022, 2023 and 2024 is 55, 16 and 4 respectively which clearly indicates a downward spiral and this was very clear in 2024 and should have been in 2023 as well. Audi announced the purchase plan in late 2022 with a minority stake in early 2023. While a minority owner for 2023 season, given the plan to move to controlling the team by 2026, they should have had a full inside seat to watch and monitor what was going on with the team. If they didn't have an inside seat, or was not utilizing that access, then that is a miss on their part.

I remember reading about a schedule of increase in ownership at the 25%, 50%, 75% steps. However it seems that the only steps that are clear are a 25% in January 2023 and a 100% share (or majority share) in March 2024 (ignoring the sale of 30% to QIA). March may not see very long ago, but my key point is that they didn't make any real leadership changes until five months later when Binotto showed up in August. So if someone was inside the team and watching, why did it take them so long to pull the trigger on making changes once they achieved full control? You might say "these things take time". And they do. But in my opinion, Audi should have had a plan in place and ready to implement as soon as they took majority control vs. waiting until late in 2024. Especially as they should have been very familiar with the internal workings for quite a long time. Now there may be other issues that prevented them from doing so, but regardless, I tend to feel that it is fair to question their actions so far, which can be interpreted as not having their eye on the ball.

Regarding the power unit part, I suspect that for the most part, that is likely run somewhat independently from the team. So Audi may (or may not) be very "on top of things" with respect to the 2026 power unit. We will not know until 2026. It think it's very much about the Sauber side of things.

In the end, it's just an opinion.

Richard

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

Ford RBPT have the same engine budget cap as Audi...

They are both already being given a slight extra allowance as new entrants.

I don't think it is fair for Audi (or Ford RBPT) to be given an undue advantage over other engine manufacturers.

Obviously Sauber is an existing team, so no reason for non-standard budget caps to apply on the chassis side. There is already an allowance for higher Swiss salaries.

it certainly wont help my position to admit this but when it comes to the engine side of things, i do agree with you that the development and spending rules for said engines seem to have been handled quite fairly for the new entrants.

and its not that i even disagree with you about the chassis in that you also should not penalize those who have been investing into their capabilities well before the cap era started and before some hypothetical new team or manu even enters.

im more focused on the year to year operational side of things going forward and dont want to see teams who have the money to operate at the top end of the cap unable to maintain the same staffing levels (certainly not 30-40% lower as has been suggested by Tombazis) as to those in lower cost countries. imo thats not a good look. as fans, i dont see how that benefits us to have teams who have this somewhat invisible barrier preventing them from running a competitive season.

also it is my understanding that these equivalency formulas/offsets are not yet in play yet but looks like they will be when the cap is significantly increased for 2026 and for when Audi first takes the grid. what shape this will take however im not entirely clear on and of course we will have to see whether it can actually serve to level the playing field in respect to staffing levels.

for me i clearly like this direction as i do feel anything to help grow the sport, not in terms of number of fans or races are held in new countries, but in terms of overall increasing the number of viable locations/facilities/centres there are to run a top level F1 team from...there should be motorsports valleys everywhere no?

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Loosely related to Budget Cap - there is also the benefit of more aero development time that comes from being last in the WCC. Perhaps it is a deliberate 'tank'.

Pay more staff from a Swiss registration (higher budget cap).
But, within the books, cleverly account for that cap to maximise the wind tunnel time permitted.

fair fair! this is F1 so there no doubt a much deeper game being played so i must also admit that i could very much be falling for the distraction argument that Audi is playing to unduly improve their hand?