F1 budgets to be cut 50%

[f1atic]

According to something I have just read, Frank Williams has stated the Flavio Briatore has for years said it and now we are all (teams) beginning to realize the urgency of it. He was speaking of a 50% proposed reduction in budgets.

If this were to become part of the 'rules', what would be given up by teams like Ferrari, Williams, McLaren and Toyota, who have some really deep pockets?

Would they try to reduce all aspects of their budget by this figure?
Would they take most of it from their expensive "home-away-from-home" trailers?
Would R&D suffer?

If you were a team owner and had the reduction impossed, what would you cut?

[DriverT]

What is the source of the material? It would have to be approved by all the teams, as per the Concorde Agreement. I cannot see everyone agreeing to it.

[ParkLife]

The reality would be that the larger manafacturer backed teams would simply not declare a lot of the money they spent (they'd shift it elsewhere in their account records). R&D costs could be declared against general road car development for example. And where do engine budgets stand? Would engine development cost be part of the budgetry capping? If yes then how can it be policed (it can't)? If no then that is once again screwing over the customer teams as whatever they paid for their engines would come out of their capped budget of £X milion.

[DriverT]

Exactly. That's a good point, and what I was thinking about. Just what is defined as "declared budget"? All you have to do is declare 50% of it, and hey presto, you have a budget cut of 50%.

[Snrub]

Obviously if this was to happen there would have to be an independant 3rd party auditor with a lot of power to be able to enforce a budget cut.

[hamsmith]

Are we talking budgets being cut by a percentage or being capped, i thought that the current talk was about the budgets being capped and I am concerned that the Frank W statment is being used out of context. If you put a percentage of 50% cut to Ferrari and Williams then surley in fairness (joke) you would have to impose a % cut to the lower teams who can only just survive.

[Kicking-back]

It's not going to happen.

Frank is being taken out of context

[Armco Bender]

Cut Minardis budget in half?

[RaceFreak]

Excellent question ! Here's my 2 cents

Ban ALL engine electronics. All of them. period. Mechanical fuel injection only. This cuts hp and slows the cars as well. Easy to enforce; not very popular, however.

Engine manufacturers MUST supply a minimum of 2 teams. Not with year-old POS motors, but with the latest generation lump. One engine/weekend rule is a good start !

An ENGINE CONSTRUCTORS championship, in addition to the overall constr's champ. See above for motivation.

steel brake rotors rather than CF. maybe even steel or Ti wishbones rather than CF. (remember, 50% is a BIG cut)

a 2 year freeze on tub designs. no more "new car" annually. Each "new" tub must be used for 2 seasons.

slick tires so the cars aren't as treacherous to drive as they are now.

onboard electric starters.

limit wind tunnel and CFD computer time (tough one to enforce. Gotta give that one some tough thought)

New Concord agreement. Immediately. Bernie coughs up more money to the teams, more equitably. Present situation is simply feudal.

Unless we want to see F1 die, Flavio is correct. It's dying now, let there be no doubt. Another goal should be to lower ticket prices by 25%. European ticket prices are way outta line !

Let the flames commence !

[Wrex]

With all due respect mate, there is alot of BS in your post.

F1 is'nt dying, banning all electronics is never going to happen (I take your aware we moved into a new century recently), and given nobody has seen the concorde agreement, I find the comment "Present situation is simply feudal" borderline liable.



Flavs statements have nothing to do with budget caps. For those that have followed this (hes made these statements for years, and these quotes came from the Melbourne Press conference) the main thing he is referring to is Testing.

If teams can get the money they will spend it. He does'nt want to limit income, he want to limit expenditure (and the effectiveness of it), and testing is the most expensive thing they do.

Personally, I'm for it. It's not going to change the pecking order in F1. Ferrari will still be towards the front, and Minardi towards the back, however if 50 million only buys you 2/10ths instead of a full second, it can only lead to a better racing.

[ljakse]

Whenever there is talk about cutting costs, testing gets mentioned as one of the most expensive thing. I have one question about 'policing' testing - how can Ferrari be controlled? They have a race track on their premises. How can anybody control what are they doing on their private property?

P.S. I am NOT accusing Ferrari of anything, this is purely 'technical' question.

[Wrex]

Mate, thats an easy one.

You make the penalty huge, ie, your are outed form the championship if the car turns a wheel on the track.

Secondly, hiding that would be just as difficult as Williams hiring a private track somewhere.

Offer a $1 million reward for any reporter that catches them and the job is done.

There is no way they (or anyone else) could get away with it, or risk it.

[alfasud]

First you would have to examine exactly who's budget is being cut and how to monitor.... if Bridgestone spend millions on racing tyre R&D, does some or all of that count against Ferrari's budget? If BMW do R&D on lightweight engine materials - does that count against Williams? How would you police such a thing?

I like some of Racefreaks ideas - at least the idea of a control slick and steel brakes. Not sure about some of the others, but it might take some radical ideas like that to make a difference.

[oziengineer]

Yarno Trulli is in the thinking that the cars are now simply too fast, so maybe if development was slowed now, while the cars are the fastest they have ever been, they can half the budgets and still have quick cars.

[Hugh Jarce]

Cap budgets and the big teams would ultimately walk!

It's the old, old arguement. Restrict the technological advance and you get another F3000.

For the 'big boys' its all about proving your brand is the ultimate in car development. So, you'll spend anything to show that a Merk or Toyota is better engineered than a Ferrari.

I have thought about this one over many a beer.

As much as I dislike outrageous spending, as it cripples Jordan etc. - to limit it will ultimately make F1 less than F1.

What I reckon you will get is more Sauber's with teams becomming number 2's

[ASCII Man]

F1 is less than F1 already....

[Sodemo]

How could you police spending, I doubt it can be done, unless all cars produced are made in a "controlled FIA enviroment", which all 10 teams have to use to make their cars, and all purchases go through a 3rd party financer.

So the teams would in effect have to create their cars in a parc ferme type situation. They would have to have FIA officials at each "factory" to ensure these proceedures are being followed.

[mayhem]

Agree with alfasud and The Monster, the only way to regulate costs would be to introduce more 'common' parts, which I thought would be going against the whole ideas of F1 being a 'technical' formula, and the beginning of being a 'parity' formula.

[Sodemo]

We already have standard fuel equipment and standard underbody aerodynamics (plank) what harm would a standard gearbox do?
Or nominate several manufacturers (X-Trac, Hewland) to produce a few off the shelf gearboxes?
Most of all I think a standard rear wing would be a good thing for F1, not only would it bring the field closer together, as in effect Minardi would have the same aerodynamics as Ferrari, but it would help racing.
Or the FIA could produce a "standard wing" with 2 elements (for drag), but with a space for the team to produce a 3rd element of their own - a good compromise?

[alfasud]

Please don't say 'parity' formula.... a 'parity' formula is when 'team a' has more downforce, so 'team b' is allowed to run less weight/wider rubber etc... and very soon it becomes a lobbying formula, where whoever can best play the game of lobbying the rulemakers wins.

Some would say it's a bit like that now, but at least it's the same set of rules for all.

Keep it a technical formula, where there are certain technical limits, like number of cylinders, max engine capacity and specified materials than can be used.... and in some cases, some control parts like a control tyre.

[RWC]

f1 is a stinking mess at the moment and will continue to be for quite a while


The real questions are who will win these political games in the end.........

Will max continue to use his influence to make tiny changes in the regulations or is he just interested in holding onto power by manupiulating the situation?

Can bernie make more money out of the teams/race promoters/caterers/TV networks by manipulating the situation?

Can paul get some more handouts and move up the grid (er,yeah right) by manipulating the situation?

Can BMW gain more say in the williams team by manipulating the situation?

Can ferrari gain even more subsidies by manipulating the situation?

etc
etc
etc

[Red]

*Tiny* changes!? Whoa, I wonder what dramatic changes would be! They changed the regs regarding electronics and auto-gearboxes like 25 times in past 2-3 years. They also changed the aero-regs every year as well. Not to mention the Sporting regs, which are so changed (I don't want to use [censored]-up)!

[Wrex]

Where does this "F1 is dying" and "F1 is a sticking mess" come from (I will ignore the fact all statements came from non-Ferrari fans)?

Also, when are people going to learn the big teams profit from rule changes, not the other way around. How quick do you think McLaren, Williams and Co can work the changes as opposed to Minardi and Jordan?

If you want a control series, go elsewhere as that is'nt what F1 is about. I find it hard to beleive with the comments above F3000 does'nt have a larger audiance.

[Red]

F1 isn't dying. Not yet. However a couple more years of "is dying, change things for the sake of entertainment" complaints and ignorant fans (not ticket payers, but loud) and yes, it will die.

I am looking forward to 2008, and GPWC alternate series. It can't go any worse than it goes now.

[Kicking-back]

Originally posted by Red
F1 isn't dying. Not yet. However a couple more years of "is dying, change things for the sake of entertainment" complaints and ignorant fans (not ticket payers, but loud) and yes, it will die.

I am looking forward to 2008, and GPWC alternate series. It can't go any worse than it goes now.

The GPWC isn't happening anymore.

And if you think that would be a good thing, look at the mess in the USA with CART and IRL.