Teams reject Ferrari "cost cuts"...

[Sodemo]

Just read over on Autosport.com that the 9 teams have rejected Ferrari's cost cuts.

One part of me says:
"fair play, don't bow down to pressure from Ferrari thinking IT can dictate what F1 does".

Then another part of me says:
"this is stupid, we need to adopt cheaper regs, they should have agreed so we could have parity with regard to testing".

F1 is doomed...

[Marbot]

Did the teams reject all the proposals?

[Kicking-back]

The proposals the teams are pushing for are the ones the nine teams have wanted all along. It was always unlikely they would accept the Ferrari proposal.

[Redblurr]

JT: "...With that in mind, our proposal is for a maximum of an additional 15,000 kilometres dedicated to tyre development for each of the two companies. They would be at liberty to subdivide that testing between their teams,..."

can't understand why thery rejected the proposal

[pitcrew]

At the end of the day F1 is supposed to be the top formula in the world but with all the limits and cost cuts etc its surely going backwards! hrug:

[raul_iulian]

Originally Posted by pitcrew

At the end of the day F1 is supposed to be the top formula in the world but with all the limits and cost cuts etc its surely going backwards! hrug:

F1 is the most expensive formula in the world... And every sport needs limits... without limits, well you'll probably see Ferrari wining everything, and at the end of the day Ferrari will buy F1

[pitcrew]

Originally posted by raul_iulian every sport needs limits...

But they also need limits in the right places!!

[raul_iulian]

Originally Posted by pitcrew

But they also need limits in the right places!!

T.R.U.E can argue with you here!

[pitcrew]

one idea i have is to make the drag higher to create a bigger slip stream (larger rear wings) and slicks so grip is still avalibel off line, = overtaking, done solved the viewing figures!!!

[BootsOntheSide]

Originally Posted by Redblurr

JT: "...With that in mind, our proposal is for a maximum of an additional 15,000 kilometres dedicated to tyre development for each of the two companies. They would be at liberty to subdivide that testing between their teams,..."

can't understand why thery rejected the proposal

Hardly sounds fair, does it? That Ferrari get 15000 kilometers, and Williams/BAR/McLaren/Renault/Sauber get 3000 each? People like yourself ahve complained enough about rules you feel are there to reduce the advantage Ferrari have of their own test track, so how can there be support for rules designed by Ferrari to maximise their advantage? The teams are absolutely right to reject ideas such as this.

There is a case against limiting testing as a method of cost-cutting, this much is true. Teams would simply use as much simulation technology as they have, which would mean that costs aren't neccessarily reduced, and it would see the number of people employed in F1 reduced, but not the amount spent on technology.

2-day race weekends seem like a sensible progression, especially as so many tracks have limited support race programmes, and this would allow a few extra races as well as reducing costs. As for the cars themselves, what pitcrew suggests could really improve the action on track.

[Knowlesy]

That 15,000 kilometres per tyre manufacturer is surely tongue in cheek by Ferrari?

That is ridiculous......although rather crafty I must say.

[nkh]

Originally Posted by BootsOntheSide

Hardly sounds fair, does it? That Ferrari get 15000 kilometers, and Williams/BAR/McLaren/Renault/Sauber get 3000 each?

Well, it's probably just a reaction to the 9 other teams who wanted to give Michelin 5 times as much test time as Bridgestone

[joe rossi]

If the other teams do go ahead with their self imposed limitations Ferrari will be backed into a corner.
In my opinion if they carry on testing when they like they will spend themselves into oblivion, and Fiat will eventually pull the plug if the other manufacturers are reducing budgets and can still be competitive.
Also any results they do get will be de-valued by not playing on a level playing field with the other teams.

[RWC]

Paul Stodardt says it best-

"it's a p*iss take"

Furrari have long thought they could dictate how f1 is run (and they could!)
but now everyone is getting sick of it

So what happens next year?.Simple..ferrari will do as they like and the other teams will have to drop their self imposed testing limits
Back to square one again!
We'll all just have to wait until shu retires and ferrari become desperate again

Back to square one

[Marbot]

Surely now is the time for a control tyre,it's pretty obvious that this is where the biggest performance advantages are gained ,and lets face it tyre technology is pretty dull stuff,doesn't matter what they do to them they always look the same and those grooves are just a joke,a one make rule would cut costs at a stroke.

[Valve Bounce]

[QUOTE=BootsOntheSide]Hardly sounds fair, does it? That Ferrari get 15000 kilometers, and Williams/BAR/McLaren/Renault/Sauber get 3000 each? People like yourself ahve complained enough about rules you feel are there to reduce the advantage Ferrari have of their own test track, so how can there be support for rules designed by Ferrari to maximise their advantage? The teams are absolutely right to reject ideas such as this.
QUOTE]


This sounds about right. And Ferrari always get's their way in the end anyway.

[Gt_R]

This is such a shame. When Ferrari objects to "proposals" clearly designed to disadvantage Ferrari WITHOUT much benefits of the sport, Ferrari gets blasted for killing the sports. Then with the roles reversed, Ferrari still gets blasted. It seems that the forum likes to take it anyway as long as Ferrari's the one in the black.

I won't say i particularly support this set of proposals which reduce testings. But what i would like to point out is that the 9 teams are absolutely hypocritical in this situation. When they submitted their proposals, they gave bullish claims of how they are willing to sacrifice their own "advantages" for the better of the sports (of course, at the expense of Ferrari). If THAT is their honorable objective, then why did they refuse such a Ferrari proposal? Because it doesn't achieve their aim of ruining Ferrari's exclusive advantage.

Ferrari mainly proposed two things. (1) Each team is limited to 15,000km of car testing throughout the season, which is actually less than the 24 days stipulated by the current agreement between the 9 teams. This is rejected.

(2) Each tyre manufacturer is limited to 15,000km of tyre testings, subdivided as the tyre manufacturer wish too. This is more debatable, i won't deny it because Ferrari might get most of the BS testings while other Michelin runners have to share. However, it doesn't seem to bother people that the proposals given by the 9 teams basically hand Michelin a huge advantage of having 5 times more testing data. Of course, fair play doesnt matter as long as Ferrari is disadvantaged

In a way, i like this two proposals (not supporting them) in the way that (1) limits testings at a sensible level without being too little (2) the proposals make it fair among tyre manufacturers as with almost equal amount of testing, could have a slight "control tyre" effect as not one manufacturer would get significantly more testing than the other. But there are some flaws in it which needs to be implemented.

Thus, what i suggest on top of Ferrari's proposal, is that to the amount of tyre testings, each tyre manufacturer is limited to 15,000km per season underway, subdivided among their teams, with each team limited to undertake 5000km.

This way, what we'd have is that some teams would than transfer back to Bridgestone and more or less, every tyre manufacturer would get similar amount of testing shared relatively equally among the teams.

I can't believe that people who condemn Ferrari in the previous proposals for not doing their part can lift their head and support the 9 teams now for what is basically a role reversal.

[Gt_R]

Oh anyways, i completely find it rubbish if people think that Ferrari's result next year would be "de-valued" simply because of them not giving into the proposal submitted by the 9 teams and test more.

This year, WITHOUT any stupid proposals and with Ferrari testing only the 3rd most among all teams, Ferrari still dominate and make a fool out of everyone. So to say Ferrari win next year because they test more blah blah blah are just stupid excuses. And similarly, if people need reminding, what the 9 teams are now doing are a private agreement, not a rule. Ferrari would still be competing within the framework of the rules and regulation.

[Super Tourer]

A solution - All teams HAVE to take part in Friday testing and can run 3 cars with a 3rd driver of their choice, regardless of experience in previous seasons. This has to be cost cutting as the teams are already at the circuit.

Then, testing outside a race weekend limited to 15,000 km per team per year inclusive of any tyre testing, tests monitored by an FIA observer, any mileage over 15,000Km penalised by $1M per km and deducted one constructors point per km. Any team that is found to run 1000k or more over the allowance is deducted 100 constructors points, fined $10M and has their testing for the next season cut by 5000km. No appeals, no exceptions, no mitigating circumstances.

You need to have the limit set in distance rather than days due to weather, mechanical problems, etc.

Part of me quite likes the idea that teams which test very little anyway could sell part of their km allocation to another team - can you imagine the look on PS and EJ's face as BMW, Ferrari and Mercedes queue up outside their motorhomes to buy km's, obviously going to the highest bidder......!

[joe rossi]

Originally Posted by Gt_R

(2) Each tyre manufacturer is limited to 15,000km of tyre testings, subdivided as the tyre manufacturer wish too. This is more debatable, i won't deny it because Ferrari might get most of the BS testings while other Michelin runners have to share. However, it doesn't seem to bother people that the proposals given by the 9 teams basically hand Michelin a huge advantage of having 5 times more testing data. Of course, fair play doesnt matter as long as Ferrari is disadvantaged

If Bridgestone hadn't nailed their colours so firmly to Ferrari in the first place, maybe they would have other teams on board who could add to the testing miles.

[N I Tram]

Ferrari have had a big advantage in the last few yers through having Bridgestone tyres designed purely for them, and seeing them lose that would be good for the sport, and for cost-cutting intentions. I'm not convinced the test tracks are a major advantage - they had those during their lowest ebb in the early 90s.

[pitcrew]

but testings the only way the smaller teams will ever have a chance of catching up!

[N I Tram]

Incorrect. All the teams have caught up with the mid-2003 pace already. The problem is that the top teams are pushing the boundaries even further, through doing so much more testing because they can afford it. The more testing is required to get competitve, the more expensive F1 becomes for Jordan and Minardi (and for Red Bull/Midland/Dubai, who could feasibly represent the 3 types of new F1 entrant over the next decade).

[johnh875]

Originally Posted by joe rossi

If Bridgestone hadn't nailed their colours so firmly to Ferrari in the first place, maybe they would have other teams on board who could add to the testing miles.

Agreed. Besides, can anyone tell me how you would tell the difference between "team" testing and "tyre" testing anyway?

[Glen]

As far as I recall the only team to switch away from Bridgestone because of alleged favouritism towards Ferrari has been McLaren. Even that I take with a pinch of salt - Ron Dennis not being one to miss an opportunity to spin a story against his biggest rival. The simple reason that most of the best teams are on the Michelins is that they are better, and have been for the best part of two years. What we're left with is that Bridgestone really only have one team that can afford to test sufficiently to have a tyre development programme at all - vs five or more seriously well funded Michelin teams that are able, to a degree, to collude and pool information for the building of the best possible tyres. It is hard to see a conclusion that will work other than a spec tyre, which would be radically cheaper all round. Unfortunately, the last thing the other teams want is Ferrari on the same rubber as them, because it would would remove one of the very few competitive edges that they currently enjoy ever them.