|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
1 Aug 2018, 17:26 (Ref:3840699) | #351 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 7,979
|
Quote:
It's... funny? |
||
|
1 Aug 2018, 18:31 (Ref:3840708) | #352 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
|
||
|
1 Aug 2018, 18:45 (Ref:3840710) | #353 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,945
|
Quote:
It's basic economics, and why not every company in the world can be the size of Apple, Amazon and Microsoft. Not everyone can be the 'winner'. Now, you need the small teams more than ever because we no longer have the Minardi, Forti and Simtek teams coming in to prop up the back of the grid. The entry barrier to the series is too high now, so possibly entries are limited. So whilst losing teams before didn't matter, because there were others ready to take the spot, now it does because there isn't anyone to take it. |
||
|
1 Aug 2018, 18:46 (Ref:3840712) | #354 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,323
|
At the rate Force India was going with being obstructionist in previous votes to allow payments to teams ahead of schedule and now wanting a bending of the rules for themselves. A stupid rule yes, but one they have used to their advantage before, so yes, you reap what your dumbass owner has sown. And I used to like Force India as the underdog team but they (VJ and occasionally team comments but mostly VJ) have become insufferable and honestly could not care any less if they are forced to fold.
As for the baseless argument of think of the jobs, first nothing I buy supports them so I have not contributed anything to their well-being, have you? Fly Kingfisher often, drink any of his liquors, buy water systems? No, then what have you contributed to helping them stay afloat. And if you actually think any of the people employed by the team wouldn't be able to find jobs, likely without having to relocate, is childish and frankly a baseless complaint. Please show ANY, even 1% of their employees, of their workforce who would be unemployed from closure of the team. |
|
|
1 Aug 2018, 18:53 (Ref:3840713) | #355 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,700
|
Because without the smaller teams the grid would be much smaller and attract lower numbers of people either at the circuit or on TV, as numbers dwindle so does the money and then F1 ceases to exist. Only a few teams can win races but no one wants to see races with only a tiny number of cars starting.
|
||
|
1 Aug 2018, 19:01 (Ref:3840715) | #356 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
|
How so? If you force the big manufacturers to enter 4 or 5 cars you're right back where we started. Looking at how many of the teams are already simply factory B teams that doesn't even seem too far fetched.
|
|
|
1 Aug 2018, 19:34 (Ref:3840717) | #357 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,945
|
Quote:
Between 2008 and 2009, BMW, Toyota and Honda all left. Given the massive increase in costs in the last decade, there's no guarantee that if such a situation happened now, that the teams could survive after being handed over to private teams (which would make them small teams again...). So if they were entering 4-5 cars per team, then under that format, they would have lost 12-15 cars. All because the teams were spending huge amounts of money and not winning...a problem which would be further exaggerated if manufacturers were supplying 4-5 car teams. Also, by putting the series in such a situation where a big team leaving kills the series, you completely destroy the political power balance. Now any team can hold a knife to the throat of the series, knowing that if they leave, you need to suddenly find 5 cars. That doesn't sound too healthy. So yes, you do need the small teams. That's why literally every series in the entire world has them. When WEC tried without them, they had to pretty rapidly run back to them when everyone left. Those teams with the 3 cars had quite an impact when they were no longer there. |
||
|
1 Aug 2018, 19:36 (Ref:3840718) | #358 | ||
Registered User
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 175
|
Quote:
|
||
|
1 Aug 2018, 19:38 (Ref:3840719) | #359 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,613
|
And variety is nice too.
Yes, technically F1 can survive without them and doesn’t need them, but it’s better they are there for variety’s sake and strength in numbers. A team like Force India and its past guises to a greater or lesser extent have added to the pleasure of watching F1. |
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
1 Aug 2018, 19:43 (Ref:3840721) | #360 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,721
|
The bottom line is that, as in all competitive sport, someone has to be last. Smaller, more modestly funded teams (for whom motor racing is the raison d’être) are more likely to put up with that than megabucks manufacturers (see Toyota et al as mentioned above).
|
||
|
1 Aug 2018, 19:43 (Ref:3840722) | #361 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,945
|
Quote:
Just look at the collapses of BTCC, WEC, ALMS, CCWS etc when the teams all left and nobody could replace them. Series were either bought/folded or had to do dramatic changes to survive. BTCC has learnt the lesson and now caters for the small teams quite significantly. Be proactive, not reactive. And don't build yourself into a situation where the only possible long-term outcome is a sudden collapse. |
||
|
1 Aug 2018, 19:45 (Ref:3840723) | #362 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,873
|
Quote:
Quote:
Richard |
|||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
1 Aug 2018, 19:57 (Ref:3840727) | #363 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
|
Quote:
So instead of the private teams we would have 4 or 5 cars each from the manufacturers. Sort of ironically it would then be even more about individual driver skill since there would be more good drivers in the fastest cars. And since the factories will be forced to build many more cars costs can come down as well. You could also stipulate a minimum amount of cars like now so manufacturers will be incentivized to make sure enough rival manufacturers join to fill the grid. Ahum, anyway. I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here, I do enjoy the smaller teams if only for variety's sake. But I feel sometimes it's necessary to remind people that some clichés don't necessarily hold true (anymore). When someone just flatout says 'we need small private teams' without saying why my trigger finger starts itching. Sorry for the mostly off-topic hypothetical. |
||
|
1 Aug 2018, 20:06 (Ref:3840729) | #364 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,945
|
If the situation is such that the small teams are all on the verge of collapse, and the big teams leaving causes a problem, then the solution is not to kill off the remaining small teams, and give the big teams more power to the point of having so much that one leaving would cause a violation of FOMs commercial contracts.
I appreciated the point about driver skill, and for fans it might work, but the Toyota and BMW board rooms don't consider that. It wouldn't stop a massive and sudden collapse of the series upon the next diesel scandal. We need small teams and we need private teams because without them you have a grid of about 4 teams. If there were more big teams wanting to be in F1, they'd be here now. So if you then say each team needs 4-5 cars, then when Mercedes and Renault leave (which they will eventually), you're up the unpleasant creek without a paddle. They are most certainly, 100%, definitely, without a doubt, a requirement to the long-term stability of the series. Given the current topic, I don't think this is very off topic or requires an apology - given the lack of small teams, the situation of Force India is pretty tied in with it right now. |
|
|
1 Aug 2018, 23:14 (Ref:3840775) | #365 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
2 Aug 2018, 00:00 (Ref:3840776) | #366 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 324
|
Quote:
The manufacturers are being spoken of as a block. There are, however, three (Perhaps four) distinctly different levels/models of involvement. You would separate Honda and Renault and make a distinction between them and the other two. MB and Ferrari have much the same level of involvement and funding but for my 10 cents worth Ferrari and "knowing what's best for the sport" should never be used in the same sentence. (I am not saying you did, by the way) Much of the interest in F1 used to be the diversity and the random improvements/one off good performances of the smaller teams. That is now gone. Gone because the available funding and required levels of expenditure do not allow anyone that is not a factory outfit to compete. This year it FI is struggling, last year it was Sauber. If it wasn't for their state ownership it would be McLaren next. And why? Because there isn't enough money left after the first three of four teams have had their fill. Distribute it more evenly and the lower ranked teams can compete better and survive better. The good ones may even prosper, which is how it should be. |
||
|
2 Aug 2018, 05:47 (Ref:3840797) | #367 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,181
|
Joe Saward reporting that it is believed that Lawrence Stroll paid the Force India salaries this week. ...
Sent from my SM-T310 using Tapatalk |
|
|
2 Aug 2018, 12:00 (Ref:3840842) | #368 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,323
|
Quote:
I highly doubt we will see anything change with the team through administration and it end up as Stroll Racing in the end. And hopefully Claire and the rest end up with egg completely coating their face in the next round of LM payout schedules for being blindly pigheaded and wanting the cash they have not earned. FI earned the cash and only BE's greed made they able to block it. Guarantee somewhere in the legalese of the name change means no money next season and management gets some of the seized money for his daughters to buy another bauble. Now I guess it's for LM to buy another media outlet. |
||
|
2 Aug 2018, 13:09 (Ref:3840850) | #369 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,580
|
Quote:
A link to this would be appreciated. Quote:
An explanation of what you are trying to say would be appreciated. Some of it doesn't seem to make sense. And this article from the BBC throws some light on why the three teams are not happy with the proposals about the changes to the ownership of Force India. It's not just about the money. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/45026461 |
||||
|
2 Aug 2018, 13:43 (Ref:3840859) | #370 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,721
|
Hmmm. I’m not really sure I believe that Renault, McLaren and Williams are really being obstructive purely for the health of the sport. Call me a cynic.
|
||
|
2 Aug 2018, 13:57 (Ref:3840861) | #371 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,945
|
Williams blocked it due to not wanting a two tier system, but also said they'd consider being a Mercedes B-Team if they had to. I don't buy it, sorry.
|
|
|
2 Aug 2018, 14:01 (Ref:3840862) | #372 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,721
|
Quite. Sauce for the goose and all that.
|
||
|
2 Aug 2018, 14:02 (Ref:3840863) | #373 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,580
|
That's not what they are saying in reality; they acknowledge that they are looking out for their own interest, primarily.
Their objection is that, from what they know that is going on behind the scenes, and to which we are not privy, it would appear that Mercedes are considering using what is left of of Force India to become a satellite team. And their concern is that if this trend is allowed to continue, it will put them out of business, because they cannot compete under those conditions. They also have concerns that, off the track, Mercedes and Ferrari are acting as connected parties and that this is not beneficial for the sport. |
||
|
2 Aug 2018, 14:33 (Ref:3840878) | #374 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,302
|
One thing for sure, if Mr Stroll has paid the wages, there has to be something in it for him.
|
|
|
2 Aug 2018, 14:46 (Ref:3840882) | #375 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,748
|
it might be a moot point that Williams and Mclaren are making (this ship for satellite teams has already sailed) but nevertheless, i find myself agreeing with their sentiment.
along with Red Bull, these are the only teams with the clout to stand up to the manus and personally i think they deserve more support from the fans in this....surely most of us agree that the manus hold too much control as it is. the one thing i really dont understand is why Renault is taking issue with this. surely as a manufacturer they are looking to lock up suppliers for themselves and the more parts they can sell and thus defer the costs of their own works program the better. if they feel strongly about this then they should advocate for a lower engine cost formula. rather they could work towards eliminating the conditions (high costs) that make running a satellite team a viable option. but they are not going to do that. selling engines and parts is far too profitable. |
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
Tags |
diageo, force india, formula 1 |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fisichella and Force India. | ralf fan | Formula One | 23 | 20 Apr 2008 10:49 |
Force India livery | 429CJ | Formula One | 47 | 1 Jan 2008 13:14 |
Who will get the second Force India seat? | cds_uk | Formula One | 47 | 29 Nov 2007 01:04 |
Asian F3 Champion to receive test in Force India F1 Car | Asa | National & International Single Seaters | 20 | 24 Nov 2007 21:40 |
Spyker to be named "Force India" | Red Bulldog | Formula One | 81 | 1 Nov 2007 19:51 |