Andretti F1 - 2025

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

I had not bothered with a clause to drop a team at all.

I think there are multiple valid approaches. And mine only is on the pre-condition that they are not going to allow extra teams in. Which I prefer to not be the situation. I prefer more teams.

One of my concerns with my proposal is the propagation of two tier system by having teams getting some type of special classification. I like the payout being weighted towards the top of the grid. That might address some of my concerns.

I haven't fully digested your proposal, but I tend to think that before the big teams agree to anything (yours or mine) they would negotiate protections that us as fans and especially those who are driving toward a more "sports" oriented solution (such as yours) would not be happy with. And FOM feels the big teams are the "product" and are likely to give them special considerations to ensure their participation.

My biggest wish is for the sport to not be to big. For budgets to be smaller. For manufactures to not be in the sport, or at least have much less influence (driven by the commercial rights holder).

I fear we are moving far off topic. At least I am. I mean this is about solving the problem Andretti is experiencing, but it's just a big thought experiment that is unlikely to happen anytime soon. I expect the next Concorde agreement to be much the same as the current, but with a rework on the anti-dilution values/process and maybe small adjustments to the cap ex spending limits.

Richard

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Richard C

I think there are multiple valid approaches. And mine only is on the pre-condition that they are not going to allow extra teams in. Which I prefer to not be the situation. I prefer more teams.

One of my concerns with my proposal is the propagation of two tier system by having teams getting some type of special classification. I like the payout being weighted towards the top of the grid. That might address some of my concerns.

I haven't fully digested your proposal, but I tend to think that before the big teams agree to anything (yours or mine) they would negotiate protections that us as fans and especially those who are driving toward a more "sports" oriented solution (such as yours) would not be happy with. And FOM feels the big teams are the "product" and are likely to give them special considerations to ensure their participation.

My biggest wish is for the sport to not be to big. For budgets to be smaller. For manufactures to not be in the sport, or at least have much less influence (driven by the commercial rights holder).

I fear we are moving far off topic. At least I am. I mean this is about solving the problem Andretti is experiencing, but it's just a big thought experiment that is unlikely to happen anytime soon. I expect the next Concorde agreement to be much the same as the current, but with a rework on the anti-dilution values/process and maybe small adjustments to the cap ex spending limits.

Richard

I'm agreeing that the top end manufacturers be it RBRPT or AMG-Mercedes or Ferrari, McLaren, Alpine all might have some arguments but if they are doing a good job, have most of the money, own the powertrain side of the business, what are they afraid of?

Someone finding an advantage in aero and catching them napping?
That is insanity bordering on psychosis.
I just named half the existing teams.
The others are racing for scraps.
In reality the next Concorde will be decided by the teams in the next few years. The more powerful the team, the greater the influence.

The only way to undermine that is to expose straw man arguments and the contrived nonsense around money. Having money and access to it doesn't make you one of the best people handle it.

I spent more than a decade of my 40-year working life living and working with people who lived on less than 3-4 USD a day. Don't ever think they're not kind, gentle, generous, giving, loving, faithful or reliable.

People with money can be much worse, much more greedy, manipulative and obsessive. It's one of the reasons I question everything that comes from people with power.
So whatever is going in in politics or in business or F1, you follow the money trail and see where it takes you.

So my initial comments were, and still are to question the rhetoric so many seem to take for granted.
Dealing with the alleged loss to teams an additional team would create is one of those efforts to show the truth. The math's doesn't lie and the proportions, even if they are not exact, show where the money goes and relatively who gets it
The winning team gets double what a tenth (or 11th team in my breakdown) so you can see how much is actually needed by a smaller team.
Like RBR will get approximately 130+ million for 2023, and Hass about 65 million. But that is based on a billion for 2023 and the reports indicate a higher payout was on the cards.

The previous Concorde was very specific about dispensations, allowances for Ferrari and McLaren, etc. I would expect the present one is similar in layout.

It is not an agreement that would give Liberty a lot of latitude in payouts to the teams and is very much like a negotiated settlement.

My system isn't two tiers. it is a single line with one team without a step on the ladder if there were 12 teams and 11 rungs on the ladder. No different to having ten rungs and Andretti as the tenth team.

IndyCar isn't a lot different. The top 22 entries across the year get $915000 each and the rest get nothing. They have to pull in what they can from drivers and sponsors. Only the Indy 500 pays real prize money.
That is just reality.
Laurence Stroll knows what he is in for and how it works.
So far, he has done a pretty good job as an independent operator.

There is no reason why Andretti couldn't do as well across a three-year time span. That is why the final decision was so full of nonsense and self-justification.

If we do nothing on this site but unravel the self-importance and the rubbish behind the contrived arguments presented, then we are educating people or at least giving them reasons to think more critically about how our favorite sport is being managed.

That at least, makes it it worthwhile writing a post.

[GTRMagic]

Shortcuts are more fun..
Like having your bestie tilt at windmills and publicly announce a distaste for one organisation owning two teams..
Perhaps opening up an opportunity for AG to swoop in and buy…

[Tourer]

GM positive about F1 with Andretti - work still underway including contact with FOM.

Sounds positive, also that both Andretti and GM want to meet with FOM after missing that email invitation from FOM. No doubt one of the things they'll be looking for is some kind of surety regarding 2028, so that they can keep working & investing towards that.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Tourer

GM positive about F1 with Andretti - work still underway including contact with FOM.

Sounds positive, also that both Andretti and GM want to meet with FOM after missing that email invitation from FOM. No doubt one of the things they'll be looking for is some kind of surety regarding 2028, so that they can keep working & investing towards that.

My take away from that article is...

* GM is taking the high road (good for them, I wouldn't be as gracious)
* They are calling out that the FIA approved them
* They are confident in the existing application that was turned down by FOM
* There is no way to bring an engine forward earlier than 2028 due to existing FIA power unit supplier regulations
* GM and Andretti are still partners
* They want to talk to FOM

As to the last point, I would say that no doubt, GM and Andretti want to know speak honestly and frankly in private with FOM. Given their comments, I think they also want to salvage the current entry vs. wait until some future date.

Richard

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by Richard C

As to the last point, I would say that no doubt, GM and Andretti want to know speak honestly and frankly in private with FOM. Given their comments, I think they also want to salvage the current entry vs. wait until some future date.

Richard

Perhaps an organisation with some level of ability in reading the tea leaves, in knowing that their selected team’s entry was not warming a lot of the decision makers up, would have done this behind closed doors, in the first place.

Wasn’t there a rule, or a policy or protocol some time ago that a new engine supplier entering the sport needed to, if called upon, supply engines to more than just that team? Or did I dream that?

Perhaps GM can just buy HaasF1…

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Perhaps an organisation with some level of ability in reading the tea leaves, in knowing that their selected team’s entry was not warming a lot of the decision makers up, would have done this behind closed doors, in the first place.

Exactly, although they may also have to learn to listen to the guidance given to them.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by peebee2

Exactly, although they may also have to learn to listen to the guidance given to them.

Perhaps GM might like to choose Penske as a partner.. they are already connected in IndyCar.. and are making a fair old fist of Y2 with Porsche and their Hypercar program

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Shortcuts are more fun..
Like having your bestie tilt at windmills and publicly announce a distaste for one organisation owning two teams..
Perhaps opening up an opportunity for AG to swoop in and buy…

I actually have no problem with RBR owning two teams in the championship.

Id have problem with Mercedes or Ferrari having a second team either.

And Id probably have no problem with Ferrari part owning a team with someone like Dallara and collaborating.

If I was moving right away from the present situation Id have no problem with teams selling chassis to private teams.

I'd have no problem with someone like Dallara being able to sell replicas of last year's Ferrari to private teams either.

And I'd have no problem with single car private teams like Frank Williams did for Piers Courage in 1969, or Rob Walker did for Moss and Siffert at different times.

Do people honestly buy the argument that such additions would 'dilute the value of F1' drivel?

I'd have qualifying for 26 places back too.

All of this is unlikely given the expense of the engine leases and you could run into problems like IndyCar where there aren't enough leases to go around but that just takes us back to the idea that the current engine formula is derived as an answer to the rhetoric about the planet and sustainability, so we won't delve too deeply there.

But allowing single entries and allowing used chassis or copies or the sale of chassis would allow people like stroll to set up a satellite team or a single car operation, oe rent a seat with a 'private team' for Lance.

It would have been a lot cheaper.

The sport in fact has made the cost of competing much, much, higher by the insistence on a set of parameters that add to and inflate the cost of competition.

This is also why the present rhetoric about the value of the teams is just so much nonsense.
Owning an F1 'works' team is highly inflated.
In business terms it is a joke.
It is only useful to a commercial body as an advertising and promotions vehicle as long as the return on the running and investment costs can be justified by the amount of benefit derived through publicity and success.

If that benefit doesn't add up, then the team is gone or sold.
If it is not successful, then the value is greatly reduced.

[bathurst77]

I thought this guys ideas were worth a chat

ohhhh wait

Originally Posted by bathurst77

Im in favour of opening the door to more, bring back prequally.
Maybe have a 2nd tier, lower entry fees, lower prize money and you have to prequalify each race. And of course a smaller slice of the money pie at years end. ("privateers cup" Champions vs Challengers! David and goliiath)
Race day grid is the full tier 1 cars, plus 2 or 4 cars from tier 2.

Sure theres a chance your weekend is over sat morning, but if Prequal was guaranteed full tv coverage and the team gets a run in all friday sessions plus their own prequal, thats 3 sessions on world tv for a much lower buy in.
Hell bring back customer cars for tier 2. After 3 years maybe they have to start building their own chassis. slowly build your team and ease your way in.

New team, buys a chassis from x engine from y, a couple of good pay drivers, much lower cost than playing the main game. Could even end up with RB chassis with Ferrari engine or the like.

Or can only stay in tier 2 for a few years then move up or move on...
After a few years in tier 2, they have "learned the ropes" and proven themselves, so they have to step up or step out.

Maybe allow the tier 2 winner each year enter as tier 1 the next and the lowest tier 1 is relegated, soccer style.

A Revolving door of new teams and cars regularly - sparking interest.

I like to spit ball....

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

I actually have no problem with RBR owning two teams in the championship.

Id have problem with Mercedes or Ferrari having a second team either.

And Id probably have no problem with Ferrari part owning a team with someone like Dallara and collaborating.

If I was moving right away from the present situation Id have no problem with teams selling chassis to private teams.

I'd have no problem with someone like Dallara being able to sell replicas of last year's Ferrari to private teams either.

And I'd have no problem with single car private teams like Frank Williams did for Piers Courage in 1969, or Rob Walker did for Moss and Siffert at different times.

Do people honestly buy the argument that such additions would 'dilute the value of F1' drivel?

I'd have qualifying for 26 places back too.

I'm with you all the way there! And I'd add one more:

I'd have no problem with teams running more than two cars, as Ferrari and others did in the (distant) past.

[Alan52]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

I'm with you all the way there! And I'd add one more:

I'd have no problem with teams running more than two cars, as Ferrari and others did in the (distant) past.

Are you ready to see Red Bull lock out the podium for 20 races?The top 4 teams scoring every available point in nearly every race?Yet another excuse for them to exclude new entrants?
That’s one idea I disagree with.

[RED55]

I'd have no problem with the FIA laying down the law and telling f1 it has to go up to 24 cars .

However the FIA have lost control and the liberty monster will end up having to eat it's own hand when manufacturers decide it's not selling them any electric cars

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Alan52

Are you ready to see Red Bull lock out the podium for 20 races?The top 4 teams scoring every available point in nearly every race?Yet another excuse for them to exclude new entrants?
That’s one idea I disagree with.

In a reasonable situation Id have no problem with third cars for anyone.
But I would have some caveats on the situation of running a third car.

My reasoning runs around the existence of the constructors championship which would in effect become a 'teams' championship in those points scored for the teams' championship would be limited to the two nominated cars for the season.
The third car could be run by the team but not be eligible for points.
But if a third car was run by a separate team entry that team would score points under its own name.
This is also behind he ide of teams able to sell cars or run a 'B' tea so the VCARB situation becomes a non-issue as some people are talking things up at the moment.

It would be more likely then that teams would either have a 'B; team or it would be more effective to sell chassis to an effective privateer as Rob Walker was or Frank Williams was for several years.

And no. I don't think that we would see RBR dominating the podium all year. Not at all.

The possibility of someone doing a Wolf and Scheckter thing may be remote but Brawn was effectively such a surprise, and again it was an aero idea that no one else had thought of until it actually happened...

[S griffin]

I think running third cars would not be practical in the long run. Really would just help the top teams more of an advantage. If teams could run third cars on a one off basis, that would be a different story, but I can't see that happening. Really the FIA need to try to encourage more F1 teams to join, despite what FOM, Liberty and the other teams think.

[steve_r]

3rd cars are not needed. Another couple of new teams would be welcome though. Doh.

[porsche962fan]

look at 1977 for example, it's just amazing how many teams and privateers there were
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977_Formula_One_season

some Grand prix had near 40 cars entered !! and only 26 could start

https://www.racingsportscars.com/f1/...977-07-16.html

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by porsche962fan

look at 1977 for example, it's just amazing how many teams and privateers there were
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977_Formula_One_season

some Grand prix had near 40 cars entered !! and only 26 could start

https://www.racingsportscars.com/f1/...977-07-16.html

It would be interesting to know what the team budgets were in 1977 when adjusted for inflation. What the budget was for top vs bottom teams and what was felt was needed from a budget perspective to be actually competitive. I suspect some of this might be known (top teams), but I can imagine some of this might be lost to time. I am asking with the expectation that the seasonal budgets were much less than today. The schedule looks smaller (meaning overall smaller budget due to less travel) and I also wonder (I really don't know the answer to this) how many of that large number of teams/entrants travelled to all of the races that season or if there happened to be a large number of entrants in locations like Silverstone given it's proximity to the center of gravity of F1 then and now (UK).

Richard

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by porsche962fan

look at 1977 for example, it's just amazing how many teams and privateers there were
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977_Formula_One_season

some Grand prix had near 40 cars entered !! and only 26 could start

https://www.racingsportscars.com/f1/...977-07-16.html

Wow, some curious ones who didn’t show up at the British GP. Notably Derek Bell

[Tourer]

"Process was followed" according to Domenicali in rejection of Andretti "pre GM" entry.

He also says that work is due to start on the new Concorde Agreement very soon, which is good news - sooner the terms of that are known, better for all concerned I think.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by Tourer

"Process was followed" according to Domenicali in rejection of Andretti "pre GM" entry.

He also says that work is due to start on the new Concorde Agreement very soon, which is good news - sooner the terms of that are known, better for all concerned I think.

I’d like to know how it was different from the FIA’s process that accepted Andretti

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I’d like to know how it was different from the FIA’s process that accepted Andretti

Well we don't have the exact specifics but the indication has been that FIA looks at sporting issues & acceptance (or not) and FOM at commercial issues & acceptance (or not).

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Tourer

"Process was followed" according to Domenicali in rejection of Andretti "pre GM" entry.

He also says that work is due to start on the new Concorde Agreement very soon, which is good news - sooner the terms of that are known, better for all concerned I think.

The first thing that comes to my mind is that GM had said they wanted to talk with FOM about the response. Especially given the missed meeting. I don't know if that happened or not, or if this is FOM saying.... "Nope, we are done talking about this."

Richard

[GTRMagic]

There is a video floating around in instagram suggesting that Andretti Global has opened a new facility at Silverstone for the F1 project.
There are a heap of people in the video, all in Andretti attire..
With patriarch Mario in the clip talking about it being the next step..
To what I don’t know..

Is this like St Edwards Hospital from Yes Minister fame?
Fully staffed, fully equipped, most efficient hospital in the NHS.. except they didn’t have the budget to take on patients…

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

There is a video floating around in instagram suggesting that Andretti Global has opened a new facility at Silverstone for the F1 project.
There are a heap of people in the video, all in Andretti attire..
With patriarch Mario in the clip talking about it being the next step..
To what I don’t know..

Is this like St Edwards Hospital from Yes Minister fame?
Fully staffed, fully equipped, most efficient hospital in the NHS.. except they didn’t have the budget to take on patients…