|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
5 Jan 2017, 14:14 (Ref:3700308) | #151 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,007
|
None of us on this forum really know the detail of driver's personal position and it is fruitless to speculate on such detail. Given that all the current cars are within about 105% the question remains, would a team make more, or faster progress up the grid by placing more emphasis on talent than budget
|
||
|
5 Jan 2017, 14:51 (Ref:3700321) | #152 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,857
|
Quote:
To your question directly above "talent or budget". It's not an "either/or" proposition. You need a budget to get talent. And the talent is not all on the driver side. To the larger question... the focus should be on obtaining stable funding, so you can build a quality team that can work well together. I think some teams may subscribe to the "super chicken" model. Watch this for details... https://www.ted.com/talks/margaret_h..._order_at_work Personally, I am somewhat leery of taking the behaviour of chickens to model human behaviour, but... I generally agree with the problem with super chicken organizations. So in short, it's maybe less important to hire an Adrian Newey as it is to have a team that works well together (if you can do both, even better!). I don't know much about Force India, but they seem to be doing something right with a smaller budget. I suspect it is high productivity via good teamwork and management. Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
5 Jan 2017, 16:53 (Ref:3700347) | #153 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,007
|
Well Richard, my initial proposition was that if a team gets extra money where is it best to spend it, driver ability or engineering. I do agree that long term, better engineering is likely to give lasting benefit but I also have had a bee in my bonnet for quite a while that we may not be attracting the very best drivers to F1 because of an over reliance on budget contribution.
The Autosport piece that set me off suggests that tenths of a second cost millions to find for the top teams and I feel drivers offer teams such as Manor more bang for their buck. Comparing drivers ability is difficult and one of my connections feels that at the top level of motorsport we pay too little attention to driver coaching. I have no way of answering the question but how many top drivers, not just in F1 but in all world series actually have a coach as would be the case with a top golfer or tennis player? And how many tenths would a coach find? |
||
|
8 May 2017, 21:39 (Ref:3732335) | #154 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,549
|
Autosport has published what the F1 teams got in terms of FOM money for last year
Ferrari was top of the pile with $180 million US$, Haas were at the bottom with $19 million. Interestingly Force India who finished one place behind Ferrari in the constructors championship only got $72 million which is about 40% of what Ferrari got. http://classic.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/129388 |
|
|
9 May 2017, 01:10 (Ref:3732353) | #155 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
I assume Renault is losing money due to having taken the team back over, although I thought that negotiation of the historical payments lapsing had been a sticking point and had been "sorted out" with Bernie because they were a manufacturer. |
||
|
10 May 2017, 06:23 (Ref:3732582) | #156 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
^^ No takers?
Last edited by wnut; 10 May 2017 at 06:38. |
|
|
10 May 2017, 18:04 (Ref:3732700) | #157 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,744
|
indeed, Renault were looking for historical payments as a requirement for their return but i dont recall how those negotiations worked out. i would assume they did work out as Renault came back.
but from the current summary it does not seem like they get anything extra at all from the prize fund (which may require unanimous consent by the teams to change) so if i was to venture a guess then i would say they received a special payment from outside the prize fund? as for Mclaren...im not sure which years but i think i read that it covers wins over a four year period (maybe read it on Saward). i havent looked at the points table but with a several wins in 2012 im assuming the calculation is based on 2012 and 2015...in which case they wont be seeing that bonus next year. |
||
__________________
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 |
10 May 2017, 19:57 (Ref:3732716) | #158 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,857
|
My main comment is that it's interesting how those figures all line up in neat columns with nice names like "Long Standing Team". When in reality... It's just teams who wanted (and negotiated) more money, so FOM just creates categories and formulas to generate the expected outcome. Sort of makes it look like there was a grand scheme to begin with.
Generally speaking I think the foundation should be a simple equitable payout system. Beyond there being powerful loosers in that scenario and something like this would require some real strength by Liberty to say "no" to the likes of Ferrari.... I see the problem of it creating something similar to the "Start and Park" scenario in NASCAR. I don't follow NASCAR, but I am aware of the concept. It is teams who really don't try hard, but still get money. You show up, run little in the way of practice and after a few laps in the race retire due to a "mechanical issue" and then collect a purse for last place. It becomes profitable because you never really spend the money required to run a full race or be competitive. But I am sure some solution could be found. I think NASCAR has something that combats that issue. Richard |
|
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
16 Jul 2017, 11:51 (Ref:3751666) | #159 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,559
|
This forum's least favourite journalist has written to confirm that the UK's Serious Fraud Office (SFO) is to carry out a "thorough examination" of potential bribery allegations concerning the signing of the 2013 Concorde Agreement. This follows a formal complaint from the Chairman of the House of Common's Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee into how certain payments are or will be paid to certain teams, payments to the FIA and also how certain teams have privileged voting rights over certain matters.
Mind you, based on past experience , all the current participants could have left this mortal coil by the time that the SFO has finished it's deliberations, and it's track record both in the courts and prior negotiations leave a lot to be desired. They could learn a lot from the American corporate justice system. |
||
|
12 Aug 2018, 10:01 (Ref:3843131) | #160 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
F1 teams take a $23 Million hit in April - June 2nd Quarter of 2018.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/t...-drop/3155760/ Best Liberty stops fiddling and gets on with improving the racing. |
|
|
12 Aug 2018, 12:23 (Ref:3843156) | #161 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6,081
|
Thanks to their massive marketing costs and overhead as opposed to the old regime.
|
||
|
13 Aug 2018, 16:18 (Ref:3843408) | #162 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,744
|
improving the racing is not a matter entirely within their control though...and most definitely not a problem that can be solved by more money flowing to the teams. if anything, history has shown us that more money equals more problems in F1.
certainly Liberty are investing more into the sport but i feel they are also agreeing to/more amenable to signing more favourable hosting deals then the prior regime. this will also mean less money coming but necessary for the sports long term future and essential for the more 'historic' venues by allowing them to compete with state run/funded races of the BE era. also their attempts to transition from the lucrative traditional TV deals to self funded online service is a benefit for the fans. anyways, in this, i read less money for the teams as a synonym for the current owners being less greedy and more forward looking then the prior regime...for me this alone is a win in Liberty's column. |
||
__________________
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 |
13 Aug 2018, 16:58 (Ref:3843413) | #163 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,559
|
As E.B. says, a considerable amount of the reduction in profits is attributable to the way that Liberty are running FOM now.
In Mr E's days, he ran the business, because that is what it is, from a room in his London apartment with the assistance of one full time member of staff; I don't think that there were even any part-timers in the "organisation". The moment Liberty took over, they leased an office building in one of the most expensive parts of London, and it is stuffed full of very well remunerated staff to carry out all the things that BCE did virtually single handed. And can anyone say with their hands on their hearts that, so far at least, they are doing a better job than Bernie. OK, I acknowledge that they are trying to open up F1 to modern media outlets, but reports and comments that I have read say that that is not going extremely well at the moment. So as has been said about something else, what has Liberty ever done for us? |
||
|
13 Aug 2018, 17:11 (Ref:3843417) | #164 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,932
|
Quote:
That's a change that's going to pay off massively with younger generations, especially current pre-teens and teenagers. |
||
|
13 Aug 2018, 17:35 (Ref:3843426) | #165 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,744
|
hand on heart....well thats a difficult one there Mike.
i would be curious to hear from people who have attended races this year about what changes they have seen. are the events more fan/family friendly, driver access for autographs and Q&As, changes to track side experience, fan zones etc...is the price of admission a better value today then it was under BE's tenure? Liberty has promised to improve the fan experience but, to be honest, i have no idea how well they have executed on those promises. |
||
__________________
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 |
13 Aug 2018, 17:38 (Ref:3843429) | #166 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,559
|
Quote:
As I said, I acknowledge that. Quote:
Well, I can only base my observations from knowing my two teenage grandchildren. And neither of them are in the least enthused by watching any motor sport, regardless of the format. Which upsets their two grandfathers no end, what with one having raced saloons in the distant past, and the other having been a co-driver/navigator to the McRae family in the past. It is peculiar that we have tried to interest them in the sport, but it doesn't ignite any sparks. We've taken them to the British GP, various BTCC meetings, go-karting and my son always has both F1 and BTCC weekends on the box. But nothing, although one grandchild has enjoyed messing around with motor racing on his PlayStation or Xbox. And I asked both of the youngsters whether any of the chums had any interest, and both said no; but they loved football! So, although both of them trawl through YouTube on a regular basis, they never look for motor sport. |
||||
|
13 Aug 2018, 17:50 (Ref:3843432) | #167 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,932
|
Quote:
You won't turn a non-motorsport fan into a motorsport fan using YouTube. But if your potential motorsport fans use YouTube, then you won't get them if you don't even embrace the platform. We ask what Liberty has done for us, and I'd say attempting to future proof for the next generation (something BE had no interest in) is a good one. The YouTube change is more important than just getting to search for some Montoya clips. Aren't they also introducing a dedicated streaming service? I don't think it's available in the UK due to the existing BE Sky contract, but that's pretty good, isn't it? Certainly, I prefer watching WEC, ELMS and Blancpain through their dedicated service rather than hoping a TV Channel (which is more expensive, despite the constant advert breaks) carries it. |
||
|
13 Aug 2018, 18:54 (Ref:3843448) | #168 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,585
|
Well they have shown they don’t have short term profit as the number one priority. They could have increased their income by not spending as much.
Are things changing, well there is more access in some ways and things are changing. Not everything, clearly and not always at the pace we impatiently want. Some of the bigger things take longer as they are constrained by contracts and legacy of voting etc... Are things changing in every area the way I would like. No. Are they concentrating on the right things? They are looking at everything and sometimes the easy things to change aren’t the biggest. That doesn’t mean you ignore them, it doesn’t have to be sequential, they can look at more than one thing at once. |
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Anyone who can finance this beauty for me? | Marcus666 | Formula One | 16 | 29 Sep 2012 18:03 |
Car Finance | Carrie | Road Car Forum | 12 | 22 Mar 2002 12:35 |
F1 Finance & Bernie's Empire | Schume | Formula One | 1 | 17 Jul 2000 16:42 |