Bye, bye, Ferrari?

[JSR]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8044860.stm

So, Ferrari don't want a two-tier championship? It's funny that they were not quite so discerning before when we had a two-tier championship - divided by the "haves" and "have nots" when Ferrari were one of the "haves".

Seems to me that Ferrari are afraid of not being the number one team anymore. They've fallen back this year, are a team littered with silly mistakes, and feel they can't pick themselves up with either of the options (all the money and limited freedom or all the freedom and limited money) open to them next year.

If the lesser teams can cope with smaller budgets, why can't Ferrari? Yes, Formula 1 is meant to be "the best of the best" but if the only way to be the best is to throw money at your problems, then maybe you're not the best after all.

[coupekid]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

Toys and Pram spring to mind!
no doubt Bernie et al will (as usual) bow down to their demands, and make sure they dont leave though.

[peter]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

Toys and Pram spring to mind!
no doubt Bernie et al will (as usual) bow down to their demands, and make sure they dont leave though.

I did not post anything about this as it will not happen. Also they are not the only team that feel this way. Red bull and BMW more or less said the same thing at the weekend.

[JSR]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

I did not post anything about this as it will not happen. Also they are not the only team that feel this way. Red bull and BMW more or less said the same thing at the weekend.

Personally, I think the media are scraping around for "shock" headlines.

The one before the Ferrari leaving headline was "Barrichello will hang up his helmet if team favours Button".

Which, of course, is like the Ferrari headline. If you read Barrichello's words, he actually said something along the lines of "I'll quit if the team favours him over me, but I know it won't happen" - which was presumably the only response he could give to a direct question of "what will you do if the team favours Jenson?". So, as usual, taking it out of context.

The Ferrari thing isn't quite the same because they have released a statement following a board meeting effectively stating that if the FIA don't cow-tow to them on the subject of the budget cap, they will pull out.

This places the FIA in quite an awkward position. Recent events have gone a long way to prove that the "F" in "FIA" doesn't stand for "Ferrari" but if they now cow-tow to Ferrari's demands, then they may was well not be there. If, for every decision they make in the future, Ferrari just needs to deliver the "do as we say or we'll leave" ultimatum, then the FIA will just become the lame duck of governing bodies. After all, Ferrari may as well have said "declare the Brawn diffuser illegal, otherwise we'll leave F1" just to get their own way on that.

Once the FIA starts on this slippery slope, they'll never be able to get off it. Ferrari should have found a better way of voicing their concerns without giving such a public ultimatum.

The Ferrari statement also goes on to say how much profit and turnover they've had in the last three months - almost on a par with last year. This isn't about a two-tier regulation system, this is about Ferrari having the money and wanting to spend it while not being restricted by the regulations. They want to have their cake and eat it.

[peter]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

I did not post anything about this as it will not happen. Also they are not the only team that feel this way. Red bull and BMW more or less said the same thing at the weekend.

Renault have now joined the group. So its looks like we may have to watch gp2 next year if this carries on.

[JSR]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

Renault have now joined the group. So its looks like we may have to watch gp2 next year if this carries on.

Perhaps Ferrari, Renault, BMW, and Red Bull should start a separate Formula One.

Then there would be a two-tier system. "F1a for the fat cats with loadsamoney" and "F1b for the cheapskates".

You don't get more "two tier" than that!

[peter]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

Perhaps Ferrari, Renault, BMW, and Red Bull should start a separate Formula One.

Then there would be a two-tier system. "F1a for the fat cats with loadsamoney" and "F1b for the cheapskates".

You don't get more "two tier" than that!

Ok lets put this nice and simply. What does F1 mean to you ?

I would like to think F1 is at the top of the motor sport tree. Yes or No

So if a team has the money spend it heck football teams spend daft amounts of money so why not the car makers. If you cannot spend the money you do not go racing.

Now do not get me wrong I want f1 to go on yes I would like more teams in it BUT it must not be dumbed down. Also if the FIA want the teams to save money why make them change the cars all the time bringing in new rules and to top it off how much money has KERS cost each team is that value for money I think not.

Also it has always been a 2 tier system as there will always be teams that seem to go no where. Ok so Brawn may have bucked that trend this year but for how long will it really last ?. So it may well end up a 3 tier system if the FIA have their way.

[JSR]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

Ok lets put this nice and simply. What does F1 mean to you ?

I would like to think F1 is at the top of the motor sport tree. Yes or No

So if a team has the money spend it heck football teams spend daft amounts of money so why not the car makers. If you cannot spend the money you do not go racing.

Now do not get me wrong I want f1 to go on yes I would like more teams in it BUT it must not be dumbed down. Also if the FIA want the teams to save money why make them change the cars all the time bringing in new rules and to top it off how much money has KERS cost each team is that value for money I think not.

Also it has always been a 2 tier system as there will always be teams that seem to go no where. Ok so Brawn may have bucked that trend this year but for how long will it really last ?. So it may well end up a 3 tier system if the FIA have their way.

I wasn't seriously suggesting that there should be two Formula Ones (even if there was, everyone from the cheapskates would soon jump ship and join Ferrari anyway!). You saw the smilies, I take it?

There has always been a two-tier system split firmly between the "have nots" and the "haves". The more money a team has, the more they're in the "haves" group. If a team doesn't have the money, they'll forever be a back marker - with everyone constantly saying every year "why do they bother when they know they can't win"? (Which is presumably why Honda pulled out and new teams won't join up.)

The Brawns bucked the trends precisely because the regulations were changed, leaving many teams on their back foot. This has (for me) caused a shake-up resulting in the most enjoyable season of F1 for years. I can't honestly say that this has been a bad thing.

In principle, I don't see an issue with allowing teams to either spend all the money in the world *or* have a little more freedom. It would help to bring the back markers up to the same level as the "haves". While the "haves" spend all the money they want and race ahead of the field, the "have nots" have a little more flexibility to allow them to catch up.

If the "have nots" are encouraged to catch up with the "haves" then we'd ultimately end up with a more mixed field - we wouldn't have endless years of just two teams dominating with everyone else just making up the numbers.

In principle, I don't see an issue with saying to the teams "either you can spend all the money you want, or you can show us how technically innovative you can be on less money". Because, for all that Formula 1 is meant to be the "best of the best", it should surely be the best for technical innovation - not the best for throwing money at their problems because the regulations have stagnated and everyone's afraid of changing them.

What does F1 mean to me? It means exciting races with the best drivers in the world driving the fastest cars in the world in which any team could win - it doesn't mean yet another year of the same two cars slugging it out for supremacy.

If you cannot spend the money you do not go racing.

Under that philosophy, everyone except Ferrari and McLaren may as well pack up and go home. We'll just have four cars racing around the circuits. That'll be very entertaining - not! Should Brawn not have bothered taking over the Honda team this year, given that he didn't have the money and "if you can't spend the money, you don't go racing"..?

With sponsors pulling out left, right, and center, there is certain to end up with quite a large number of teams that "can't spend the money". Perhaps none of them should go racing?

If something isn't done to save F1 now, it won't matter how fat Ferrari's pockets are when they're the only car racing. For teams to cry about the FIA creating a two-tier system when there is already a two-tier system created by those teams seems folly of the first order.

But that's just me. Maybe I just don't see the big picture?

[peter]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

Quick answer because I will be off to work soon. I agree with what yo are saying but its the amount of money they are saying the teams can have is just to low.

[JSR]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

Quick answer because I will be off to work soon. I agree with what yo are saying but its the amount of money they are saying the teams can have is just to low.

[Patrick]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

I am a neutral on this subject, not that interested in F1 except as a flag waiving exercise, I like to see British success in all sports whether or not I like the sport.

I can see both arguments for limiting and setting a ceiling on budgets, the analogy with soccer is a fair one, but then I believe some sort of control should be applied there as well. That said the money spent on soccer is mostly transfer and wages costs, a relatively small amount going to develop the game. With F1 new technology emerges that feeds into the motor industry
Why try and cap costs in such a two tier way, I am probably missing the point but surely if it is to be done it should be none by capping the same for all teams take it or leave it, no ifs this and ifs that.
My take would be leave development costs levels to the teams and their sponsors and put other factors into place such as limited fuel use to encourage engine efficiency, tyre development and safety measures that could be as I mentioned reach the general motor industry to benefit us all eventually.

Patrick

[Ian]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

Perhaps Ferrari, Renault, BMW, and Red Bull should start a separate Formula One.

Then there would be a two-tier system. "F1a for the fat cats with loadsamoney" and "F1b for the cheapskates".

You don't get more "two tier" than that!

Renault actually make much of the fact that they spend less than the other 'big' teams.

The problem is that 40 million is a massive drop from 300 million, which Honda, Toyota, Ferrari, and McLaren were spending. Granted, the 40 million cap is not on the total budget (I understand that driver salaries and marketing are not included, among others) but I'm sure that Ferrari are spending several times the proposed capped budget at the moment. Mercedes said they spend several million onf their KERS system alone.

None of the teams want a two-tier system anyway. It's just that they want one tier with more than 40 million as the cap. I can see it rise to 60 million when all the bargaining is over.

Ian

[JSR]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

Renault actually make much of the fact that they spend less than the other 'big' teams.

The problem is that 40 million is a massive drop from 300 million, which Honda, Toyota, Ferrari, and McLaren were spending. Granted, the 40 million cap is not on the total budget (I understand that driver salaries and marketing are not included, among others) but I'm sure that Ferrari are spending several times the proposed capped budget at the moment. Mercedes said they spend several million onf their KERS system alone.

None of the teams want a two-tier system anyway. It's just that they want one tier with more than 40 million as the cap. I can see it rise to 60 million when all the bargaining is over.

Ian

everything with the exception of fines. That way the teams get to decide how to spend the money without being dictated to by the FIA. If they want to spend more on the car and driver, they sacrifice hospitality; if they want more hospitality, they sacrifice the car/driver - it's the individual team's choice, not the FIA's.

For further reading, I came across this site that lists the team's budgets for 2008:

Toyota: $445.6m
McLaren: $433.3m
Ferrari: $414.9m
Honda: $398.1m
Renault: $393.8m
BMW Sauber: $366.8m
Red Bull Racing: $164.7m
Williams: $160.6m
Toro Rosso: $128.2m
Force India: $121.85m
Super Aguri: $45.6m

Data from: http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/09/2...-budget-4456m/

[Ian]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

The FIA says the cap exceptions are:

• Marketing and hospitality;
• Remuneration for test or race drivers, including any young driver programmes;
• Fines or penalties imposed by the FIA;
• Engine costs (for 2010 only);
• Any expenditure which the team can demonstrate has no influence on its performance in the Championship;
• Dividends (including any tax thereon) paid from profits relating to participation in the Championship.

So the cost issues centre around the money spent on designing and producing the cars themselves, as well as the cost of operating the race team.

Ian

[JSR]

Re: Bye, bye, Ferrari?

Looks like the FIA are ready to do what they're told -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8049816.stm

Any guesses what the outcome will be? Ferrari 1, FIA nil..?

If so, I guess this will be knocked on the head -

http://www.planet-f1.com/story/0,18954,3213_5324478,00.html