It is currently Tue May 26, 2020 1:36 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2020 10:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 2:27 pm
Posts: 33
Ferrari to evaluate F1 future if budget cap imposed, warns Binotto

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... ia-binotto?

-Leave your unearned bonuses at the door
-Don't let the door hit you on the way out
-Never never never come back


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 3:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6813
Location: Nebraska, USA
Perhaps you should read the article, frenk.

Actually, he makes some sense in what he is saying. The vitriol displayed in your post suggest that there is probably nothing Ferrari could have said that you would not take exception to.
From an earlier post by you:

"Michael Schumacher is the Lance Armstrong of F1"

"I wouldn't mind if F1 would blow itself up and stopped to exist..."

" I hate how F1 is biased towards the richest teams... "

"I don't want an Grand Prix in my country because it is an awful waste of money and both circuits"

Why do you even bother? I would think a Spec series would be perfect for your racing interests.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 4:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2730
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 6:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16919
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.


In some respects they would be a huge loss in others not. It would be much easier to improve the sport and make it more competitive without Ferrari.

It's a moot point anyway because they won't be leaving.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 6:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 351
I think Ferrari will be quitting because of what is going on. A lot of the financials of expensive cars are based around gatherings of people. If that can't happen, they might just be in great trouble.

Of course we won't be separated for too long, but up until then, selling luxury goods could be really in decline.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 11:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7981
Wait you're telling me a company investing hundreds of millions in a sport will reevaluate its participation when the rules drastically change? I'm shocked.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 11:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 8226
paul_gmb wrote:
I think Ferrari will be quitting because of what is going on. A lot of the financials of expensive cars are based around gatherings of people. If that can't happen, they might just be in great trouble.

Of course we won't be separated for too long, but up until then, selling luxury goods could be really in decline.


They survived the 2008 slump, and others before, the rich will always be rich. But this again is a bit of a different beast, so I am not quite sure how they will be affected.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 11:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:17 pm
Posts: 723
Location: illinois
i don't have enough fingers and toes to count how many times ferrari, and other teams, have threatened to leave. nothing i can do about it, so i don't worry about it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 2:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 2312
Location: Miami, Florida
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.

That's not at all true. Williams, the worst team in the sport has a huge fanbase, and they've been stinking up the joint for a long time now. They're like the Chicago Cubs of F1. LOL

McLaren has a huge fanbase, Haas has a decent fanbase, Red Bull has a huge fanbase (Verstappen has his own fanbase that has added to the team's already large following), Mercedes has a huge fanbase, Sauber has had a solid fanbase for decades (muself included - though I've not warmed up to the Alfa Romeo era much yet), Force India/Jordan has had a solid following and now as Racing Point (the stupidest name for an F1 team yet) seems to be maintaining their fanbase and once they launch as Aston Martin F1 they will grow their following considerably - though I'm not a fan of that brand at all - poor fitment of components, not manufacturing their own engines, the 100% Red Bull designed & engineered Valkyrie… coughFRAUD! of an AM branded product.

So while Ferrari do indeed have the absolute largest fanbase, It is false that they're the only team to have one.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VERSTAPPEN :: LECLERC :: BOTTAS :: VETTEL :: SAINZ :: NORRIS
KVYAT :: RAIKKONEN :: RUSSEL :: ALBON :: RICCIARDO :: HULKENBURG :: PEREZ
STROLL :: MAGNUSSEN :: GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: GIOVANAZZI :: KUBICA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 2:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16919
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.

That's not at all true. Williams, the worst team in the sport has a huge fanbase, and they've been stinking up the joint for a long time now. They're like the Chicago Cubs of F1. LOL

McLaren has a huge fanbase, Haas has a decent fanbase, Red Bull has a huge fanbase (Verstappen has his own fanbase that has added to the team's already large following), Mercedes has a huge fanbase, Sauber has had a solid fanbase for decades (muself included - though I've not warmed up to the Alfa Romeo era much yet), Force India/Jordan has had a solid following and now as Racing Point (the stupidest name for an F1 team yet) seems to be maintaining their fanbase and once they launch as Aston Martin F1 they will grow their following considerably - though I'm not a fan of that brand at all - poor fitment of components, not manufacturing their own engines, the 100% Red Bull designed & engineered Valkyrie… coughFRAUD! of an AM branded product.

So while Ferrari do indeed have the absolute largest fanbase, It is false that they're the only team to have one.


Racing Point is an inspired name because written down it is actually Racing .

This means it's great for sponsors - Last year they were officially named Sport Peso Racing . - and it means they can become Aston Martin Racing . without the need to apply for a name change and all the rigmarole that comes with that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 2:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 12:14 am
Posts: 244
Location: Salisbury, Wiltshire UK
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.

That's not at all true. Williams, the worst team in the sport has a huge fanbase, and they've been stinking up the joint for a long time now. They're like the Chicago Cubs of F1. LOL

:lol: Don't I know it.

I never stop believing. Or hoping....... :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2020 4:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 3381
Location: UK
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.

You could make a similar case for Lewis Hamilton, yet the sport will be just fine once he retires. People will find someone else to support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:04 am
Posts: 1892
j man wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.

You could make a similar case for Lewis Hamilton, yet the sport will be just fine once he retires. People will find someone else to support.


Its never the same. People know a driver is always going to retire one day.
Teams can kill the ports in particular region, countries and in general if it ceases to exist. IT has happened before in other sports where that particular sport simply fell off the people's radar and popularity because the certain team decided to call it quits or was suddenly not good enough.

Specially when we hardly have 10-12 teams in the entire sport. Like it or not, Ferrari is the backbone of F1's global popularity and one of the main reasons TV deals are as lucrative for broadcasters. You take that away and F1 wont ever be the same. Not with McLare, Not with Williams and not with Mercedes. The majority of current viewers would rather watch other motorsports than F1 without Ferrari.

Williams is only other team I can think of that has somewhat of an old fan following. But they won't be even 10% of the Ferrari's global popularity.

With how things stand in this world, F1 cannot afford to lose Ferrari. Ferrari does not need F1 as it once did. Their car business is doing well without F1 titles now. But it will be sad day for both Ferrari and F1 if they ever split.

The only real solution is to have 2 different budget caps for Engine suppliers and just chassis builders. There cant be a universal cap for all teams. Teams who dont build their own engines will be at an unfair advantage if that happens.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16919
funkymonkey wrote:
j man wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.

You could make a similar case for Lewis Hamilton, yet the sport will be just fine once he retires. People will find someone else to support.


Its never the same. People know a driver is always going to retire one day.
Teams can kill the ports in particular region, countries and in general if it ceases to exist. IT has happened before in other sports where that particular sport simply fell off the people's radar and popularity because the certain team decided to call it quits or was suddenly not good enough.

Specially when we hardly have 10-12 teams in the entire sport. Like it or not, Ferrari is the backbone of F1's global popularity and one of the main reasons TV deals are as lucrative for broadcasters. You take that away and F1 wont ever be the same. Not with McLare, Not with Williams and not with Mercedes. The majority of current viewers would rather watch other motorsports than F1 without Ferrari.

Williams is only other team I can think of that has somewhat of an old fan following. But they won't be even 10% of the Ferrari's global popularity.

With how things stand in this world, F1 cannot afford to lose Ferrari. Ferrari does not need F1 as it once did. Their car business is doing well without F1 titles now. But it will be sad day for both Ferrari and F1 if they ever split.

The only real solution is to have 2 different budget caps for Engine suppliers and just chassis builders. There cant be a universal cap for all teams. Teams who dont build their own engines will be at an unfair advantage if that happens.


We definitely get that with drivers as well. It's no coincidence we had two Spanish Grand Prix for a time with Alonso and now we barely have 1. Exactly the same with the German GP and Schumacher. Do you think we would be going to Zandvoort without Verstappen?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2020 8:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 3381
Location: UK
funkymonkey wrote:
j man wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.

You could make a similar case for Lewis Hamilton, yet the sport will be just fine once he retires. People will find someone else to support.


Its never the same. People know a driver is always going to retire one day.
Teams can kill the ports in particular region, countries and in general if it ceases to exist. IT has happened before in other sports where that particular sport simply fell off the people's radar and popularity because the certain team decided to call it quits or was suddenly not good enough.

Specially when we hardly have 10-12 teams in the entire sport. Like it or not, Ferrari is the backbone of F1's global popularity and one of the main reasons TV deals are as lucrative for broadcasters. You take that away and F1 wont ever be the same. Not with McLare, Not with Williams and not with Mercedes. The majority of current viewers would rather watch other motorsports than F1 without Ferrari.

Williams is only other team I can think of that has somewhat of an old fan following. But they won't be even 10% of the Ferrari's global popularity.

With how things stand in this world, F1 cannot afford to lose Ferrari. Ferrari does not need F1 as it once did. Their car business is doing well without F1 titles now. But it will be sad day for both Ferrari and F1 if they ever split.

The only real solution is to have 2 different budget caps for Engine suppliers and just chassis builders. There cant be a universal cap for all teams. Teams who dont build their own engines will be at an unfair advantage if that happens.

I still dispute that F1 cannot exist without Ferrari, it is a claim often made but rarely backed up with any solid evidence. Here in the UK at least, Ferrari are not popular at all (in fact I would describe them as deeply unpopular) and their loss would not affect F1's fanbase at all. Granted, we are somewhat of a unique case in that most of the other teams are based here and we've pretty much always had a decent driver to support.

Personally I know plenty of people who are massive car/motorsport enthusiasts but have no interest in F1 because they think it's dull. The number of fans F1 would lose if Ferrari pulled out is dwarfed by the number of potential fans they are currently losing because they have spent the last few decades prioritising the interests of the big teams (and Ferrari in particular) over the interests of the sporting competition, as if a parade of famous marques is more appealing to the general public than an exciting motor race. I like that Liberty Media seem to be trying to reverse this to improve the sport's broader appeal and Ross Brawn is doing a good job of standing up for the sport's interests against the big teams' objections, something Jean Todt and the FIA have been utterly useless at.

To me, this proposal of a two-tier budget cap primarily highlights that the whole setup of having customer and supplier teams has to stop if we're to have a fair sporting competition. Like so many things in F1 these days, the proposal is a sticking plaster solution that doesn't address the fundamental issue. If the majority of the teams are not making certain components themselves and simply buying them in from other teams, then it makes sense to me that either all the teams should be forced to make these parts themselves or they should be spec parts common to all teams. And if Ferrari et al. are not happy with that arrangement, then perhaps they should negotiate a fairer distribution F1's revenue so that the smaller teams can actually afford to make all the parts themselves.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2020 9:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16919
j man wrote:
funkymonkey wrote:
j man wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.

You could make a similar case for Lewis Hamilton, yet the sport will be just fine once he retires. People will find someone else to support.


Its never the same. People know a driver is always going to retire one day.
Teams can kill the ports in particular region, countries and in general if it ceases to exist. IT has happened before in other sports where that particular sport simply fell off the people's radar and popularity because the certain team decided to call it quits or was suddenly not good enough.

Specially when we hardly have 10-12 teams in the entire sport. Like it or not, Ferrari is the backbone of F1's global popularity and one of the main reasons TV deals are as lucrative for broadcasters. You take that away and F1 wont ever be the same. Not with McLare, Not with Williams and not with Mercedes. The majority of current viewers would rather watch other motorsports than F1 without Ferrari.

Williams is only other team I can think of that has somewhat of an old fan following. But they won't be even 10% of the Ferrari's global popularity.

With how things stand in this world, F1 cannot afford to lose Ferrari. Ferrari does not need F1 as it once did. Their car business is doing well without F1 titles now. But it will be sad day for both Ferrari and F1 if they ever split.

The only real solution is to have 2 different budget caps for Engine suppliers and just chassis builders. There cant be a universal cap for all teams. Teams who dont build their own engines will be at an unfair advantage if that happens.

I still dispute that F1 cannot exist without Ferrari, it is a claim often made but rarely backed up with any solid evidence. Here in the UK at least, Ferrari are not popular at all (in fact I would describe them as deeply unpopular) and their loss would not affect F1's fanbase at all. Granted, we are somewhat of a unique case in that most of the other teams are based here and we've pretty much always had a decent driver to support.

Personally I know plenty of people who are massive car/motorsport enthusiasts but have no interest in F1 because they think it's dull. The number of fans F1 would lose if Ferrari pulled out is dwarfed by the number of potential fans they are currently losing because they have spent the last few decades prioritising the interests of the big teams (and Ferrari in particular) over the interests of the sporting competition, as if a parade of famous marques is more appealing to the general public than an exciting motor race. I like that Liberty Media seem to be trying to reverse this to improve the sport's broader appeal and Ross Brawn is doing a good job of standing up for the sport's interests against the big teams' objections, something Jean Todt and the FIA have been utterly useless at.

To me, this proposal of a two-tier budget cap primarily highlights that the whole setup of having customer and supplier teams has to stop if we're to have a fair sporting competition. Like so many things in F1 these days, the proposal is a sticking plaster solution that doesn't address the fundamental issue. If the majority of the teams are not making certain components themselves and simply buying them in from other teams, then it makes sense to me that either all the teams should be forced to make these parts themselves or they should be spec parts common to all teams. And if Ferrari et al. are not happy with that arrangement, then perhaps they should negotiate a fairer distribution F1's revenue so that the smaller teams can actually afford to make all the parts themselves.


Not sure I've ever agreed with a post more.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2020 2:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:26 am
Posts: 829
Before this "crisis" the only purpose of the whole thing was to find year after year a way to survive without changing the basis of the business, not being able nor willing to reform itself ; the "owners of the show" not willing to wean thelmselves off their outrageous money racket (on the contrary trying to expend it by adding new "clients"), the private club of members making an easy living of it not wanting to reduce their outrageous lifestyle.
We're all discussing (well, you're discussing, I'm not) whether F1 can survive if Ferrari quits... When the question should be : can F1 survive, whatever Ferrari does ? My own answer is : F1 as we've seen it "developping" this last decade and the decade before won't. And doesn't deserve to.

_________________
As my brother said : "I've got the brain of a four year old. I'll bet he was glad to be rid of it".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2020 5:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 2014
j man wrote:
funkymonkey wrote:
j man wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.

You could make a similar case for Lewis Hamilton, yet the sport will be just fine once he retires. People will find someone else to support.


Its never the same. People know a driver is always going to retire one day.
Teams can kill the ports in particular region, countries and in general if it ceases to exist. IT has happened before in other sports where that particular sport simply fell off the people's radar and popularity because the certain team decided to call it quits or was suddenly not good enough.

Specially when we hardly have 10-12 teams in the entire sport. Like it or not, Ferrari is the backbone of F1's global popularity and one of the main reasons TV deals are as lucrative for broadcasters. You take that away and F1 wont ever be the same. Not with McLare, Not with Williams and not with Mercedes. The majority of current viewers would rather watch other motorsports than F1 without Ferrari.

Williams is only other team I can think of that has somewhat of an old fan following. But they won't be even 10% of the Ferrari's global popularity.

With how things stand in this world, F1 cannot afford to lose Ferrari. Ferrari does not need F1 as it once did. Their car business is doing well without F1 titles now. But it will be sad day for both Ferrari and F1 if they ever split.

The only real solution is to have 2 different budget caps for Engine suppliers and just chassis builders. There cant be a universal cap for all teams. Teams who dont build their own engines will be at an unfair advantage if that happens.


I still dispute that F1 cannot exist without Ferrari, it is a claim often made but rarely backed up with any solid evidence. Here in the UK at least, Ferrari are not popular at all (in fact I would describe them as deeply unpopular) and their loss would not affect F1's fanbase at all. Granted, we are somewhat of a unique case in that most of the other teams are based here and we've pretty much always had a decent driver to support.

Personally I know plenty of people who are massive car/motorsport enthusiasts but have no interest in F1 because they think it's dull. The number of fans F1 would lose if Ferrari pulled out is dwarfed by the number of potential fans they are currently losing because they have spent the last few decades prioritising the interests of the big teams (and Ferrari in particular) over the interests of the sporting competition, as if a parade of famous marques is more appealing to the general public than an exciting motor race. I like that Liberty Media seem to be trying to reverse this to improve the sport's broader appeal and Ross Brawn is doing a good job of standing up for the sport's interests against the big teams' objections, something Jean Todt and the FIA have been utterly useless at.

To me, this proposal of a two-tier budget cap primarily highlights that the whole setup of having customer and supplier teams has to stop if we're to have a fair sporting competition. Like so many things in F1 these days, the proposal is a sticking plaster solution that doesn't address the fundamental issue. If the majority of the teams are not making certain components themselves and simply buying them in from other teams, then it makes sense to me that either all the teams should be forced to make these parts themselves or they should be spec parts common to all teams. And if Ferrari et al. are not happy with that arrangement, then perhaps they should negotiate a fairer distribution F1's revenue so that the smaller teams can actually afford to make all the parts themselves.




You just need to ask yourself these questions to know why F1 wont survive without Ferrari.

If Ferrari leave F1 will Daimler board continue to finance Mercedes to race against Mclaren and Redbull?

How exactly does F1 become interesting if Ferrari pull out?

Also Ferrari being one the greatest if not the greatest auto manufacturer in the world, most kids have a dream of owning a Ferrari.

As for forcing all entities to make all components, what benefit does Redbull get from building engines?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2020 6:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16919
Rockie wrote:
j man wrote:
funkymonkey wrote:
j man wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.

You could make a similar case for Lewis Hamilton, yet the sport will be just fine once he retires. People will find someone else to support.


Its never the same. People know a driver is always going to retire one day.
Teams can kill the ports in particular region, countries and in general if it ceases to exist. IT has happened before in other sports where that particular sport simply fell off the people's radar and popularity because the certain team decided to call it quits or was suddenly not good enough.

Specially when we hardly have 10-12 teams in the entire sport. Like it or not, Ferrari is the backbone of F1's global popularity and one of the main reasons TV deals are as lucrative for broadcasters. You take that away and F1 wont ever be the same. Not with McLare, Not with Williams and not with Mercedes. The majority of current viewers would rather watch other motorsports than F1 without Ferrari.

Williams is only other team I can think of that has somewhat of an old fan following. But they won't be even 10% of the Ferrari's global popularity.

With how things stand in this world, F1 cannot afford to lose Ferrari. Ferrari does not need F1 as it once did. Their car business is doing well without F1 titles now. But it will be sad day for both Ferrari and F1 if they ever split.

The only real solution is to have 2 different budget caps for Engine suppliers and just chassis builders. There cant be a universal cap for all teams. Teams who dont build their own engines will be at an unfair advantage if that happens.


I still dispute that F1 cannot exist without Ferrari, it is a claim often made but rarely backed up with any solid evidence. Here in the UK at least, Ferrari are not popular at all (in fact I would describe them as deeply unpopular) and their loss would not affect F1's fanbase at all. Granted, we are somewhat of a unique case in that most of the other teams are based here and we've pretty much always had a decent driver to support.

Personally I know plenty of people who are massive car/motorsport enthusiasts but have no interest in F1 because they think it's dull. The number of fans F1 would lose if Ferrari pulled out is dwarfed by the number of potential fans they are currently losing because they have spent the last few decades prioritising the interests of the big teams (and Ferrari in particular) over the interests of the sporting competition, as if a parade of famous marques is more appealing to the general public than an exciting motor race. I like that Liberty Media seem to be trying to reverse this to improve the sport's broader appeal and Ross Brawn is doing a good job of standing up for the sport's interests against the big teams' objections, something Jean Todt and the FIA have been utterly useless at.

To me, this proposal of a two-tier budget cap primarily highlights that the whole setup of having customer and supplier teams has to stop if we're to have a fair sporting competition. Like so many things in F1 these days, the proposal is a sticking plaster solution that doesn't address the fundamental issue. If the majority of the teams are not making certain components themselves and simply buying them in from other teams, then it makes sense to me that either all the teams should be forced to make these parts themselves or they should be spec parts common to all teams. And if Ferrari et al. are not happy with that arrangement, then perhaps they should negotiate a fairer distribution F1's revenue so that the smaller teams can actually afford to make all the parts themselves.




You just need to ask yourself these questions to know why F1 wont survive without Ferrari.

If Ferrari leave F1 will Daimler board continue to finance Mercedes to race against Mclaren and Redbull?

How exactly does F1 become interesting if Ferrari pull out?

Also Ferrari being one the greatest if not the greatest auto manufacturer in the world, most kids have a dream of owning a Ferrari.

As for forcing all entities to make all components, what benefit does Redbull get from building engines?


F1 has coped fine when Ferrari hasn't been at the front previously.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2020 4:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6813
Location: Nebraska, USA
However, whether they were at the front of not, they were still there. That is not the same as Ferrari being out of the sport. There is always beating the "red devils" if nothing else. Even during their 22 years of not winning championships, they were there, they competed, their fans were there, and F1 had the benefit as it does now.

It should be remembered that the UK is not the end all of F1, no matter how much some seem to think it is. Just because Ferrari is not extraordinarily popular in the home of Lewis Hamilton, McLaren and Williams, doesn't mean that they don't have a huge following world-wide. I suspect that McLaren and Williams are not all that popular in Italy as a counterpoint.

I would not say, not do I think that I ever have said that F1 would not survive without Ferrari (unless Ferrari were to be a part of an alternate series and take McLaren, Red Bull and/or Mercedes with them). However, we're Ferrari to leave, you may not like the F1 that you have left. Ferrari brings in considerably more money into the sport than any other team. Also, as has been pointed out, there is a decent chance that a Ferrari-less F1 may not be attractive to one of more of the other top teams. We're they to leave the landscape and future of F1 could change dramatically. I am not saying that would happen, but it could. As much as people like to rag on the Manufacturers in F1, take them out and F1 becomes a "nothing series" of it even survives at all. The mid and bottom level teams are not gonna generate the income to keep F1 at or near the top.

So once again the yearly, perhaps bi-annual, who needs Ferrari in F1 comes to the front. Once again we been told that Ferrari is not popular in the UK (though I suspect there is a fair bit of BS in that claim), yet it seems that there is a pretty fair Ferrari representation at Silverstone very year...MAYBE not Mercedes size theses days, but not insignificant.

Someday, I am going to learn to save the response so I don't have to type it all over again.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2020 6:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16919
Blake wrote:
However, whether they were at the front of not, they were still there. That is not the same as Ferrari being out of the sport. There is always beating the "red devils" if nothing else. Even during their 22 years of not winning championships, they were there, they competed, their fans were there, and F1 had the benefit as it does now.

It should be remembered that the UK is not the end all of F1, no matter how much some seem to think it is. Just because Ferrari is not extraordinarily popular in the home of Lewis Hamilton, McLaren and Williams, doesn't mean that they don't have a huge following world-wide. I suspect that McLaren and Williams are not all that popular in Italy as a counterpoint.

I would not say, not do I think that I ever have said that F1 would not survive without Ferrari (unless Ferrari were to be a part of an alternate series and take McLaren, Red Bull and/or Mercedes with them). However, we're Ferrari to leave, you may not like the F1 that you have left. Ferrari brings in considerably more money into the sport than any other team. Also, as has been pointed out, there is a decent chance that a Ferrari-less F1 may not be attractive to one of more of the other top teams. We're they to leave the landscape and future of F1 could change dramatically. I am not saying that would happen, but it could. As much as people like to rag on the Manufacturers in F1, take them out and F1 becomes a "nothing series" of it even survives at all. The mid and bottom level teams are not gonna generate the income to keep F1 at or near the top.

So once again the yearly, perhaps bi-annual, who needs Ferrari in F1 comes to the front. Once again we been told that Ferrari is not popular in the UK (though I suspect there is a fair bit of BS in that claim), yet it seems that there is a pretty fair Ferrari representation at Silverstone very year...MAYBE not Mercedes size theses days, but not insignificant.

Someday, I am going to learn to save the response so I don't have to type it all over again.


To be fair we only have a thread like this twice a year because Ferrari says it might not need F1 twice a year.

I would prefer to have a Ferrari in F1. But if having Ferrari in F1 comes at the cost of loads of special treatment for them and them preventing a competitive landscape in the sport then I think that's to higher price to pay.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2020 9:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2355
While I am skeptical that this crisis will change the world so much as some commentators dream and others fear, the accompanying economic downturn is likely to further aggravate the difficult environment for car manufacturers. Already before this crisis, we have seen much more car manufacturers being interested in FE than in F1. The aftermath of the pandemic may well lead to either Renault or Mercedes leaving and saving the money they spend on F1 - or even both will leave. Unfortunately, F1 does not have a healthy number of specialists teams and constructors to compensate a double blow.

Ferrari nowadays is an independent sports car manufacturer with an ownership structure of very different interests. It is not very clear how the majority in this changing ownership structure will develop. But of course it may happen that a cash-oriented majority emerges and pulls the plug of Ferrari's F1 investment. A massive downturn in the sports car business may speed up such a process. In other words, F1 cannot expect to have Ferrari forever and if Ferrari leaves it won't be the rules and no special pro-Ferrari regulation will make them stay. Actually, special treatment through biased rules is only relevant for Ferrari as long as they are desperate to stay and to succeed. ;)

Any sensible strategy for F1 to survive must not rest on the participation of Ferrari, Mercedes, or any other specific player. If that is the precondition, then F1 is doomed sooner or later. Offering an attractive package for independent enthusiasts and especially for entries into the sport is paramount. I do not think that FIA or Liberty have understand this yet.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2020 10:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 3381
Location: UK
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Any sensible strategy for F1 to survive must not rest on the participation of Ferrari, Mercedes, or any other specific player. If that is the precondition, then F1 is doomed sooner or later. Offering an attractive package for independent enthusiasts and especially for entries into the sport is paramount. I do not think that FIA or Liberty have understand this yet.

I think this is spot on. One would hope that the lessons would have been learned from around 2009 / 2010 when the manufacturers all suddenly pulled out and we were nearly left with a shortage of teams to fill the grid, yet it seems right now the sport is more reliant on their continued participation than ever. With the impending economic fallout of the current crisis, I can see history repeating itself.

I think Liberty do understand this issue though and they are trying to wrestle control back from the big teams so that they can make things fairer and ultimately more accessible for new entrants. It's a slow process and is difficult under the organisational and financial structure that they inherited from Bernie, but the budget cap is an important first step.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2020 4:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:46 am
Posts: 387
Location: Suffolk, UK
mikeyg123 wrote:
To be fair we only have a thread like this twice a year because Ferrari says it might not need F1 twice a year.


Quite: Ferrari is always trying to get its own way by threatening to leave F1. It has bullied its way into an unfair cut of the prize money and will do anything to maintain its advantages. I hope Liberty will call their bluff. F1 does not need Ferrari in my opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2020 9:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6813
Location: Nebraska, USA
tim3003 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
To be fair we only have a thread like this twice a year because Ferrari says it might not need F1 twice a year.


Quite: Ferrari is always trying to get its own way by threatening to leave F1. It has bullied its way into an unfair cut of the prize money and will do anything to maintain its advantages. I hope Liberty will call their bluff. F1 does not need Ferrari in my opinion.


Fortunately, it is only your opinion...just as meaningless as mine. However, the bullying as you call it, is BS. F1 has long realized Ferrari's importance to the sport, and has used Ferrari every bit as much as Ferrari has used F1, it has been mutually beneficial to both, and to the other teams in the sport as well.

Perhaps you will get your way and Ferrari will leave F1, but you can bet your backside, it won't be the same F1 as you envision...hell, it is already but shell of what it once was even with Ferrari. I

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2020 8:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16919
Blake wrote:
tim3003 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
To be fair we only have a thread like this twice a year because Ferrari says it might not need F1 twice a year.


Quite: Ferrari is always trying to get its own way by threatening to leave F1. It has bullied its way into an unfair cut of the prize money and will do anything to maintain its advantages. I hope Liberty will call their bluff. F1 does not need Ferrari in my opinion.


Fortunately, it is only your opinion...just as meaningless as mine. However, the bullying as you call it, is BS. F1 has long realized Ferrari's importance to the sport, and has used Ferrari every bit as much as Ferrari has used F1, it has been mutually beneficial to both, and to the other teams in the sport as well.

Perhaps you will get your way and Ferrari will leave F1, but you can bet your backside, it won't be the same F1 as you envision...hell, it is already but shell of what it once was even with Ferrari. I


I think that's kind of the point Blake.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2020 9:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 8226
j man wrote:
funkymonkey wrote:
j man wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari would be a huge loss for the sport, because Ferrari is the only team that has an actual fanbase.

Look at Monza, the atmosphere when Leclerc won was insane. Those are not fans of one specific driver, they are Ferrari fans. Which other team can create that kind of emotion? Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren? Don’t make me laugh.

Ferrari have a mythical, larger than life aura that none of the other teams have.

You could make a similar case for Lewis Hamilton, yet the sport will be just fine once he retires. People will find someone else to support.


Its never the same. People know a driver is always going to retire one day.
Teams can kill the ports in particular region, countries and in general if it ceases to exist. IT has happened before in other sports where that particular sport simply fell off the people's radar and popularity because the certain team decided to call it quits or was suddenly not good enough.

Specially when we hardly have 10-12 teams in the entire sport. Like it or not, Ferrari is the backbone of F1's global popularity and one of the main reasons TV deals are as lucrative for broadcasters. You take that away and F1 wont ever be the same. Not with McLare, Not with Williams and not with Mercedes. The majority of current viewers would rather watch other motorsports than F1 without Ferrari.

Williams is only other team I can think of that has somewhat of an old fan following. But they won't be even 10% of the Ferrari's global popularity.

With how things stand in this world, F1 cannot afford to lose Ferrari. Ferrari does not need F1 as it once did. Their car business is doing well without F1 titles now. But it will be sad day for both Ferrari and F1 if they ever split.

The only real solution is to have 2 different budget caps for Engine suppliers and just chassis builders. There cant be a universal cap for all teams. Teams who dont build their own engines will be at an unfair advantage if that happens.

I still dispute that F1 cannot exist without Ferrari, it is a claim often made but rarely backed up with any solid evidence. Here in the UK at least, Ferrari are not popular at all (in fact I would describe them as deeply unpopular) and their loss would not affect F1's fanbase at all. Granted, we are somewhat of a unique case in that most of the other teams are based here and we've pretty much always had a decent driver to support.

Personally I know plenty of people who are massive car/motorsport enthusiasts but have no interest in F1 because they think it's dull. The number of fans F1 would lose if Ferrari pulled out is dwarfed by the number of potential fans they are currently losing because they have spent the last few decades prioritising the interests of the big teams (and Ferrari in particular) over the interests of the sporting competition, as if a parade of famous marques is more appealing to the general public than an exciting motor race. I like that Liberty Media seem to be trying to reverse this to improve the sport's broader appeal and Ross Brawn is doing a good job of standing up for the sport's interests against the big teams' objections, something Jean Todt and the FIA have been utterly useless at.

To me, this proposal of a two-tier budget cap primarily highlights that the whole setup of having customer and supplier teams has to stop if we're to have a fair sporting competition. Like so many things in F1 these days, the proposal is a sticking plaster solution that doesn't address the fundamental issue. If the majority of the teams are not making certain components themselves and simply buying them in from other teams, then it makes sense to me that either all the teams should be forced to make these parts themselves or they should be spec parts common to all teams. And if Ferrari et al. are not happy with that arrangement, then perhaps they should negotiate a fairer distribution F1's revenue so that the smaller teams can actually afford to make all the parts themselves.


I think that it is actually quite good that they give freedom to the teams to do whatever they want, otherwise it would be a spec series. Well, almost. If a team wants to avoid developing a part (which is going to cost them millions) in an area that they have no expertise, like RB making a hybrid engine for example, then this is fine, just buy it. If they want to have a go at it, that's also fine. But in general I see no issue with a team with a big wallet wanting to develop their own part and a team with a smaller one to just buy it off the shelf and save a ton of R&D costs.

But I love that they have the option to do that.

The first and most obvious thing would be to re-distribute the winnings and extra legacy goodie-packs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2020 10:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:46 am
Posts: 387
Location: Suffolk, UK
Blake wrote:

Fortunately, it is only your opinion...just as meaningless as mine. However, the bullying as you call it, is BS. F1 has long realized Ferrari's importance to the sport, and has used Ferrari every bit as much as Ferrari has used F1, it has been mutually beneficial to both, and to the other teams in the sport as well.

Perhaps you will get your way and Ferrari will leave F1, but you can bet your backside, it won't be the same F1 as you envision...hell, it is already but shell of what it once was even with Ferrari. I


I don't want Ferrari to leave F1. As you say, both they and F1 benefit from the long-term relationship. I just object to Ferrai thinking it's so special that it can dictate terms which disadvantage other teams. It would be nice if their priority was more the racing rather than their own success at any price.

I think though that if Ferrari did leave F1 would survive and prosper. Its USP is having the world's best drivers in the most technically advanced cars, with teams competing against eachother in engineering to a far greater degree than any comparable series. Its international scale is also unmatched, so no other series is going to usurp it. The biggest threat to F1 is escalating budgets, which Ferrari as much as any team wants to maintain for its own selfish marketing ends. In my opinion an F1 without Ferrari but with a full 26-car grid would be an improvement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2020 5:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 2014
mikeyg123 wrote:

F1 has coped fine when Ferrari hasn't been at the front previously.


Exactly Ferrari did not leave because they were not winning they stayed and kept on participating.

It's similar to Ron Dennis parting ways with Mclaren, Mclaren are surviving but that passion, OCD and the DNA of Mclaren gone with him Mclaren is a shadow of itself and no longer has the gravitas in F1.

Its the way F1 would end up!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2020 5:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4550
Rockie wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:

F1 has coped fine when Ferrari hasn't been at the front previously.


Exactly Ferrari did not leave because they were not winning they stayed and kept on participating.

It's similar to Ron Dennis parting ways with Mclaren, Mclaren are surviving but that passion, OCD and the DNA of Mclaren gone with him Mclaren is a shadow of itself and no longer has the gravitas in F1.

Its the way F1 would end up!


I thought about Jordan when reading this thread. They were never a fraction of the team Ferrari were in terms of fan base, results and history, but for those of us passionate about the sport in the 90's they were a big deal and very prominent in the sport with a large fan base of their own. Their demise brought along Midland, Spyker and then Force India I believe, none of which have any kind of fan base that Jordan had. Now, increase the influence Jordan had in F1 during their time to that of Ferrari and whilst the sport wont stop without them, it will be hugely different.

The passion the Jordan fans had did not appear to get transferred to any other team. I really miss the Jordan team and their fans.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3803
I think Lotus is the biggest name the sport lost (original lotus, not the 2000s era remakes)

They were the team that defined the DNA of the sport along with Ferrari, their ingenuity a counter to the big factory muscle of Maranello. Their legacy is still felt to this day with the pursuit of lightness and aerodynamics. While they weren't the only team of this ilk, they were the defining one and it could be argued that teams like McLaren and Williams sit on points along the Ferrari-Lotus spectrum.

Of course they dwindled out of the sport rather than withdraw, leaving Ferrari as the only true legacy name (McLaren and Williams have only really been true forces in the sport since the 70s) and as the only legacy team Ferrari does therefore add a lot more value to the sport. Formula 1 would be diminished without Ferrari for a while - it would almost certainly result in the loss of the Italian GP and a lot of followers in Italy, the USA and other markets. I imagine the middle Eastern races would lose interest given that they exist as places to sell hyper cars - but then maybe that would hurt Ferrari more than F1. With Aston entering the sport, would they really want Mercedes, McLaren and Aston Martin all getting free hyper publicity in the markets that are basically recession proof for super car manufacturers?

At the end of the day, F1 would move on just as it did when we lost Jordan, Lotus and all the other big names. Yes, Ferrari would be a lot bigger loss, but no loss is insurmountable. And 6 team grid with Ferrari is worse than an 8 team grid without.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2020 9:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4550
Interesting tweet from Karun Chandhok this morning.

Quick calculation...1997 winning budget was 70 million GBP including drivers (not engines). Using BoE website's inflation calculator, that works out to £128M today or $159M USD so not far away from Ross' proposal.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2020 10:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 8226
Asphalt_World wrote:
Interesting tweet from Karun Chandhok this morning.

Quick calculation...1997 winning budget was 70 million GBP including drivers (not engines). Using BoE website's inflation calculator, that works out to £128M today or $159M USD so not far away from Ross' proposal.


But what was the winning budget of other years comparably? Maybe in 1998 it was 100m GBP, which would makes this (say) 180m GBP today. Singling out one year is ok, but this could have been an outlier for all we know.

Plus, back then the teams were smaller, technologies were different, rules had minimum changes from 1996, etc. I find it a bit simplistic to just compare the two numbers is all I'm saying!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2020 10:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4550
Siao7 wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
Interesting tweet from Karun Chandhok this morning.

Quick calculation...1997 winning budget was 70 million GBP including drivers (not engines). Using BoE website's inflation calculator, that works out to £128M today or $159M USD so not far away from Ross' proposal.


But what was the winning budget of other years comparably? Maybe in 1998 it was 100m GBP, which would makes this (say) 180m GBP today. Singling out one year is ok, but this could have been an outlier for all we know.

Plus, back then the teams were smaller, technologies were different, rules had minimum changes from 1996, etc. I find it a bit simplistic to just compare the two numbers is all I'm saying!


And he, nor indeed I, are saying it's that simple either. The point being, teams are bigger because teams have chosen to increase them with bigger and bigger budgets. As F1 was plenty entertaining back then, having comparable sized teams and budgets today would not mean the sport would suddenly be totally different.

I inferred that he was making a point that Brawn's budget cap idea isn't the end of F1 as we know it, just a change of thinking for teams.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2020 12:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 8226
Asphalt_World wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
Interesting tweet from Karun Chandhok this morning.

Quick calculation...1997 winning budget was 70 million GBP including drivers (not engines). Using BoE website's inflation calculator, that works out to £128M today or $159M USD so not far away from Ross' proposal.


But what was the winning budget of other years comparably? Maybe in 1998 it was 100m GBP, which would makes this (say) 180m GBP today. Singling out one year is ok, but this could have been an outlier for all we know.

Plus, back then the teams were smaller, technologies were different, rules had minimum changes from 1996, etc. I find it a bit simplistic to just compare the two numbers is all I'm saying!


And he, nor indeed I, are saying it's that simple either. The point being, teams are bigger because teams have chosen to increase them with bigger and bigger budgets. As F1 was plenty entertaining back then, having comparable sized teams and budgets today would not mean the sport would suddenly be totally different.

I inferred that he was making a point that Brawn's budget cap idea isn't the end of F1 as we know it, just a change of thinking for teams.

I didn't accuse you of anything really, so not sure why you are getting so defensive.

Anyway, he uses that year to make his point, but I can only take this at face value, unless he presents the data for other years too. Ok, I did two for reference; the 2003 budget of the champion team Ferrari (from F1 magazine) was circa $440m. This was about £275m (with a typical 2003 £ to $ exchange rates of 1.6). So the inflation calculator of BoE translates to something like £438m today's money.

Same exercise for 1990's McLaren ($27m from here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/csylt/2020 ... c366b23d93) gives back £110m today's money.

What does this show? Nothing much really, just an upwards trend. It just seems that Chandhok chose that year that was close to Brawn's number. Admittedly 1997 was a cracking year for entertainment as you mentioned, but there is no real measure of entertainment value over budget, I personally can't find a way to quantify this.

The problem I see with any budget that is extrapolated from the past, is that it doesn't account for things like, for example, the vast expense of the hybrid power units.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2020 12:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4550
I'm not getting defensive. Blimey!

I was pointing out that neither he nor I are taking his comment as absolute, but more an interesting view.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2020 12:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4550
He also went on to point out that the early oo's were a veyr rich time in F1 and inflationary, well above most years before that.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2020 1:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 8226
Asphalt_World wrote:
I'm not getting defensive. Blimey!

I was pointing out that neither he nor I are taking his comment as absolute, but more an interesting view.


I thought that opening a post with "I am not saying that" is kind of defensive. Apologies, I took your post the wrong way.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2020 1:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 12:14 am
Posts: 244
Location: Salisbury, Wiltshire UK
Williams won in 1997, they've never had a massive budget have they?

I wonder what Ferrari or McLaren's budget was in the same year. I'd wager it was higher than the Williams budget.....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2020 1:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 8226
SteveW wrote:
Williams won in 1997, they've never had a massive budget have they?

I wonder what Ferrari or McLaren's budget was in the same year. I'd wager it was higher than the Williams budget.....


Yes, it is almost like saying you can buy an F1 team for £1; it did happen after all! (ok, veeeeeeeeery exaggerated example here!)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 54 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group