Formula 1 2020 - General Discussion Thread (See MOD warning on first post)

AMKC · 29-05-2020 8:50pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Could be wrong but I thought it was Bernie who moved it to PayTV. Increase the value in the short-term with cash and sell it while the going's good.
I've been blathering on about it for years but F1 was *the* motorsport for a long time and one of the biggest sports full stop. Race winner would be on Monday's back page, result was on the evening news (and would brag that they had footage) and a Brit winning the WDC usually meant sports personality of the year. It was just "on", and that kind of exposure is priceless.

Could be wrong but I thought it was Bernie who moved it to PayTV. Increase the value in the short-term with cash and sell it while the going's good.

I am sure you are bang on. That's the way Bernie thought and worked. It was all about greed and money to him. I wonder if he seen the state of F1 now and had the chance to go back and not make that decision would he?

muckwarrior · 29-05-2020 8:54pm

AMKC wrote: »

Could be wrong but I thought it was Bernie who moved it to PayTV. Increase the value in the short-term with cash and sell it while the going's good.

I am sure you are bang on. That's the way Bernie thought and worked. It was all about greed and money to him. I wonder if he seen the state of F1 now and had the chance to go back and not make that decision would he?

I doubt he'd be sorry to see f1 in decline. He'd argue that it's because he's not running it anymore.

g1983d · 29-05-2020 10:34pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

It's been coming. FE has no problem getting manufacturers because it's the technology the manufacturers want to pay to compete and develop. F1 just doesn't have that. F1 used to be cutting edge tech and now the cutting edge had moved away from f1.

It's just the way things go. F1 was the future for a long time.

The manufacturers is a big part of F1s problem, they pushed out the privateer teams and dip in and out willy nilly depending on marketing appeal, global economy,etc

F1 are stuck now, cant live with them cant live without them

29-05-2020 10:53pm

The fastidious rules and the effort to keep it a closed shop are also an issue. I'm not saying it should be like the 70s where anyone could rock up with a tub but the process to be allowed to enter followed by the costs and time for homologation and testing is huge.

pjohnson · 29-05-2020 11:33pm

Well they are bringing in the budget cap.

30-05-2020 12:55am

pjohnson wrote: »

Well they are bringing in the budget cap.

To me that falls between bolting the door after the horse has bolted and simply not being enough.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-05-2020 3:00pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Could be wrong but I thought it was Bernie who moved it to PayTV. Increase the value in the short-term with cash and sell it while the going's good.
I've been blathering on about it for years but F1 was *the* motorsport for a long time and one of the biggest sports full stop. Race winner would be on Monday's back page, result was on the evening news (and would brag that they had footage) and a Brit winning the WDC usually meant sports personality of the year. It was just "on", and that kind of exposure is priceless.

Yeah it was Bernie but CVC owned it at that point. It was a complex relationship because Bernie effectively sold f1 without ever owning it. He also ran f1 without owning it. CVC just let him do it for them. In contrast, liberty media is running it directly through Carey.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-05-2020 3:02pm

g1983d wrote: »

The manufacturers is a big part of F1s problem, they pushed out the privateer teams and dip in and out willy nilly depending on marketing appeal, global economy,etc

F1 are stuck now, cant live with them cant live without them

Yeah but the entire show would be a lot smaller without manufacturer's influence. And the showight be too big and expensive, so you might be right.

I'd say the way to pit it is "can't get them and can't live without them". They very much need manufacturers at this stage.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-05-2020 3:05pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

To me that falls between bolting the door after the horse has bolted and simply not being enough.

That's true, but it will prevent costs rising. It will force the bigger teams to cut the budget a bit. It only affects Mercedes, red bull farrari and.mclaren. The rest were all running under the budget cap anyway. And who doesn't want to see the rest catch up with the top teams?

AMKC · 30-05-2020 3:57pm

Deleted User wrote: »

To me that falls between bolting the door after the horse has bolted and simply not being enough.

Maybe but because of it Renault are staying in the sport. Without it Renault would have left the sport.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

That's true, but it will prevent costs rising. It will force the bigger teams to cut the budget a bit. It only affects Mercedes, red bull farrari and.mclaren. The rest were all running under the budget cap anyway. And who doesn't want to see the rest catch up with the top teams?

Was Renault running under the budget cap?

30-05-2020 4:03pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yeah it was Bernie but CVC owned it at that point. It was a complex relationship because Bernie effectively sold f1 without ever owning it. He also ran f1 without owning it. CVC just let him do it for them. In contrast, liberty media is running it directly through Carey.

Yeah I had Liberty and CVC mixed up.

pjohnson · 30-05-2020 4:59pm

It was Steiner that said the budget cap would also help teams like Haas as when the likes of Ferrari/Red Bull/Mercedes have to move on staff those staff could be relocated to Haas in order to keep them working in the sport.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-05-2020 7:23pm

AMKC wrote: »

Maybe but because of it Renault are staying in the sport. Without it Renault would have left the sport.

Was Renault running under the budget cap?

Yeah Renault banked on the budget cap coming in sooner. So when they returned they set the team up to run to the budget cap (which was probably the lower budget cap proposed before all the shinannigans were added like drivers top 5 team people's salaries). So Renault are reasonably well placed to take advantage of the salary cap.

rock22 · 31-05-2020 9:05am

I think neither Mercedes or Renault will admit they would sell there teams until the deed is done. . Until then they will talk up their involvement to maintain the value of the teams.
Renault will probably need government help and already that government (French) want the motor industry to concentrate on electric vehicles. The German government are also talking about aid for the motor industry.
Ultimately, F1 is a UK based business and I cannot see tax payers in either France or Germany being happy to continue pouring their money into it. I fear we might be seeing the beginning of the end
Over the years under Bernie Ecclestone F1 has become an entertainment business, with sponsorships , promotions etc, rather than a motor sport. Liberty run the show rather than FIA. Sadly , I think the glory days were in the 60 - 80 era , ie. in the past.

g1983d · 31-05-2020 11:06am

I can see the BOSS racing series becoming very popular with older f1 fans

El_Duderino 09 · 31-05-2020 2:18pm

Rich energy, at it again.

https://twitter.com/rich_energy/status/1267044623748382721

flazio · 31-05-2020 3:36pm

Oh dear sweet lord.

Charlie-Bravo · 31-05-2020 4:07pm

Is this the F1 entertainment we'll have to endure for the next few months? I hope that no media outlets are giving it airtime.

mrsoundie · 31-05-2020 10:08pm

Well it seems the British Government likes F1. BBC

El_Duderino 09 · 31-05-2020 10:37pm

mrsoundie wrote: »

Well it seems the British Government likes F1. BBC

Yeah to be fair I think they were always going to allow these exemptions fpr sports. It was prudent to wait a few weeks before announced them.

I'm pretty sure the exemptions were agreed behind closed doors weeks ago. I mean, the sports were going ahead with organising the events which depend on the exemptions.

Silverstone could actually come out ahead with this deal. They get paid for hosting instead of the usual deal. If they hadn't had the race and lost a load of money, I wouldn't be surprised if they would have asking the government for a bailout

tigerboon · 31-05-2020 10:54pm

AMKC wrote: »

Could be wrong but I thought it was Bernie who moved it to PayTV. Increase the value in the short-term with cash and sell it while the going's good.

I am sure you are bang on. That's the way Bernie thought and worked. It was all about greed and money to him. I wonder if he seen the state of F1 now and had the chance to go back and not make that decision would he?

I'd say his only regret is he didn't get a bit more for his pension pot.

H3llR4iser · 01-06-2020 12:25am

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

That's true, but it will prevent costs rising. It will force the bigger teams to cut the budget a bit. It only affects Mercedes, red bull farrari and.mclaren. The rest were all running under the budget cap anyway. And who doesn't want to see the rest catch up with the top teams?

There's only one fly in the ointment, something the "smaller teams" don't seem to be considering: while it IS true that the money is needed to be at the front and compete, it's not guaranteed that being on equal financial terms will bring competitiveness.

Besides the obvious current day example of McLaren, there are the relatively recent stories of Toyota and BMW - they came in with massive budgets (bigger than Ferrari's back then, in the case of Toyota) and left with their tails between their legs, having spent massively and racking a handful of pole positions and a single race win between both teams. And that's not even mentioning the Honda shenanigans pre-2009.

g1983d · 01-06-2020 8:51am

I think manufacturers would get way better value for money by producing a decent engine for a good privateer team.
Their name is mentioned as part of the team name so as good as being the team.
McLaren Honda, McLaren Meecedes, Jordan Honda, Red Bull Renault
Why dump a ton of cash into their own team when they can just supply a decent engine and throw a few quid with it.
Of course theres the risk of the team/driver slating the engine ala Alonso Honda but do a good job and that's not a problem

El_Duderino 09 · 01-06-2020 9:27am

H3llR4iser wrote: »

There's only one fly in the ointment, something the "smaller teams" don't seem to be considering: while it IS true that the money is needed to be at the front and compete, it's not guaranteed that being on equal financial terms will bring competitiveness.

Besides the obvious current day example of McLaren, there are the relatively recent stories of Toyota and BMW - they came in with massive budgets (bigger than Ferrari's back then, in the case of Toyota) and left with their tails between their legs, having spent massively and racking a handful of pole positions and a single race win between both teams. And that's not even mentioning the Honda shenanigans pre-2009.

Yeah. That's true. But I think you'll find a pretty strong correlation between being a top 3 spender and being a top 3 team.

They also need good management and a good race team and a good factory and a good design team and a good engine and good drivers. But none of those elements are cheap and they take time to build.

So coming in with big budget doesn't guarantee success (nothing guarantees success) it takes time and money to build a top team.

Inviere · 01-06-2020 10:19am

g1983d wrote: »

Why dump a ton of cash into their own team when they can just supply a decent engine and throw a few quid with it.

Because a decent engine doesn't translate into good, marketable, results. Imagine if Mercedes were supplying Williams with engines & just left it at that. The engine is rock solid, but the car itself is dirt...last place in the last two seasons, it ends up looking really bad for Mercedes despite providing a potentially winning engine.

It's better for marketing reasons to have a works team...full control over the engine & car design philosophy will mean higher chances of success, and that means it looks better for the manufacturer.

Of course the downside to this means the days of customer teams tasting success are all but gone. To win in F1 takes a LOT of investment, and that has left other manufacturers not wanting to bother getting involved.

flazio · 01-06-2020 1:55pm

Could someone check something here, if we take the team that started as Jordan and is currently Racing Point as the same team throughout (like when we call Renault the Enstone outfit if referring back to their Lotus or Benetton days) is Sergio Perez the longest serving driver of the Silverstone team?

g1983d · 01-06-2020 2:28pm

flazio wrote: »

Could someone check something here, if we take the team that started as Jordan and is currently Racing Point as the same team throughout (like when we call Renault the Enstone outfit if referring back to their Lotus or Benetton days) is Sergio Perez the longest serving driver of the Silverstone team?

Wouldnt know the answer to that but related is the jordan grand prix entry to F1 all the teams since used officially ceased when force india died and Stroll took over

g1983d · 01-06-2020 2:30pm

Inviere wrote: »

Because a decent engine doesn't translate into good, marketable, results. Imagine if Mercedes were supplying Williams with engines & just left it at that. The engine is rock solid, but the car itself is dirt...last place in the last two seasons, it ends up looking really bad for Mercedes despite providing a potentially winning engine.

It's better for marketing reasons to have a works team...full control over the engine & car design philosophy will mean higher chances of success, and that means it looks better for the manufacturer.

Of course the downside to this means the days of customer teams tasting success are all but gone. To win in F1 takes a LOT of investment, and that has left other manufacturers not wanting to bother getting involved.

That was kind of the point I made in the rest of my comment that's not quoted as being the downside

quokula · 01-06-2020 2:41pm

H3llR4iser wrote: »

There's only one fly in the ointment, something the "smaller teams" don't seem to be considering: while it IS true that the money is needed to be at the front and compete, it's not guaranteed that being on equal financial terms will bring competitiveness.

Besides the obvious current day example of McLaren, there are the relatively recent stories of Toyota and BMW - they came in with massive budgets (bigger than Ferrari's back then, in the case of Toyota) and left with their tails between their legs, having spent massively and racking a handful of pole positions and a single race win between both teams. And that's not even mentioning the Honda shenanigans pre-2009.

It won't guarantee competitiveness, but not having it guarantees uncompetitiveness.

Jordan 199 · 02-06-2020 4:48am

Italian Grand Prix contracted by an extra year until 2025.

Formula 1 2020 - General Discussion Thread (See MOD warning on first post)

Comments