Motorsport Off Topic Thread

COTA has been a money pit for a while all from reports I've read so presume this is a nail in the coffin of it hosting F1. Bet they lost a packet from this years weather hit race as well.

Running Race circuits must be one of the biggest mugs games going, do any of them make any money?! If they host F1 they're either losing tons or living hand to mouth (i.e. Silverstone) or they're bankrolled by some rich oligarch or arab!
 
I don't think it's that unsustainable in reality, but F1 costs such a vast amount. The track is doing fine by all accounts, but the F1 fee is so high that without government funding it can be very difficult to make ends meet on a weekend basis. Not to mention the requirements for meeting the FIA's (and FOM's) ever changing standards for safety and facilities.

Tracks that have shunned F1 still can make money (good example is the MSV tracks in the UK - Brands Hatch, Snetterton, Oulton Park and Cadwell Park). I'd imagine F1 is a loss leader for most non-government funded tracks.
 
Lewis just put a message up saying he has had a crash, crashed into a stationary vehicle or something. Though will be fine for brazil.
 
Last edited:
Interesting chat from Ted during practice. The FIA seem to be trying to grow some balls and play chicken with Ferrari and Mercedes.

They have been blocked at selling the engines at a cap of $12m because the manufacturers have said it will mean selling at a loss. So the FIA have said "right, well you can all build a brand new engine for 2017 instead then, let's see you absorb that half billion dollar cost". Selling the current engines at $12m doesn't look so bad any more does it?

It will be interesting to see if this plan works...
 
The FIA has put the 2017 engine out to tender. No one will build it after the last time.

You wanted these power units FIA now deal with it.
 
deuse said:
The FIA has put the 2017 engine out to tender. No one will build it after the last time.

You wanted these power units FIA now deal with it.
Click to expand...

I think you've missed the point. The end game the FIA are trying to get to is for the current V6s to be retained, but at a capped price. Which is the most sensible outcome at the moment. The 2017 engine is a weapon in the battle, not what they want as an outcome.

Unfortunately Ferrari consider themselves more important than F1, which is why were even in this game of chicken.

(Oh and someone, a couple of people actually, already build the 2017 engine.)
 
Last edited:
Skeeter said:
Not within the arena of F1 they aren't.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they are. If Ferrari were to leave F1 would die within a couple of years. Mercedes have some history, but they're miles away from having any of the romance that Ferrari have. Mercedes would only be beating privateers, as Renault and Honda would soon leave when they kept getting hammered by Mercedes, the sponsors would have already started to desert F1 and the TV audience will have preceded that.

It's a fairly bleak time for F1, and while I suppose it's not as desperate as this point in 2014, it's depressing that the manufacturers hold so much power now. It's quite staggering how quickly we've moved from the teams have zero weight (again, only Ferrari could sway things, even in their horribly bleak time pre-Schumacher/Byrne/Brawn) through to the regulators and TV companies having minimal weight. It's such a swing.

The push for a new engine or change in engine costs is effectively the FIA/FOM trying to insist they still have control, but it's not going to happen. Surely no small, independent company will be capable of coming up with a consistently reliable engine able to challenge Mercedes, and neither Ferrari or Mercedes will allow the regulations to change and possibly erode the advantage they have. We'll inevitably end up with the same engines but with a cost cap for the customer teams, which isn't going to improve the sport at all in the near future. All of this is just bluster, but I've no idea if that's a good or bad thing - I don't want the manufacturers to have control as they will protect their interests and ensure only they can win, but I don't want FOM to have control either, as when Bernie goes, deranged as he is, he's an F1 man and formerly a team owner and, often forgotten, briefly a racer, but he'll be replaced by a pure money-man, F1 will lose all of its history and identity and we'll be drifting from oligarch to oligarch.
 
Last edited:
The FIA and FOM are not the same thing, you know?

What F1 needs is a regulator to regulate it. What it currently has is a poor excuse for a regulator selling the rights to make the rules to the promoter and the competitors, and then acting surprised when nobody agrees on anything.

What this whole saga has shown is that nothing will happen unless Ferrari agree, as they have shown their hand and that they are not only holding all the aces, but are prepared to use them. So unless what gets proposed is a single spec Ferrari ruled series that only the Ferrari's are allowed to win in, we will just have endless disagreements and nothing happening.

Just to be clear, nobody thinks that a select few teams having all the power in F1 is a good thing, do they?
 
Skeeter said:
Just to be clear, nobody thinks that a select few teams having all the power in F1 is a good thing, do they?
Click to expand...

Of course not.

But I stand by my statement. If F1 disbanded tomorrow, it would be no great loss. Another single seater formula would replace it. But if Ferrari went out of business....:eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom