planetf1.com

It is currently Mon May 29, 2017 1:19 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
 Post subject: F1 Team payouts for '16!
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 3:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 4380
Location: Mumbai, India
Here's the amount of money the teams will be receiving in monthly payments for their performance in 2016:

10. Haas - $19 million
9. Sauber - $49 million
8. Renault - $52 million
7. Toro Rosso - $59 million
6. Force India - $72 million
5. Williams - $79 million ($10 million heritage pay)
4. McLaren - $97 million
3. Red Bull - $161 million
2. Mercedes - $171 million
1. Ferrari - $180 million ($68 million heritage pay)

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Global/Issues/2017/05/09/Finance/F1-Team-Payments.aspx

The big figures for the top 3 will always ensure that there is a big gap between them & the rest as money funds development

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Last edited by UnlikeUday on Tue May 09, 2017 7:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 4:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5428
Location: Nebraska, USA
Oh he11, here we go again...

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 5:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 3643
Location: Michigan, USA
UnlikeUday wrote:
The big figures for the top 3 will always ensure that there is a big gap between them & the rest as money funds development

Only if they do decently. McLaren gets a big chunk as well (hence why they're not closer to the bottom!), but it isn't keeping them ahead of the rest right now.

The fact of the matter is, the top three also have access to vast amounts of their own funding. Their competitive advantage, while certainly based in money, isn't just from their FOM payments.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 7:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10686
Exediron wrote:
UnlikeUday wrote:
The big figures for the top 3 will always ensure that there is a big gap between them & the rest as money funds development

Only if they do decently. McLaren gets a big chunk as well (hence why they're not closer to the bottom!), but it isn't keeping them ahead of the rest right now.

The fact of the matter is, the top three also have access to vast amounts of their own funding. Their competitive advantage, while certainly based in money, isn't just from their FOM payments.


Or if they are Ferrari who could finish 10th in the WCC and still earn more than Williams if Williams were champions. Ludicrous.

Also, looking at the full table I see Red Bull are still getting their annual bride for being the first to brake away and sign the deal.

It's not just Ferrari, the whole system stinks of corruptness.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5428
Location: Nebraska, USA
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 12:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1584
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.


I've never seen any figures showing what revenue Ferrari bring in to the sport. I'd be intrigued to see it.

_________________
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 12:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10686
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.


Or you take a bride like Red Bull.

I agree with you from a commercial sense but it's far from ideal in a sporting sense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 12:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18871
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

yeah, but if you take that to its logical conclusion that means no other teams bring anything to the sport, and I don't think I can agree with that. I think McLaren, for example, are as much a part of the fabric of F1 as Ferrari are, yet they don't get the historic payment Ferrari do.

Bernie was a master of divide and conquer. Those who crumbled first got the biggest payments from him. It's what they meant to him and his agenda, not what they brought to the sport


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 12:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5428
Location: Nebraska, USA
Zoue wrote:
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

yeah, but if you take that to its logical conclusion that means no other teams bring anything to the sport, and I don't think I can agree with that. I think McLaren, for example, are as much a part of the fabric of F1 as Ferrari are, yet they don't get the historic payment Ferrari do.

Bernie was a master of divide and conquer. Those who crumbled first got the biggest payments from him. It's what they meant to him and his agenda, not what they brought to the sport


I can't agree with that, my friend. McLaren has the second richest F1 history, no argument, but they fall may years short on the historic aspect and hasn't been a part of F1 throughout the sport's history by starting in 1950.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 1:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18871
Blake wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

yeah, but if you take that to its logical conclusion that means no other teams bring anything to the sport, and I don't think I can agree with that. I think McLaren, for example, are as much a part of the fabric of F1 as Ferrari are, yet they don't get the historic payment Ferrari do.

Bernie was a master of divide and conquer. Those who crumbled first got the biggest payments from him. It's what they meant to him and his agenda, not what they brought to the sport


I can't agree with that, my friend. McLaren has the second richest F1 history, no argument, but they fall may years short on the historic aspect and hasn't been a part of F1 throughout the sport's history by starting in 1950.

No argument from me that Ferrari started earlier, but McLaren weren't that far behind in the 1960s and for most people they are also synonymous with F1. Is that extra decade or so really worth $100M? A year?

I'm not trying to bring Ferrari down, just highlight that the way the revenue is distributed isn't grounded in logic. If history alone was a justification for such a payment then Ferrari wouldn't be the only recipient.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 2:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 7389
Ferrari only have 16 years on Mclaren, 67 years vs 51 years. The more time that passes the "shorter" that becomes. It won't be long before everybody watching F1 would have only seen it with Mclaren in it, we are nearly there now. You need to be 60+ to have seen F1 without Mclaren and started watching (not that it was on TV) at age 9.

The difference between Mclaren and Williams (11 years) is similar to the difference between Ferrari and Mclaren but I've never heard that mentioned.

Mclaren surely receive a historical payment too though?

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 2:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5428
Location: Nebraska, USA
They do... and they should. I don't know why it wasn't mentioned.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 2:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 7389
Judging by the numbers it seems Mclaren get $20-25m per season which is a little low but about right. They should get at least half of what Ferrari do and Williams I would say around 1/3 of Ferrari. F1 should help to keep these private teams alive as history shows the manufacturers come and go as they please but these teams all stay to race. No manufacturer has stayed for long recently, although Mercedes could be an exception. But they will still leave when the the climate changes for them.

BMW - 3 years
Toyota - 8 years
Honda - 3 years
Renault - 9 years (2002-2010) now back (2016- )
Mercedes - 8 years+

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 3:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18871
Blake wrote:
They do... and they should. I don't know why it wasn't mentioned.

Oh, come on, it's completely different. I'm surprised at you for saying this. Ferrari are the only team to receive their special payment. They also, like McLaren and a couple of other teams, get the other, historical payment. So in effect they get both and are the only team to do so. See the link below for a visual breakdown

http://www.totalsportek.com/f1/formula-1-prize-money/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 3:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10686
Blake wrote:
They do... and they should. I don't know why it wasn't mentioned.


And Ferrari get their special bonus in addition to the historical payment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 7:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:19 pm
Posts: 1147
Location: Los Angeles, California
If there were no bonuses and the money was split as normal:
Mercedes- $141.5 million
Red Bull- $127.4 million
Ferrari- $113.3 million
Force India- $103.9 million
Williams- $99.2 million
McLaren- $94.5 million
Toro Rosso- $85.1 million
Renault- $75.7 million
Sauber- $71 million
Haas- $28.2 million

Each team would have gotten $52.2 million just for participating (except Haas who don't qualify for it yet), which is already more than what Sauber are getting. Sauber would get as much money as Force India WILL get for 4th place, so while it's obvious that the teams at the bottom would find it easier to survive, it's would naturally serve to close the gap between the fastest and slowest cars. The gap from the highest to lowest paid would be nearly half what it is now (excluding Haas, of course, but even then, the gap would still be smaller). It just makes sense, and I'm glad Liberty Media are looking at this and looking for a solution.

_________________
"No, there is no terrible way to win. There is only winning."
Jean-Pierre Sarti


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 8:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5428
Location: Nebraska, USA
Zoue wrote:
Blake wrote:
They do... and they should. I don't know why it wasn't mentioned.

Oh, come on, it's completely different. I'm surprised at you for saying this. Ferrari are the only team to receive their special payment. They also, like McLaren and a couple of other teams, get the other, historical payment. So in effect they get both and are the only team to do so. See the link below for a visual breakdown

Zoue... if you look again, you will see that I was referering to Lamo's question a out McLaren and historical payments. I am a bit confused as to what you are upset about?

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 8:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5428
Location: Nebraska, USA
I don't think that Ferrari is the only team to receive a special pyment. Didn't Red Bull negotiate a deal as well?

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 9:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 3684
Merit should be the only basis of pay differences. Heritage pay is absurd. This should be a SPORT! You can't just have a baked in advantage in something you want to describe as a SPORT. Hopefully Liberty will clean this up in the next Concord agreement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 9:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5428
Location: Nebraska, USA
Fine... then let the teams all have their own profits from branded items rather than having divided amongst all teams. Let the teams negotiate with each venue for a share if revenue based on their fan base in attendance. Lets face it some teams mean more to F1 than do others. Some bring more money and fans into the sport... and a small handful of teams have made F1 into the popular sport that is today...

You cant deny their impact... well i guess you can, but it would be s bit foolish.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 9:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10686
Blake wrote:
I don't think that Ferrari is the only team to receive a special pyment. Didn't Red Bull negotiate a deal as well?


Red Bull's is even more dodgy than Ferrari's. There payment is nothing more than bribe for breaking away from FOCA and being the first to sign. Greatly reducing the other teams bargaining power. Bernie's old divide and concur tactics.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 9:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10686
Blake wrote:
Fine... then let the teams all have their own profits from branded items rather than having divided amongst all teams. Let the teams negotiate with each venue for a share if revenue based on their fan base in attendance. Lets face it some teams mean more to F1 than do others. Some bring more money and fans into the sport... and a small handful of teams have made F1 into the popular sport that is today...

You cant deny their impact... well i guess you can, but it would be s bit foolish.


Which wouldn't be good for the sport.

I've no problem with the likes of Ferrari getting a bonus but when it is impossible for a team like Williams to take more money than Ferrari there is a problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 10:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1584
Blake wrote:
Fine... then let the teams all have their own profits from branded items rather than having divided amongst all teams. Let the teams negotiate with each venue for a share if revenue based on their fan base in attendance. Lets face it some teams mean more to F1 than do others. Some bring more money and fans into the sport... and a small handful of teams have made F1 into the popular sport that is today...

You cant deny their impact... well i guess you can, but it would be s bit foolish.


I'd be fine with teams keeping the profits from merch sales. I'm surprised they don't already, whenever I've bought McLaren tops I've paid McLaren directly.

Attendance revenue is different though. How do you work that out? And just because a fan is wearing a Ferrari top, it doesn't mean they wouldn't attend should Ferrari leave F1.

I won't deny Ferrari are good for F1. But you also can't deny that the Ferrari brand wouldn't be the same without Formula 1.

_________________
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 11:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 3643
Location: Michigan, USA
Herb wrote:
Blake wrote:
Fine... then let the teams all have their own profits from branded items rather than having divided amongst all teams. Let the teams negotiate with each venue for a share if revenue based on their fan base in attendance. Lets face it some teams mean more to F1 than do others. Some bring more money and fans into the sport... and a small handful of teams have made F1 into the popular sport that is today...

You cant deny their impact... well i guess you can, but it would be s bit foolish.

I'd be fine with teams keeping the profits from merch sales. I'm surprised they don't already, whenever I've bought McLaren tops I've paid McLaren directly.

Attendance revenue is different though. How do you work that out? And just because a fan is wearing a Ferrari top, it doesn't mean they wouldn't attend should Ferrari leave F1.

I won't deny Ferrari are good for F1. But you also can't deny that the Ferrari brand wouldn't be the same without Formula 1.

Both good points.

Firstly, I absolutely do think teams should get equal payments and keep their own merchandise money. That would make a team's extra income directly proportional to their fanbase and the people they bring into the sport, making it much more fair. Ferrari would doubtless still get the most, but through a much better mechanism.

Second, Ferrari relies on F1 to be what it is. It's a mutually beneficial relationship, but I fully believe that Ferrari needs F1 more than F1 needs Ferrari. The same is even more true of McLaren and Williams; Williams is nothing without F1, and even with the struggles McLaren is currently experiencing, the mere fact of their F1 pedigree makes their cars stand out in a way that a new supercar manufacturer can't hope to match. The teams give F1 value, but F1 also gives the teams a lot in return.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 1:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5428
Location: Nebraska, USA
Exediron wrote:
Herb wrote:
Blake wrote:
Fine... then let the teams all have their own profits from branded items rather than having divided amongst all teams. Let the teams negotiate with each venue for a share if revenue based on their fan base in attendance. Lets face it some teams mean more to F1 than do others. Some bring more money and fans into the sport... and a small handful of teams have made F1 into the popular sport that is today...

You cant deny their impact... well i guess you can, but it would be s bit foolish.

I'd be fine with teams keeping the profits from merch sales. I'm surprised they don't already, whenever I've bought McLaren tops I've paid McLaren directly.

Attendance revenue is different though. How do you work that out? And just because a fan is wearing a Ferrari top, it doesn't mean they wouldn't attend should Ferrari leave F1.

I won't deny Ferrari are good for F1. But you also can't deny that the Ferrari brand wouldn't be the same without Formula 1.

Both good points.

Firstly, I absolutely do think teams should get equal payments and keep their own merchandise money. That would make a team's extra income directly proportional to their fanbase and the people they bring into the sport, making it much more fair. Ferrari would doubtless still get the most, but through a much better mechanism.

Second, Ferrari relies on F1 to be what it is. It's a mutually beneficial relationship, but I fully believe that Ferrari needs F1 more than F1 needs Ferrari. The same is even more true of McLaren and Williams; Williams is nothing without F1, and even with the struggles McLaren is currently experiencing, the mere fact of their F1 pedigree makes their cars stand out in a way that a new supercar manufacturer can't hope to match. The teams give F1 value, but F1 also gives the teams a lot in return.


Actually, Ferrari does need for F1 to be what it is... hell, they pretty much, with the assistance of a very, very few other teams built the sport into what it is. Would F1 survive without Ferrari and McLaren... probably, would it be the F1 you love, not likely. Would Ferrari survive without F1? I have no doubt. Yes, they have created a bit of a "monster" in that their history is so involved with F1, especially after getting their donkeys kicked by Fords big dollar effort in sports cars in the 60s. However, were they to find themselves outside of F1, there are other options that they could turn to that would maintain their image. Sports cars in particular. Their brand image is incredibly strong right now. Over half of the Top 100 collector car sales as of last year are Ferraris. Just today, there are articles that Ferrari has now passed Tesla as the strongest automotive stock on the exchange, and as usual, their production is sold out for months/years in advance. They certainly have benefited by their F1 involvement, but the name and the reputation is quite well established, as you said.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 7:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:53 pm
Posts: 1089
Location: Ireland
I agree with a heritage benefit but it should not be financial. It should be given in voting rights etc.
If a team is well supported and successful then it will reap financial rewards through prize money, sponsorship and merchandise.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 8:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18871
Blake wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Blake wrote:
They do... and they should. I don't know why it wasn't mentioned.

Oh, come on, it's completely different. I'm surprised at you for saying this. Ferrari are the only team to receive their special payment. They also, like McLaren and a couple of other teams, get the other, historical payment. So in effect they get both and are the only team to do so. See the link below for a visual breakdown

Zoue... if you look again, you will see that I was referering to Lamo's question a out McLaren and historical payments. I am a bit confused as to what you are upset about?

I think upset is a bit strong, but I do think that since McLaren's payment is somewhat different and the inference in your answer - I don't know why it wasn't mentioned - is that they should be linked, that's a bit misleading. McLaren are part of a group of teams, including Ferrari, who get a special historical payment (the fairness of which is also open to debate). Ferrari get yet another, much larger payment in addition to that, which is what many people cite as unfair, since they are the only team to get it. In any sporting endeavour, giving preferred treatment to a single competitor can't be healthy, surely?

No-one's trying to take away what Ferrari bring to the sport, but I'd argue that other historical teams like McLaren and Williams arguably bring something similar. I'm afraid I find it difficult to rationalise Ferrari receiving such a massive advantage over others in this way, especially since no-one can ever - no matter what they do - join that exclusive club


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 8:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18871
James14 wrote:
I agree with a heritage benefit but it should not be financial. It should be given in voting rights etc.
If a team is well supported and successful then it will reap financial rewards through prize money, sponsorship and merchandise.

I disagree about voting rights. Part of the problem with F1 today is that teams have a say in how it's run, so decisions are taken with the teams', not F1's, interests in mind. The teams need to be stripped of any say in the sport's governance IMO, so we can move away from the tradition of turkeys voting for Christmas that has sprung up.

Liberty have already offered the teams a chance to buy into the sport - and I think I'm right in saying Ferrari have indicated they are interested in taking that option up. So if Ferrari decide to invest, they can get extra profits that way, same as any other investor in any other business. The difference, however, is that everyone else has the same risk/reward opportunity and the doors to entry aren't forever closed to anyone whose name isn't Ferrari.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 12:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4222
Zoue wrote:
James14 wrote:
I agree with a heritage benefit but it should not be financial. It should be given in voting rights etc.
If a team is well supported and successful then it will reap financial rewards through prize money, sponsorship and merchandise.

I disagree about voting rights. Part of the problem with F1 today is that teams have a say in how it's run, so decisions are taken with the teams', not F1's, interests in mind. The teams need to be stripped of any say in the sport's governance IMO, so we can move away from the tradition of turkeys voting for Christmas that has sprung up.

Liberty have already offered the teams a chance to buy into the sport - and I think I'm right in saying Ferrari have indicated they are interested in taking that option up. So if Ferrari decide to invest, they can get extra profits that way, same as any other investor in any other business. The difference, however, is that everyone else has the same risk/reward opportunity and the doors to entry aren't forever closed to anyone whose name isn't Ferrari.

F1 either needs to be a top down organization where the FIA sets the rules and the teams step to that beat or leave, or be more like the NFL, MLB, NBA, etc. where the teams own the league and what's good for the sport is good for them.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 4:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 1765
Location: England
Blake wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Herb wrote:
Blake wrote:
Fine... then let the teams all have their own profits from branded items rather than having divided amongst all teams. Let the teams negotiate with each venue for a share if revenue based on their fan base in attendance. Lets face it some teams mean more to F1 than do others. Some bring more money and fans into the sport... and a small handful of teams have made F1 into the popular sport that is today...

You cant deny their impact... well i guess you can, but it would be s bit foolish.

I'd be fine with teams keeping the profits from merch sales. I'm surprised they don't already, whenever I've bought McLaren tops I've paid McLaren directly.

Attendance revenue is different though. How do you work that out? And just because a fan is wearing a Ferrari top, it doesn't mean they wouldn't attend should Ferrari leave F1.

I won't deny Ferrari are good for F1. But you also can't deny that the Ferrari brand wouldn't be the same without Formula 1.

Both good points.

Firstly, I absolutely do think teams should get equal payments and keep their own merchandise money. That would make a team's extra income directly proportional to their fanbase and the people they bring into the sport, making it much more fair. Ferrari would doubtless still get the most, but through a much better mechanism.

Second, Ferrari relies on F1 to be what it is. It's a mutually beneficial relationship, but I fully believe that Ferrari needs F1 more than F1 needs Ferrari. The same is even more true of McLaren and Williams; Williams is nothing without F1, and even with the struggles McLaren is currently experiencing, the mere fact of their F1 pedigree makes their cars stand out in a way that a new supercar manufacturer can't hope to match. The teams give F1 value, but F1 also gives the teams a lot in return.


Actually, Ferrari does need for F1 to be what it is... hell, they pretty much, with the assistance of a very, very few other teams built the sport into what it is. Would F1 survive without Ferrari and McLaren... probably, would it be the F1 you love, not likely. Would Ferrari survive without F1? I have no doubt. Yes, they have created a bit of a "monster" in that their history is so involved with F1, especially after getting their donkeys kicked by Fords big dollar effort in sports cars in the 60s. However, were they to find themselves outside of F1, there are other options that they could turn to that would maintain their image. Sports cars in particular. Their brand image is incredibly strong right now. Over half of the Top 100 collector car sales as of last year are Ferraris. Just today, there are articles that Ferrari has now passed Tesla as the strongest automotive stock on the exchange, and as usual, their production is sold out for months/years in advance. They certainly have benefited by their F1 involvement, but the name and the reputation is quite well established, as you said.


Ferrari's entire advertisement comes through F1, and their involvement therein. The arrangement the Ferrari and F1 have is almost symbiotic, one needs the other to flourish. That much isn't in any doubt. I agree fully with Exediron insomuch that teams should get equal payment on a base level, and given your constant preaching that Ferrari and it's fanbase bring more to the table than anyone else, surely you wouldn't be against the idea that the teams could recoup all profits on their merchandise? By your own postings, you truly believe that more people show up to an F1 race to watch Ferrari over (at the time our discussion was about Marussia, but I digress) any of the 'lesser' teams. If that truly comes to pass, then surely Ferrari shift more gear than any other team and can recoup money in that fashion, in keeping with their standing within the sport?

The 5% they get now before anyone else is the shining beacon of just how bad it got towards the end of the Ecclestone era. Bernie did great things, but as his power was on the wane he cut some fast and loose deals with several teams in order to reinforce the bottom line and his own seat at the top table. This 'leak' of payments is nothing new, it was fairly common knowledge, but it's been done by a 'team' now, and i'm sure its yet another salvo across the bows of Liberty as they settle in the role of running F1.

_________________
http://tsatr.mooo.com
The Sun and The Rain - The reluctant runner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 4:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 1765
Location: England
Blake wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

yeah, but if you take that to its logical conclusion that means no other teams bring anything to the sport, and I don't think I can agree with that. I think McLaren, for example, are as much a part of the fabric of F1 as Ferrari are, yet they don't get the historic payment Ferrari do.

Bernie was a master of divide and conquer. Those who crumbled first got the biggest payments from him. It's what they meant to him and his agenda, not what they brought to the sport


I can't agree with that, my friend. McLaren has the second richest F1 history, no argument, but they fall may years short on the historic aspect and hasn't been a part of F1 throughout the sport's history by starting in 1950.


So by virtue of Bruce McLaren having the utter cheek to be born 39 years after Enzo, and thus utterly unable to establish his team at the same time, we get to endure Ferrari being doled out honey money because its always got in line when the ringmaster came calling?

Christ.

_________________
http://tsatr.mooo.com
The Sun and The Rain - The reluctant runner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 6:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5428
Location: Nebraska, USA
Flash2k11 wrote:
Blake wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

yeah, but if you take that to its logical conclusion that means no other teams bring anything to the sport, and I don't think I can agree with that. I think McLaren, for example, are as much a part of the fabric of F1 as Ferrari are, yet they don't get the historic payment Ferrari do.

Bernie was a master of divide and conquer. Those who crumbled first got the biggest payments from him. It's what they meant to him and his agenda, not what they brought to the sport


I can't agree with that, my friend. McLaren has the second richest F1 history, no argument, but they fall may years short on the historic aspect and hasn't been a part of F1 throughout the sport's history by starting in 1950.


So by virtue of Bruce McLaren having the utter cheek to be born 39 years after Enzo, and thus utterly unable to establish his team at the same time, we get to endure Ferrari being doled out honey money because its always got in line when the ringmaster came calling?

Christ.


What a ridiculous comment. As to your previous response... try reading what I said on the topic before you post sometime.

As for the "constant preaching" comment, you might note that my "preaching" is in response to what others have posted. I realize that some, such as yourself?... would prefer that no one post a counterpoint so that they could go on believing that their view is the only view... sorry, but i won't roll over dead for you.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 10:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 20619
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

He gave money to Red Bull so he could destabilise FOCA who were looking to have a bigger say in how F1 was run, FOCA folded a few years afterwards.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 22nd

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2017 3:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 3643
Location: Michigan, USA
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

He gave money to Red Bull so he could destabilise FOCA who were looking to have a bigger say in how F1 was run, FOCA folded a few years afterwards.

:thumbup:

Indeed. Bernie didn't give away money for nothing, but that doesn't mean his motive was anything like what he claimed it was.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2017 4:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 1765
Location: England
Blake wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Blake wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

yeah, but if you take that to its logical conclusion that means no other teams bring anything to the sport, and I don't think I can agree with that. I think McLaren, for example, are as much a part of the fabric of F1 as Ferrari are, yet they don't get the historic payment Ferrari do.

Bernie was a master of divide and conquer. Those who crumbled first got the biggest payments from him. It's what they meant to him and his agenda, not what they brought to the sport


I can't agree with that, my friend. McLaren has the second richest F1 history, no argument, but they fall may years short on the historic aspect and hasn't been a part of F1 throughout the sport's history by starting in 1950.


So by virtue of Bruce McLaren having the utter cheek to be born 39 years after Enzo, and thus utterly unable to establish his team at the same time, we get to endure Ferrari being doled out honey money because its always got in line when the ringmaster came calling?

Christ.


What a ridiculous comment. As to your previous response... try reading what I said on the topic before you post sometime.

As for the "constant preaching" comment, you might note that my "preaching" is in response to what others have posted. I realize that some, such as yourself?... would prefer that no one post a counterpoint so that they could go on believing that their view is the only view... sorry, but i won't roll over dead for you.


Not asking you to roll over, though i'd love it if you could actually refute the point instead of making vague allusions to my reading ability and the paranoid notion that i'm not willing to debate on any subject.

_________________
http://tsatr.mooo.com
The Sun and The Rain - The reluctant runner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2017 4:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5428
Location: Nebraska, USA
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

He gave money to Red Bull so he could destabilise FOCA who were looking to have a bigger say in how F1 was run, FOCA folded a few years afterwards.

:thumbup:

Indeed. Bernie didn't give away money for nothing, but that doesn't mean his motive was anything like what he claimed it was.

So, basically, poker, Exediron and Blake all seem to agree on the topic of bernie the rat's motivations. This is a rare event.
;)

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2017 5:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 3643
Location: Michigan, USA
Blake wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

He gave money to Red Bull so he could destabilise FOCA who were looking to have a bigger say in how F1 was run, FOCA folded a few years afterwards.

:thumbup:

Indeed. Bernie didn't give away money for nothing, but that doesn't mean his motive was anything like what he claimed it was.

So, basically, poker, Exediron and Blake all seem to agree on the topic of bernie the rat's motivations. This is a rare event.
;)

If Zoue agrees on it too, then it's probably a once-in-a-lifetime event.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2017 7:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18871
Exediron wrote:
Blake wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
It comes down to what the teams bring to the sport. Bernie was not in the habit of giving away money for no reason.

He gave money to Red Bull so he could destabilise FOCA who were looking to have a bigger say in how F1 was run, FOCA folded a few years afterwards.

:thumbup:

Indeed. Bernie didn't give away money for nothing, but that doesn't mean his motive was anything like what he claimed it was.

So, basically, poker, Exediron and Blake all seem to agree on the topic of bernie the rat's motivations. This is a rare event.
;)

If Zoue agrees on it too, then it's probably a once-in-a-lifetime event.

Pretty hard to argue against Bernie's motives being anything but straightforward. Mark it in your calendar


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2017 6:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 2352
Location: UK
Blake wrote:
Fine... then let the teams all have their own profits from branded items rather than having divided amongst all teams. Let the teams negotiate with each venue for a share if revenue based on their fan base in attendance. Lets face it some teams mean more to F1 than do others. Some bring more money and fans into the sport... and a small handful of teams have made F1 into the popular sport that is today...

You cant deny their impact... well i guess you can, but it would be s bit foolish.

In recent years Lewis Hamilton has arguably done more than anyone to draw more fans and money into the sport through his social media activities, TV appearances etc. Perhaps he should get a hefty slice of the TV revenue too?

This is supposed to be a competitive sport. Giving certain teams guaranteed advantages to maintain the status quo is not conducive to fair competition.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2017 11:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 20619
Blake wrote:
Fine... then let the teams all have their own profits from branded items rather than having divided amongst all teams. Let the teams negotiate with each venue for a share if revenue based on their fan base in attendance. Lets face it some teams mean more to F1 than do others. Some bring more money and fans into the sport... and a small handful of teams have made F1 into the popular sport that is today...

You cant deny their impact... well i guess you can, but it would be s bit foolish.

So let the circuits pay Ferrari instead, anyway to keep Ferrari's financial advantage.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 22nd

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


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: Blinky McSquinty, Google Adsense [Bot], Jenson's Understeer, KIMBO2, Lotus49, Lt. Drebin, pc27b, Prema, t2jd1967 and 1 guest


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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group