planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:08 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2018 10:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1876
Location: Miami, Florida
dizlexik wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
dompclarke wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
NO, I will never be understanding of wanting "IN" on money that another team has busted their hump TO EARN!!!

That's just plain greed and regardless of the "need" for cash some other teams may have, if they want more money… Do better and EARN IT!!!
The FIA needs to quit asking for "permission" from the rest of the teams to do certain things when they already know what is best for the sport as a whole.
Red Bull already has a B team and has for a decade already, and Ferrari have been scavenging off of Sauber (their on-again, off-again B team) for almost as long and no one has complained.

Williams is doing poorly because of the way they do things and I think Claire needs to allow Paddy Lowe to run the team his way and see what gives because the way the team has been run clearly isn't working.
Williams, McLaren and Renault ought to worry about improving THEIR car and team rather than worrying if Mercedes is going to assist in transforming Force India into a B team and trying to get as much of their money as they can.

My only hope is that FI survives. And in the event they do become a B team, everyone better watch out because they've been so close to the top guys that the slightest little breakthrough can allow them to fight further up the grid which means regular podiums and who knows what else.

Well if someone buys and renames the team it can be argued it isn't the same team and therefore hasn't earned the money...

I do think everyone should be pulling out the stops to make sure they survive, but there are other valid (if a little lacking in morals) views...

Nonsense… It most definitely cannot be argued logically that it's not the same company.
Tax returns alone would LEGALLY deem any such company as the same because regardless of new ownership, the monies owed prior to being sold are still the responsibility of any such entity,
and the taxman overrules all.

In the real world, when you buy a Business (that's truly what all sports entities are) you purchase it entirely INCLUDING all accounts payable AND RECEIVABLES.
In this case the prize money is one such receivable.


This is all about agreements between commercial rights holders and F1 teams and they define what constitute new team.

Yes and it's pretty clear what a "new" team is…

In 2010 we had 3 of them, in 2016 it was Haas. New ownership does not deem it a "new" team.

McLaren has switched ownership several times now and the team was never in jeopardy of losing its prize money.
Certainly, if they have new owners they must be considered a new team, no?

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 12:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5907
Location: Michigan, USA
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
This is all about agreements between commercial rights holders and F1 teams and they define what constitute new team.

Yes and it's pretty clear what a "new" team is…

In 2010 we had 3 of them, in 2016 it was Haas. New ownership does not deem it a "new" team.

McLaren has switched ownership several times now and the team was never in jeopardy of losing its prize money.
Certainly, if they have new owners they must be considered a new team, no?

Yeah, it's pretty ridiculous that they can consider new ownership of the same team, same factory, same works, same intellectual property, etc. to be a new entry. But that's what you get when you cede control of the sport to the teams in it - FOM doesn't want to hurt Force India, but their competitors do, and because of the crappy way the sport is structured they may have the ability to do so.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 12:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27907
moby wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Lojik wrote:
I have recently read another theory that suggests that the teams are objecting as some kind of protest against the alliances around Ferrari/Mercedes, and that they are concerned that FI will be turned into some kind of Merc B team.


I think McLaren,Williams and Renault are getting increasingly annoyed at these types of close collaborations yeah. Horner has already said STR are getting a full Red Bull rear end next year which means they'll have one of the best rear ends for pretty much next to nothing and no work done on it. I think those 3 teams are trying to use this FI situation to get some rules changed around what you can give your engine customers or "B teams" etc..rather than preempting a Merc-FI hook up.

We won't sign this until you fix that, type of thing.

I'm torn on it, on one hand I can see why they'd be so annoyed as it's more competition from teams that haven't spent the money they have on development but they're still getting better stuff passed down and almost instant competitiveness from it while they have to take a lot of CFD and wind tunnel time up and spend big to match any parts passed down from top 3 teams.

Even a year old RB rear end is going to cost millions and take up a lot of cfd/wind tunnel time up for the others to try and match for example. CFD time the customers can now pump into areas they aren't getting the hand me downs. That makes a sizeable difference you would think.

On the other I think it's the most sensible route for the smaller teams to go down and I want more competition throughput the grid, the midfield battle this year is great so I like it.

Tough situation.


Was just reading Jo's blog and he seems to think Williams will be going down the 'B' team path with Merc, starting with the gearbox/rear end next year.

It's been said for a while why do Williams design and build their own gearboxes, it takes up manpower and resources that could be used elsewhere, they still have the mindset of being a big team maybe now they are seeing the folly of it?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 6:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 6684
Location: Mumbai, India
So Renault, Williams & McLaren fear FI will become Mercedes' 'Slave Team'!!!!!! Is there any difference between a slave team & a B-team then? What could we call Haas, Sauber & Toro Rosso then?

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 7:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5907
Location: Michigan, USA
UnlikeUday wrote:
So Renault, Williams & McLaren fear FI will become Mercedes' 'Slave Team'!!!!!! Is there any difference between a slave team & a B-team then? What could we call Haas, Sauber & Toro Rosso then?

Haas seem to be fully independent in terms of their decision making and on-track conduct, so I certainly wouldn't consider them a 'slave team'. Or a B-team, for that matter.

As for Alfa-Sauber and Toro Rosso? Definitely B-teams, Toro Rosso in particular. I can't say that I wholly approve of any team owning another and having a say over their competitive choices, but I don't see any chance of Force India becoming more B-team than Toro Rosso already is. That really can't be done.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7769
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
dompclarke wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
NO, I will never be understanding of wanting "IN" on money that another team has busted their hump TO EARN!!!

That's just plain greed and regardless of the "need" for cash some other teams may have, if they want more money… Do better and EARN IT!!!
The FIA needs to quit asking for "permission" from the rest of the teams to do certain things when they already know what is best for the sport as a whole.
Red Bull already has a B team and has for a decade already, and Ferrari have been scavenging off of Sauber (their on-again, off-again B team) for almost as long and no one has complained.

Williams is doing poorly because of the way they do things and I think Claire needs to allow Paddy Lowe to run the team his way and see what gives because the way the team has been run clearly isn't working.
Williams, McLaren and Renault ought to worry about improving THEIR car and team rather than worrying if Mercedes is going to assist in transforming Force India into a B team and trying to get as much of their money as they can.

My only hope is that FI survives. And in the event they do become a B team, everyone better watch out because they've been so close to the top guys that the slightest little breakthrough can allow them to fight further up the grid which means regular podiums and who knows what else.

Well if someone buys and renames the team it can be argued it isn't the same team and therefore hasn't earned the money...

I do think everyone should be pulling out the stops to make sure they survive, but there are other valid (if a little lacking in morals) views...

Nonsense… It most definitely cannot be argued logically that it's not the same company.
Tax returns alone would LEGALLY deem any such company as the same because regardless of new ownership, the monies owed prior to being sold are still the responsibility of any such entity,
and the taxman overrules all.

In the real world, when you buy a Business (that's truly what all sports entities are) you purchase it entirely INCLUDING all accounts payable AND RECEIVABLES.
In this case the prize money is one such receivable.


This is all about agreements between commercial rights holders and F1 teams and they define what constitute new team.

Yes and it's pretty clear what a "new" team is…

In 2010 we had 3 of them, in 2016 it was Haas. New ownership does not deem it a "new" team.

McLaren has switched ownership several times now and the team was never in jeopardy of losing its prize money.
Certainly, if they have new owners they must be considered a new team, no?

It's not about ownership, but about team name. Presumably commercial rights holders see value in names. Anyone is free to buy FI, but if they want to keep prize money they can't change name. Of course I don't know any details. I don't want to say whether it is good or bad. I just try to explain how it works. The actually ownership isn't very relevant. Only the team name is.

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2033
UnlikeUday wrote:
So Renault, Williams & McLaren fear FI will become Mercedes' 'Slave Team'!!!!!! Is there any difference between a slave team & a B-team then? What could we call Haas, Sauber & Toro Rosso then?


As far as I understand it, they fear a development where three majors directly or indirectly control the deciding majority of the grid (3 x Ferrari, 2 x Red Bull, then 2 x Mercedes) - and thus de facto control technical regulations (which in turn may be shaped so to increase pressure on independents to become a "B-Team" of the majors) as well as influence the payment allocation. The independents fear to get marginalized and deterred by this "cartel".

From a sporting perspective, such a scenario would be worrying IMO. Whoever followed DTM in recent years can see it clearly: three times one lead driver and the rest are "wingmen" assisting their No. 1 and fighting the No. 2 of the others. Not my world of F1.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2033
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
This is all about agreements between commercial rights holders and F1 teams and they define what constitute new team.

Yes and it's pretty clear what a "new" team is…

In 2010 we had 3 of them, in 2016 it was Haas. New ownership does not deem it a "new" team.

McLaren has switched ownership several times now and the team was never in jeopardy of losing its prize money.
Certainly, if they have new owners they must be considered a new team, no?

Yeah, it's pretty ridiculous that they can consider new ownership of the same team, same factory, same works, same intellectual property, etc. to be a new entry. But that's what you get when you cede control of the sport to the teams in it - FOM doesn't want to hurt Force India, but their competitors do, and because of the crappy way the sport is structured they may have the ability to do so.


:thumbup:

As far as I understand the situation, the company (the "legal person") that is holding the license - Force India Formula One Ltd. or something like that - must remain intact in order to uphold all the rights. It may change ownership, but only as a whole.
However,in an administration procedure, selling such a company as a whole is only one option. Another option is to sell the assets of the company without the company (the legal person) itself and subsequently wind up the company (the then "empty" legal entity). For new owners, this way has some Advantages (e.g. all old contracts and duties are nullified, everything can be immediately re-organized). But legally it then constitutes a new legal entity. My guess is that this way was blocked by the other teams (as it would have required every other team to agree). If the company is sold as a whole, all rights to F1 and payments remain intact.

A name change can be done for next season and requires the agreement of the majority of teams.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 10:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 508
pokerman wrote:
moby wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Lojik wrote:
I have recently read another theory that suggests that the teams are objecting as some kind of protest against the alliances around Ferrari/Mercedes, and that they are concerned that FI will be turned into some kind of Merc B team.


I think McLaren,Williams and Renault are getting increasingly annoyed at these types of close collaborations yeah. Horner has already said STR are getting a full Red Bull rear end next year which means they'll have one of the best rear ends for pretty much next to nothing and no work done on it. I think those 3 teams are trying to use this FI situation to get some rules changed around what you can give your engine customers or "B teams" etc..rather than preempting a Merc-FI hook up.

We won't sign this until you fix that, type of thing.

I'm torn on it, on one hand I can see why they'd be so annoyed as it's more competition from teams that haven't spent the money they have on development but they're still getting better stuff passed down and almost instant competitiveness from it while they have to take a lot of CFD and wind tunnel time up and spend big to match any parts passed down from top 3 teams.

Even a year old RB rear end is going to cost millions and take up a lot of cfd/wind tunnel time up for the others to try and match for example. CFD time the customers can now pump into areas they aren't getting the hand me downs. That makes a sizeable difference you would think.

On the other I think it's the most sensible route for the smaller teams to go down and I want more competition throughput the grid, the midfield battle this year is great so I like it.

Tough situation.


Was just reading Jo's blog and he seems to think Williams will be going down the 'B' team path with Merc, starting with the gearbox/rear end next year.

It's been said for a while why do Williams design and build their own gearboxes, it takes up manpower and resources that could be used elsewhere, they still have the mindset of being a big team maybe now they are seeing the folly of it?

But buying these in restricts your design to fit in with the parts you're buying, change pu supplier and potentially have to change design philosophy...
I seem to remember Haas saying they'd work more and more towards manufacturing everything themselves, but it doesn't seem to have started yet


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 11:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 191
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
UnlikeUday wrote:
So Renault, Williams & McLaren fear FI will become Mercedes' 'Slave Team'!!!!!! Is there any difference between a slave team & a B-team then? What could we call Haas, Sauber & Toro Rosso then?


As far as I understand it, they fear a development where three majors directly or indirectly control the deciding majority of the grid (3 x Ferrari, 2 x Red Bull, then 2 x Mercedes) - and thus de facto control technical regulations (which in turn may be shaped so to increase pressure on independents to become a "B-Team" of the majors) as well as influence the payment allocation. The independents fear to get marginalized and deterred by this "cartel".

From a sporting perspective, such a scenario would be worrying IMO. Whoever followed DTM in recent years can see it clearly: three times one lead driver and the rest are "wingmen" assisting their No. 1 and fighting the No. 2 of the others. Not my world of F1.


Not my world of F1 either. It is understandable that Ferrari and Mercedes are content with F1 being a two team show, because that sends all the money and attention in their direction, but it is detrimental to F1 in the long run.

Since the end of 2012 109 out of 110 races has been won by Mercedes, Ferrari or Red Bull (Räikkönens single win for Lotus in 2013 the only exception), and 80 of the last 91 races by Mercedes or Ferrari, and I think that lack of competion will reduce the common interest for Formula 1. We are already talking about an informal "Best of the Rest" championship, and if everybody knows before every new season, that all races will be won by either Ferrari or Mercedes it will only leave the hard core F1 fans in the stands and behind the tv-screens. That won't be a long term viable business for Liberty Media.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 12:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 130
I think that it's a pretty legitimate concern, especially after what HAAS has pulled off this season.

Renault for one has been busting its hump trying to improve their car, HAAS is simply using Ferrari's cast off and is achieving similar results.

I think it would better for the sport if it went away from the Toro Rosso, HAAS and to some extent, Sauber models of doing things. For example, when was the last time a Toro Rosso held up a red bull or a HAAS held up a Ferrari?

These teams shouldn't just be extensions of the big 3, the big 3(really big 2) are strong enough as it is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 1027
Altair wrote:
I think that it's a pretty legitimate concern, especially after what HAAS has pulled off this season.

Renault for one has been busting its hump trying to improve their car, HAAS is simply using Ferrari's cast off and is achieving similar results.

I think it would better for the sport if it went away from the Toro Rosso, HAAS and to some extent, Sauber models of doing things. For example, when was the last time a Toro Rosso held up a red bull or a HAAS held up a Ferrari?

These teams shouldn't just be extensions of the big 3, the big 3(really big 2) are strong enough as it is.


Customer teams becoming extensions of bigger teams should provide better racing over all as the customer teams would obviously be more competitive BUT as some have already pointed out with current money distribution system and how works teams are allowed to throw their weight around it does put the sport as whole in a bad place.

Just how the teams have all decided on the new engine regs shutting out new manufacturers. The teams themselves shouldn’t be allowed to dictate the direction the sport takes and it’s frustrating as a fan to see an entire sport catered to those who have the most money. (To my knowledge) No other sport does this. How F1 continues to fail at managing its funds is beyond belief.

_________________
PF1 pick 10 2016: 7th (1 win, 4 podiums), 2017: 17th (3 podiums)
Awards: Sergio perez trophy & Podium specialist
PF1 pick 3 2015: constructors 2nd, singles 5th
Autosport Gp 2016/17 - 5th
F1 Oracle 2017: 2nd (6 wins), 2016:5th (2wins)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27907
dompclarke wrote:
pokerman wrote:
moby wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Lojik wrote:
I have recently read another theory that suggests that the teams are objecting as some kind of protest against the alliances around Ferrari/Mercedes, and that they are concerned that FI will be turned into some kind of Merc B team.


I think McLaren,Williams and Renault are getting increasingly annoyed at these types of close collaborations yeah. Horner has already said STR are getting a full Red Bull rear end next year which means they'll have one of the best rear ends for pretty much next to nothing and no work done on it. I think those 3 teams are trying to use this FI situation to get some rules changed around what you can give your engine customers or "B teams" etc..rather than preempting a Merc-FI hook up.

We won't sign this until you fix that, type of thing.

I'm torn on it, on one hand I can see why they'd be so annoyed as it's more competition from teams that haven't spent the money they have on development but they're still getting better stuff passed down and almost instant competitiveness from it while they have to take a lot of CFD and wind tunnel time up and spend big to match any parts passed down from top 3 teams.

Even a year old RB rear end is going to cost millions and take up a lot of cfd/wind tunnel time up for the others to try and match for example. CFD time the customers can now pump into areas they aren't getting the hand me downs. That makes a sizeable difference you would think.

On the other I think it's the most sensible route for the smaller teams to go down and I want more competition throughput the grid, the midfield battle this year is great so I like it.

Tough situation.


Was just reading Jo's blog and he seems to think Williams will be going down the 'B' team path with Merc, starting with the gearbox/rear end next year.

It's been said for a while why do Williams design and build their own gearboxes, it takes up manpower and resources that could be used elsewhere, they still have the mindset of being a big team maybe now they are seeing the folly of it?

But buying these in restricts your design to fit in with the parts you're buying, change pu supplier and potentially have to change design philosophy...
I seem to remember Haas saying they'd work more and more towards manufacturing everything themselves, but it doesn't seem to have started yet

Well it's something that I heard that it takes a lot of resource both financially and with manpower to design these things and it's much cheaper to buy in parts, it certainly doesn't hurt the likes of Haas.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 508
Mayhem wrote:
Altair wrote:
I think that it's a pretty legitimate concern, especially after what HAAS has pulled off this season.

Renault for one has been busting its hump trying to improve their car, HAAS is simply using Ferrari's cast off and is achieving similar results.

I think it would better for the sport if it went away from the Toro Rosso, HAAS and to some extent, Sauber models of doing things. For example, when was the last time a Toro Rosso held up a red bull or a HAAS held up a Ferrari?

These teams shouldn't just be extensions of the big 3, the big 3(really big 2) are strong enough as it is.


Customer teams becoming extensions of bigger teams should provide better racing over all as the customer teams would obviously be more competitive BUT as some have already pointed out with current money distribution system and how works teams are allowed to throw their weight around it does put the sport as whole in a bad place.

Just how the teams have all decided on the new engine regs shutting out new manufacturers. The teams themselves shouldn’t be allowed to dictate the direction the sport takes and it’s frustrating as a fan to see an entire sport catered to those who have the most money. (To my knowledge) No other sport does this. How F1 continues to fail at managing its funds is beyond belief.

Depends how customer teams are done, if they can do it for a couple of years on entry while they build up the team it could be a good thing. One thing to remember with customer cars is that Williams started with a customer March chassis, Ferrari started preparing cars for Alfa (a bit like AMG is to Merc) before doing his own cars, McLaren started with custom Cooper chassis, pretty sure Lotus used to sell cars to others to race - they can have their place in F1 if done carefully


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 130
Mayhem wrote:
Altair wrote:
I think that it's a pretty legitimate concern, especially after what HAAS has pulled off this season.

Renault for one has been busting its hump trying to improve their car, HAAS is simply using Ferrari's cast off and is achieving similar results.

I think it would better for the sport if it went away from the Toro Rosso, HAAS and to some extent, Sauber models of doing things. For example, when was the last time a Toro Rosso held up a red bull or a HAAS held up a Ferrari?

These teams shouldn't just be extensions of the big 3, the big 3(really big 2) are strong enough as it is.


Customer teams becoming extensions of bigger teams should provide better racing over all as the customer teams would obviously be more competitive BUT as some have already pointed out with current money distribution system and how works teams are allowed to throw their weight around it does put the sport as whole in a bad place.

Just how the teams have all decided on the new engine regs shutting out new manufacturers. The teams themselves shouldn’t be allowed to dictate the direction the sport takes and it’s frustrating as a fan to see an entire sport catered to those who have the most money. (To my knowledge) No other sport does this. How F1 continues to fail at managing its funds is beyond belief.
Yes, the sport needs to find a way to have the lesser teams work their way up to being top teams and top teams enjoying a period of being a top team but eventually making way for other teams to replace them.

This happens to some extent, with Renault winning and falling back, Ferrari dominance giving way to Red Bull, and Red Bull to Mercedes, but for the last decade or so it's been locked into the top 3 teams going through the ups and downs, with little to no chance for teams outside the top 3 to make up ground.

Even with budget caps and more revenue sharing, those bottom tier teams probably aren't going to be able to catch up to the top 3 without something else in their favor that can help make their cars better over the course of a few seasons. I've always been a fan of giving the lower ranked teams a way to catch up to the big teams, and I think the lower a team places in the standings the more it should be able to modify their car without grid penalties.


Last edited by Altair on Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 508
Altair wrote:
Mayhem wrote:
Altair wrote:
I think that it's a pretty legitimate concern, especially after what HAAS has pulled off this season.

Renault for one has been busting its hump trying to improve their car, HAAS is simply using Ferrari's cast off and is achieving similar results.

I think it would better for the sport if it went away from the Toro Rosso, HAAS and to some extent, Sauber models of doing things. For example, when was the last time a Toro Rosso held up a red bull or a HAAS held up a Ferrari?

These teams shouldn't just be extensions of the big 3, the big 3(really big 2) are strong enough as it is.


Customer teams becoming extensions of bigger teams should provide better racing over all as the customer teams would obviously be more competitive BUT as some have already pointed out with current money distribution system and how works teams are allowed to throw their weight around it does put the sport as whole in a bad place.

Just how the teams have all decided on the new engine regs shutting out new manufacturers. The teams themselves shouldn’t be allowed to dictate the direction the sport takes and it’s frustrating as a fan to see an entire sport catered to those who have the most money. (To my knowledge) No other sport does this. How F1 continues to fail at managing its funds is beyond belief.
Yes, the sport needs to find a way to have the lesser teams work their way up to being top teams and top teams enjoying a period of being a top team but eventually making way for other teams to replace them.

This happens to some extent, with Renault winning and falling back, Ferrari dominance giving way to Red Bull, and Red Bull to Mercedes, but for the last decade or so it's been locked into the top 3 teams going through the ups and downs, with little to no chance for teams outside the top 3 to make up ground.

Even with budget caps and more revenue sharing, those bottom tier teams probably aren't going to be able to catch up to the top 3 without something else in their favor that can help make their cars better over the course of a few seasons. I've always been a fan of giving the lower ranked teams a way to catch up to the big teams, and I think the lower a team places in the standings the ore it should be able to modify their car without grid penalties.

From 1984 to 1998 it was McLaren and Williams domination with a side show of Benneton in the middle, go back to 1972 and you can add Ferrari and Lotus. F1 has pretty much had domination of constructors championships throughout anyone looking back to days where all can compete have some very darkly tinted rose spectacles


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 191
dompclarke wrote:
From 1984 to 1998 it was McLaren and Williams domination with a side show of Benneton in the middle, go back to 1972 and you can add Ferrari and Lotus. F1 has pretty much had domination of constructors championships throughout anyone looking back to days where all can compete have some very darkly tinted rose spectacles


It's true there have almost always been a dominant team with their domination lasting for period of time. But the dominance has usually changed within a considerably larger group of teams than the current two. And that's a significant difference.

While Ferrari for instance were the dominant team in Schumachers days the domination was always under pressure from a number of other team all being potential threats to the crown. That's what we don't see today, and if the rest of the teams gradually are being reduced to B-teams because of lacking finances, then the two big teams (and possibly Red Bull for as long as it is commercially sound for the drinks company to run an F1 team) has eliminated that threat completely.

Then F1 will be a permanent Two-Tiers competition with the podiums occupied by the same teams year after year. Hopefully Liberty Media will do what it takes to prevent that from happening.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 6684
Location: Mumbai, India
FI atleast do belief they'll be running without any hindrances till the end of the season:


_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 5:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14181
dompclarke wrote:
Altair wrote:
Mayhem wrote:
Altair wrote:
I think that it's a pretty legitimate concern, especially after what HAAS has pulled off this season.

Renault for one has been busting its hump trying to improve their car, HAAS is simply using Ferrari's cast off and is achieving similar results.

I think it would better for the sport if it went away from the Toro Rosso, HAAS and to some extent, Sauber models of doing things. For example, when was the last time a Toro Rosso held up a red bull or a HAAS held up a Ferrari?

These teams shouldn't just be extensions of the big 3, the big 3(really big 2) are strong enough as it is.


Customer teams becoming extensions of bigger teams should provide better racing over all as the customer teams would obviously be more competitive BUT as some have already pointed out with current money distribution system and how works teams are allowed to throw their weight around it does put the sport as whole in a bad place.

Just how the teams have all decided on the new engine regs shutting out new manufacturers. The teams themselves shouldn’t be allowed to dictate the direction the sport takes and it’s frustrating as a fan to see an entire sport catered to those who have the most money. (To my knowledge) No other sport does this. How F1 continues to fail at managing its funds is beyond belief.
Yes, the sport needs to find a way to have the lesser teams work their way up to being top teams and top teams enjoying a period of being a top team but eventually making way for other teams to replace them.

This happens to some extent, with Renault winning and falling back, Ferrari dominance giving way to Red Bull, and Red Bull to Mercedes, but for the last decade or so it's been locked into the top 3 teams going through the ups and downs, with little to no chance for teams outside the top 3 to make up ground.

Even with budget caps and more revenue sharing, those bottom tier teams probably aren't going to be able to catch up to the top 3 without something else in their favor that can help make their cars better over the course of a few seasons. I've always been a fan of giving the lower ranked teams a way to catch up to the big teams, and I think the lower a team places in the standings the ore it should be able to modify their car without grid penalties.

From 1984 to 1998 it was McLaren and Williams domination with a side show of Benneton in the middle, go back to 1972 and you can add Ferrari and Lotus. F1 has pretty much had domination of constructors championships throughout anyone looking back to days where all can compete have some very darkly tinted rose spectacles


It was a bit less of a monopoly then though. Lotus, Ferrari and Benetton all mounted championship challenges in that time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 6:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 11:29 am
Posts: 675
Just seen this update regarding Force India's future.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/forc ... l/3154986/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 6:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 am
Posts: 1366
Location: Far side of Koozebane
mikeyg123 wrote:
dompclarke wrote:
Altair wrote:
Mayhem wrote:
Altair wrote:
I think that it's a pretty legitimate concern, especially after what HAAS has pulled off this season.

Renault for one has been busting its hump trying to improve their car, HAAS is simply using Ferrari's cast off and is achieving similar results.

I think it would better for the sport if it went away from the Toro Rosso, HAAS and to some extent, Sauber models of doing things. For example, when was the last time a Toro Rosso held up a red bull or a HAAS held up a Ferrari?

These teams shouldn't just be extensions of the big 3, the big 3(really big 2) are strong enough as it is.


Customer teams becoming extensions of bigger teams should provide better racing over all as the customer teams would obviously be more competitive BUT as some have already pointed out with current money distribution system and how works teams are allowed to throw their weight around it does put the sport as whole in a bad place.

Just how the teams have all decided on the new engine regs shutting out new manufacturers. The teams themselves shouldn’t be allowed to dictate the direction the sport takes and it’s frustrating as a fan to see an entire sport catered to those who have the most money. (To my knowledge) No other sport does this. How F1 continues to fail at managing its funds is beyond belief.
Yes, the sport needs to find a way to have the lesser teams work their way up to being top teams and top teams enjoying a period of being a top team but eventually making way for other teams to replace them.

This happens to some extent, with Renault winning and falling back, Ferrari dominance giving way to Red Bull, and Red Bull to Mercedes, but for the last decade or so it's been locked into the top 3 teams going through the ups and downs, with little to no chance for teams outside the top 3 to make up ground.

Even with budget caps and more revenue sharing, those bottom tier teams probably aren't going to be able to catch up to the top 3 without something else in their favor that can help make their cars better over the course of a few seasons. I've always been a fan of giving the lower ranked teams a way to catch up to the big teams, and I think the lower a team places in the standings the ore it should be able to modify their car without grid penalties.

From 1984 to 1998 it was McLaren and Williams domination with a side show of Benneton in the middle, go back to 1972 and you can add Ferrari and Lotus. F1 has pretty much had domination of constructors championships throughout anyone looking back to days where all can compete have some very darkly tinted rose spectacles


It was a bit less of a monopoly then though. Lotus, Ferrari and Benetton all mounted championship challenges in that time.

The big difference is that the success of a team back then was based solely on what they did in the factory and on the track and everyone had the opportunity to get to the top.

Today that's no longer the case. I don't think it's too long a bow to draw to say it's ostensibly Merc & Ferrari who now control a sport designed to allow them to remain at the top and restrict as much competition as possible.

_________________
Question: If a compulsive liar tells you they're a compulsive liar, are they really a compulsive liar?

2017 WCC CPTTC - Jalopy Racing (Herb & Me)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14181
Jezza13 wrote:
It was a bit less of a monopoly then though. Lotus, Ferrari and Benetton all mounted championship challenges in that time.

The big difference is that the success of a team back then was based solely on what they did in the factory and on the track and everyone had the opportunity to get to the top.

Today that's no longer the case. I don't think it's too long a bow to draw to say it's ostensibly Merc & Ferrari who now control a sport designed to allow them to remain at the top and restrict as much competition as possible.[/quote]

Yes, I've been trying to put my finger on the difference and I believe it mainly comes down to hope. In the past if a team didn't do well they had a far greater scope to make changes. Different engine partners were coming in and out all the time so if you ended up with a duff engine it wasn't the end of the world, you'd find a knew one for the next season etc. F1 is now so complex and regulations so tight it takes years to close up on the opposition. There are no silver bullets anymore.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6442
mikeyg123 wrote:
Jezza13 wrote:
It was a bit less of a monopoly then though. Lotus, Ferrari and Benetton all mounted championship challenges in that time.

The big difference is that the success of a team back then was based solely on what they did in the factory and on the track and everyone had the opportunity to get to the top.

Today that's no longer the case. I don't think it's too long a bow to draw to say it's ostensibly Merc & Ferrari who now control a sport designed to allow them to remain at the top and restrict as much competition as possible.


Yes, I've been trying to put my finger on the difference and I believe it mainly comes down to hope. In the past if a team didn't do well they had a far greater scope to make changes. Different engine partners were coming in and out all the time so if you ended up with a duff engine it wasn't the end of the world, you'd find a knew one for the next season etc. F1 is now so complex and regulations so tight it takes years to close up on the opposition. There are no silver bullets anymore.[/quote]
Agreed. Without testing the teams may save some money in the short run, but they can stay so far behind if they get it wrong that it would take them literally years before they bounce back. Macca would have made it work with Honda were they not crippled like that, I really believe that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 9:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Siao7 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Jezza13 wrote:
The big difference is that the success of a team back then was based solely on what they did in the factory and on the track and everyone had the opportunity to get to the top.

Today that's no longer the case. I don't think it's too long a bow to draw to say it's ostensibly Merc & Ferrari who now control a sport designed to allow them to remain at the top and restrict as much competition as possible.


Yes, I've been trying to put my finger on the difference and I believe it mainly comes down to hope. In the past if a team didn't do well they had a far greater scope to make changes. Different engine partners were coming in and out all the time so if you ended up with a duff engine it wasn't the end of the world, you'd find a knew one for the next season etc. F1 is now so complex and regulations so tight it takes years to close up on the opposition. There are no silver bullets anymore.

Agreed. Without testing the teams may save some money in the short run, but they can stay so far behind if they get it wrong that it would take them literally years before they bounce back. Macca would have made it work with Honda were they not crippled like that, I really believe that.
Fully agree. If testing had been allowed and parts not so heavily protected things would have been very different these last few years, and not just for Macca. I doubt Mercedes would have had quite such an easy time of it for so long. But with the restrictions we have today it's very hard for anyone to improve if they get it wrong. I think I read a few weeks back that Macca were treating this year as an extended test session for 2019, since they know they've made such a hash it's pointless to try
to catch up this year anymore.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 11:29 am
Posts: 675
Well that didn't take long:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula-one/45105296


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 685
Quote:
Formula 1 team Force India has agreed a deal to come out of administration, saving all 405 jobs at its Silverstone base.

The team's management, backed by a consortium of investors led by Lawrence Stroll, have secured the future of the team.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula-one/45105296

I guess Lance is off to Force India then


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 6:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:49 pm
Posts: 11
I’m really pleased that the creditors have been paid. Obviously, I’m really pleased that more than 400 jobs have been saved. It’s great that such a gutsy team live to fight another day. But it leaves a slightly bitter taste that a very good driver at FI now looks pretty certain to get the boot, with no really obvious place for them to find a comparably competitive drive.

_________________
Watching from the cheap seats.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 6:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 508
owenmahamilton wrote:

Glad they're saved!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 6:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8057
dompclarke wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:

Glad they're saved!


The Sky site includes

"Funding to support the team will be made available from today, and significantly more will be available once the company emerges from administration which we expect within the next two to three weeks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 6:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14181
I'm disappointed at the loss of FI they were easily the best team on the grid pound for pound and were one of the few midfield teams to actually sign talented drivers.

On the other hand I'm thrilled nobody will lose their jobs and wish the Strolls well. Hopefully Ocon and Perez will find seats for 2019 because they are both way to good to lose from the grid.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 130
mikeyg123 wrote:
I'm disappointed at the loss of FI they were easily the best team on the grid pound for pound and were one of the few midfield teams to actually sign talented drivers.

On the other hand I'm thrilled nobody will lose their jobs and wish the Strolls well. Hopefully Ocon and Perez will find seats for 2019 because they are both way to good to lose from the grid.

I imagine one of them will be Strolls team mate next season.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:39 am
Posts: 769
This is good news! I just hope that everyone involved still funds this team properly and they just keep it afloat like Midland did.

I've read so many reports about this situation that would just turn into an essay.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:29 am
Posts: 1962
Perez and his sponsorship will probably do a swap with Stroll at Williams with Ocon keeping his FI seat, just first gut feelings.

_________________
Kimi: "Come on, get the McLaren out of the way!”


Last edited by mas on Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 130
So I guess the pressure is on Lance Stroll to perform next season.

If he continues to finish near the bottom with a much better car than the Williams he is currently in, that says all there is to say about him deserving to be in Formula One.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14181
Altair wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I'm disappointed at the loss of FI they were easily the best team on the grid pound for pound and were one of the few midfield teams to actually sign talented drivers.

On the other hand I'm thrilled nobody will lose their jobs and wish the Strolls well. Hopefully Ocon and Perez will find seats for 2019 because they are both way to good to lose from the grid.

I imagine one of them will be Strolls team mate next season.


I'd be surprised. The Strolls aren't spending a fortune for Lance to have his donkey handed to him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:29 am
Posts: 1962
I don't think he or his father will really care. Lance is just having fun but to be fair he can race really well at times. That podium of his was really something else.

_________________
Kimi: "Come on, get the McLaren out of the way!”


Last edited by mas on Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:17 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 11:29 am
Posts: 675
I was surprised that Rich Energy hadn't sent out an angry tweet like they did when Force India went into administration, so I just checked their twitter feed and they have actually congratulated the new owners. Lawrence Stroll may not be the best owner for the team but I think that if Rich Energy had bought the team then it would have been a lot worse as they appear to have little credibility (or money for that matter) so congratulations to the administrators for having the common sense to let a consortium with seemingly plenty of money to buy the team.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 130
owenmahamilton wrote:
I was surprised that Rich Energy hadn't sent out an angry tweet like they did when Force India went into administration, so I just checked their twitter feed and they have actually congratulated the new owners. Lawrence Stroll may not be the best owner for the team but I think that if Rich Energy had bought the team then it would have been a lot worse as they appear to have little credibility (or money for that matter) so congratulations to the administrators for having the common sense to let a consortium with seemingly plenty of money to buy the team.

Stroll is worth 2.7 billion dollars, I'm surprised he needed a consortium at all.

But I guess one doesn't become rich by assuming all of the risk.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 10:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:35 pm
Posts: 314
Location: Toronto, Canada
As a long time Force India fan and a Canadian I am quite happy with this outcome. Here is hoping they don't sink to the bottom of the pecking order next year.

_________________
Proudly supporting Force India first, Lewis Hamilton second.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 508
Altair wrote:
So I guess the pressure is on Lance Stroll to perform next season.

If he continues to finish near the bottom with a much better car than the Williams he is currently in, that says all there is to say about him deserving to be in Formula One.

Assuming that this team remains better than the Williams next season...

Williams have had issues with theory translating to the track and have apparently turned a corner in this respect. If this is true this should bring them back closer to the front and with the stall in development that's happened at FI with administration they may (meaning they also may not) be less developed then usual for the start of next season.

Fingers crossed both teams are at least nipping at the heals of the top teams


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 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