Formula 1 2017

[Huertecilla]

Because you don't show your headline act the door

You do when they want to earn more than the box office results warrant.

My point is I can't see a resolution that keeps those currently receiving a higher proportion of money from past performance or heritage, satisfied by altering payments so they receive proportionately less.

So?
It is a 'sport' that is a marketing tool for manufacturers and sponsors. The publicity should be the main satisfaction.
Winning already has a DOUBLE reward.

The current structure stacks the deck in favor of a few prima donas and it sabotages the show.
That Liberty is closer to US car racing will imo have a large impact on the distribution of money over the competitors.
We will see soon enough.

[CardShark]

The point about a draft to promote young drivers completely misses the point and worries me Liberty are already misunderstanding. If they want to eradicate so called pay drivers and allow the cream to rise to the top then they need a sensible, affordable, independent series without ties to greedy promoters. Resuscitate F3 and promote it on a Grand Prix weekend. The problem with most junior series is the promoter (in cahoots with a single car and engine supplier) charges teams and in turn drivers a fortune for spares and entries. To be honest I'm surprised this has never been taken to the EU. Break a front wing that should cost at most €2000 and the promoter will will mark it up another 50%. This goes for everything else on the car and before you know it you need €2m for a season in GP2. How many drivers are currently confirmed for this years GP2 season? The answer is not many and this is the primary reason we're not seeing the best drivers being brought into the sport. We're seeing the ones with the biggest budgets.

Interesting points there, and I wasn't aware of how costs in a "junior" series can be inflated. If it's the financially advantaged that have a... well, an advantage as they work their way up the racing ladder then it could be argued that that Brawn's intentions would be like peeing in the wind, though I don't side with that point of view. Sure, unless there's a level playing field for everyone from karting to F1, money will talk and I've no idea how things could be made more fair, though Brawn's/Liberty's take on things could still be seen as a positive step.

[Geoff W]

I'll leave the technical side of things to others, although Brawn's notion of scrapping DRS is welcome. The income inequality has been kicked down the road for too long and has to be sorted out if they want any sort of 'competition' to occur.

But as a sport they need to:

Get it back on free to air TV (or change the parameters of the other deals)

Sort their social media out / streaming service - my firm has done a lot of work with NASCAR and NBA over the last few years and F1 should be embarassed at how far ahead that 'turn left' sport is on the digital front.

Make it cheaper to attend in person for kids - best way to do that is to cut the ridiculous fee for hosting a GP in the first place. Revenue sharing needs to be re-organised.

Work with the FIA to sort out GP2. It's an expensive and at time amateurish mess.

[Matt.D]

You do when they want to earn more than the box office results warrant.

The box office is taking more than enough to cover what it pays out. The business in that regard is strong, it's the perceived fairness of distributed prize money that's being questioned.

So?
It is a 'sport' that is a marketing tool for manufacturers and sponsors. The publicity should be the main satisfaction.
Winning already has a DOUBLE reward.

Publicity doesn't pay the bills.

The current structure stacks the deck in favor of a few prima donas and it sabotages the show.
That Liberty is closer to US car racing will imo have a large impact on the distribution of money over the competitors.
We will see soon enough.

I would argue the show is stifled due to poorly thought out regulation and not a disparity in team budgets. Give Manor the Red Bull budget and the racing will still be the same, to fix this the fundamental design needs to be changed.

[Backward point]

http://www.pitpass.com/58201/Manor-ceases-trading

Sadly, Fi's brave new world hasn't tempted any potential buyers for Manor.

[Backward point]

As there's precious little happening in the world of Formula 1 at the moment except rumour, counter-rumour and conjecture, some of you may be interested in the Daytona 24 Hours, which is being covered on Motors TV and on-line at http://www.imsa.com

[Matt.D]

Amazing to think of the four teams given entries in 2009; USF1 didn't make it out of the blocks and Campos/Hispania, Team Lotus/Caterham, Virgin/Marussia/Manor are probably all destined to disappear forever, in just seven seasons.

I think it could quite easily have been Sauber in this position had they not picked up 10th place in the constructors. But if Sauber went bust, I think that team would have been salvageable.

[PeterM]

A poignant article about Manor and their wind tunnel prototype:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/01/2...aced-2017-car/

A better article at Autosport (may be behind a paywall for some though)
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/127910

Let's not forget that it's not just the loss of the team (and drivers) in F1, but the loss of jobs (and perhaps careers) for ordinary people with families to support, as well as dashing their hopes and dreams.

The flawed set up in F1 needs fixing and key people need to take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror and sort this out.

[Backward point]

Joe Saward has an interesting insight into the demise of Manor on his blog. In short, there was a $40m hole in the 2017 budget, so the $10m which they would have received for finishing 10th in the 2016 Constructors Championship had it not been for Felipe Nasr's 9th place for Sauber in Brazil wouldn't have made much difference. The owners let it be known that they wouldn't sell the team debt-free to a new owner, and wanted to retain some equity themselves.

But there was another potential issue for a potential buyer - the threat of legal action from the Bianchi family following Jules' death after his Suzuka crash.

In short, although the team may have provided a means of entry into Formula 1, from a financial viewpoint it wasn't an attractive proposition. Meanwhile, the employees and their families face a worrying time.

It's a reality check for Liberty, and hopefully it will register with them. The allocation of FOM money needs to be addressed, but the teams need to examine their overheads and expenditure and balance their books.

[reggie747]

Just come across this image elsewhere...

The 3 Amigos (or the 2 Conmen, you choose)