F1 2014

codrus wrote:

Advan046 wrote: Yeah I think hitching a trailer to Ferrari power units may not be the best choice. They would have been better off going Honda as those guys in Ohio would love to tout their American presence more. I suppose Ferrari probably gave them a good deal with some guarantees of equality to the factory cars.

The powers-that-be aren't going to give the Mercedes engines a multi-year locked-in advantage, if only because it will cost them money in the form of reduced fan interest, lower TV sales #s, etc. I expect Ferrari and Renault will get the opportunity to catch up their engine performance by next year.

Possibly your right, but they didn't seem to mind the Schumi / Ferrari 5 year domination stretch. Also don't confuse TV Viewers with revenue. F1 TV Viewer ship is in a nose dive. Partly because the UK has gone pay per view and China has changed channels. They are after the $$'s they can get for the TV rights more than they are concerned with the # of eyes on the TV's

2012 515,000,000 global TV Viewers
2013 500,000,000 global TV Viewers
2014 450,000,000 global TV Viewers

Adrian_Thompson wrote: Possibly your right, but they didn't seem to mind the Schumi / Ferrari 5 year domination stretch. Also don't confuse TV Viewers with revenue. F1 TV Viewer ship is in a nose dive. Partly because the UK has gone pay per view and China has changed channels. They are after the $$'s they can get for the TV rights more than they are concerned with the # of eyes on the TV's

I'd say they were concerned with the Ferrari/Schumacher domination, they just didn't manage to break it for a while. The no-tire-changes rule in 2005 finally succeeded in doing it. Ferrari's domination was harder to break, because it was a combination of a dominant chassis, a good, reliable engine (although not the most powerful), and a very fast driver in Schumacher with an excellent team (Ross Brawn, Jean Todt, etc) behind him. Mercedes' domination is really about having dominated the engine under the new rules, I suspect the Red Bull is a better chassis than the Mercedes. You can fix that engine domination by giving Renault and Ferrari some extra design changes and testing allowances, which is much easier than fixing the Ferrari domination in the early 2000s.

And yes, it's ultimately about maximizing money, and that's not necessarily the same as maximizing viewership. Still, it does correlate with viewer interest, and if people start asking themselves why they pay $500/year (or whatever it costs -- I have no idea) to watch Mercedes take every pole and win every race, then that will hit them in their revenues.

as far as people getting tired of watching Merc run away with everything … at least the people responsible for the TV feed, don't focus totally on the leading car … as compared to other sanctioning bodies (with control of the TV cameras) they tend to find the best "fights" going on in the mid pack … we do get to watch some actual racing

so that keeps my interest as opposed to something like the Tudor series where all you get to watch is the prototypes … with an occasional bone tossed out for those that like the actual sports cars

Guess Luca won't be around much anymore Ferrari Head Ousted

06HHR wrote: Guess Luca won't be around much anymore Ferrari Head Ousted

Ding Dong! The Witch is dead. Which old Witch? The Wicked Witch!
Ding Dong! The Wicked Witch is dead.

Couldn't happen quick enough. Let's see if I soften on my view Ferrari under new management.

Trouble is $28M USD golden parachute!! Damn, I wish I could get so much for being an shiny happy person

So i was listening to the Formula 1 blog podcast this morning, they had a special with Christian Sylt who does a lot of analysis on F1 finances. He made some interesting comments.

TV ratings. The biggest part of the loss of viewers I mentioned up thread the other day was due to the switch of broadcaster in China, that lost them 30 million in one go. But that was more of a long term plan as the old National broadcaster only showed the races time delayed, where the new regional broadcaster shows them live. It's a gamble that the long term the new broadcaster will increase their reach and get back the viewers. That still doesn't explain away the money grab of going to pay per view in the UK, the most F1 rabid country there is per capita.

They also commented on the empty seats at Monza which is unheard of. That’s solely down to ticket prices, which is down to sanction fees as we know. I didn't realize how lopsided FOM's money flow was. FOM's biggest pay out is to the teams with Ferrari automatically getting $100million just for being Ferrari, regardless of where they finish with Caterham getting $0,000,000.000 for being last in last year’s constructors championship. The payout to the teams is over $800 MILLION. The teams pay nothing too FOM though. FOM's biggest single income was stated as the tracks, not media which I think must have been misstated though. Regardless of that, the tracks pay massive amounts and get zero back from FOM hence we get crappy races at crappy tracks due to a country's desire to look like a big shot, while classic beloved tracks and races get pushed out. Indy car has a similar short sited view which is why we don't get Elkhart Lake or PIR etc. NASCAR does it right by sharing the risk of promoting races in exchange for sharing the gate money.

It's worse than that in F1. IIRC, FOM takes all of the money from the on-track signage, all of the money from the TV rights, AND a huge sanctioning fee. The only revenue source left to the track promoter is the ticket revenue, which is why it's so high.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: The teams pay nothing too FOM though.

But they do pay someone - the FIA? The teams pay an entry fee that's based, in part, on the previous year's results. The constructor's championship winner pays $500,000 plus $6,000 for every point scored. That's $3,260,000 for Red Bull for the 2013 season. The others pay $5,000 per point. Lucky Caterham skates by with the minimum $500,000.

Keith Tanner wrote:

Adrian_Thompson wrote: The teams pay nothing too FOM though.

But they do pay someone - the FIA? The teams pay an entry fee that's based, in part, on the previous year's results. The constructor's championship winner pays $500,000 plus $6,000 for every point scored. That's $3,260,000 for Red Bull for the 2013 season. The others pay $5,000 per point. Lucky Caterham skates by with the minimum $500,000.

Yeah, the teams pay the FIA an entry fee. At one point, the FIA also required an enormous fee (like $50M) to start a new team -- not sure if that's still the case or not.

I suspect Ferrari probably has a special deal on the entry fee as well...

Heavy rumours about three car teams next year..............

One of our old TRD reps at the time had a brother that worked for Williams (this was the early 2000's), and we all had dinner one night during one of the USGP weekends at Indy. It was a VERY interesting dinner, and no wonder why F1 is soooo expensive. The insanity of money flowing through there would fill the budgets of many not so third world countries.

In reply to TAParker:

Caterham has been sold but the new owners have been cold-molasses-slow in releasing funds. Marussia is reportedly trying to sell the seat of a contracted driver because it needs the cash. Sauber is trying to sell itself to a Canadian who may be reconsidering. As always, Lotus (aka Renault) is besieged with money problems.

Three car teams may be necessary to fill the grid.

Now the pit wall can no longer help the driver via radio?!?!

No texting either?!?

What kind of rule enforcement is that? Why?

So the on-going financial problems of F1 teams continues. As in all types of racing, with the exception of the various GT series around the world, the cars have evolved into cookie cutter clones. Even F1 hasn't been able to steer clear of that fact. The cars go by different names and have different colors but if they all were white you wouldn't notice that much difference at 50'. NASCAR & Indy Cars are clones.

Do you think you could write a formula that would shave the cost of F1 and would still be interesting for the fans and challenging for the designers and drivers?

IMO the decades of the 60s until the mid 90s were the most interesting and exciting. I couldn't wait until the news came out about the newest designs for the next year. Is there no way to bring this back? The cars today are truly awesome so could you accept a simpler formula with parameters that are required but plenty of the design elements would be left free to allow the master designers a challenge to create a winner?

nope … not when things like height, weight, width, length, wing size (front and rear), crash/crumple zones, foot box size, under tray dimensions, exhaust outlet location, engine size/type …. etc … are all mandated

and especially as aero engineers come to understand aero better and better … why do you think it's becoming harder and harder to tell the difference between street cars … not much left for the design folk when design is dictated by gas milage

Keith Tanner wrote:

Adrian_Thompson wrote: The teams pay nothing too FOM though.

But they do pay someone - the FIA? The teams pay an entry fee that's based, in part, on the previous year's results. The constructor's championship winner pays $500,000 plus $6,000 for every point scored. That's $3,260,000 for Red Bull for the 2013 season. The others pay $5,000 per point. Lucky Caterham skates by with the minimum $500,000.

But that's the FIA not FOM, and let's face it, the money you are talking about is chump change in F1 terms. Even the Marussia has a supposed $51m budget and Caterham are on $65m. Caterham have 0 points again and that doesn't look like changing to that's less than 1% of their budget.

Graefin10 wrote: So the on-going financial problems of F1 teams continues. As in all types of racing, with the exception of the various GT series around the world, the cars have evolved into cookie cutter clones. Even F1 hasn't been able to steer clear of that fact. The cars go by different names and have different colors but if they all were white you wouldn't notice that much difference at 50'. NASCAR & Indy Cars are clones.

Indy car yes they look the same, not because they are cookie cutter, but because they are all the same, it’s a spec chassis series. That changes next year with the engine manufacturers being allowed to develop their own aero kits. That gives them the opportunity to add a lot of downforce, so to counter that the undertray and floor is much much smaller. I don’t know if the smaller teams are allowed to keep running the stock Dallara parts of if they have to run their engine’s aero kit. Either way we are looking at either two or three supposedly quite drastic different designs.

I disagree that today’s F1 cars are all cookie cutter. I bet I could differentiate most of them if they were all painted white. There are numerous different nose configurations alone.

Nico’s tire shredder Pink cow Frank and Clair’s baby Red purse ant eater Ron’s sex aid Veejay’s strap on The rouge calf limp dick Pastors fork The small Russian butt plug The Swiss butter knife The 7’s blunt pencil lead.

I see just as much difference in side pod, rear end etc designs

Graefin10 wrote: Do you think you could write a formula that would shave the cost of F1 and would still be interesting for the fans and challenging for the designers and drivers?

1. Flat, virticle end plates

2. 2 max 2 element wings with zero dihedral or section change other than aspec ratio

3. Max floor are, totally flat

4. 3 front wing and 3 rear wings designs for the season to be homologated by Feb 1st with an update to 2 of the 3 on July 15th

5. Max section for suspension arms

6. Shape can only trend down from the center line and inwards from the back of the drivers head rest. Once a body section has got lower, or closer to the center line it can’t change direction other than a max and min radius to the floor. That’s it.

Allow an increase in track width for more mechanical grip due to the massively reduced aero grip and target making Eau Rouge a seriouse lift even in perfect conditions on a quali lap with Alonso at the wheel of the best car. As soon as you close in on that goal the rules change for the following year to reduce wing area and/or floor area.

Graefin10 wrote: IMO the decades of the 60s until the mid-90s were the most interesting and exciting. I couldn't wait until the news came out about the newest designs for the next year. Is there no way to bring this back? The cars today are truly awesome so could you accept a simpler formula with parameters that are required but plenty of the design elements would be left free to allow the master designers a challenge to create a winner?

I 110% agree with you that the 60’s through 1994 was an awesome time for automotive design. The best period was 76-94 for me.

TAParker wrote: Heavy rumours about three car teams next year..............

This just won’t happen IMHO. More likely to allow the big teams to supply chassis to smaller teams, but not a third car. Even if you make the 3rd car ineligible for constructors points, that third car is going to employ drivers whose sole job is to berkeley up the race of whoever is in front of your team / driver in the points. No other sport allows teams extra players on the course/pitch/fairway to give you an unfair advantage. Who would get the third car? Mercedes, McLaren, Red Bull and Ferrari. What happens to the Williams and Force India’s of this world? How would them compete? The only way third cars work is if every team goes to them at the same time which means we need to lose at least 3 teams at the end of the season which while possible is unlikely and or you have bigger grids which no one except the fans wants. Bernie has said before he would like 10 2 car teams. Personally I loved the 80’s and 09’s with 26 starters and 28-32 entrants with prequalifying to see who would get a shot at the big show on Sunday.

Funny isn’t it, you could sell F1 chassis to other teams up until 1981 when the rule was introduced to increase professionalism that you had to make your own chassis, or have it made exclusively for you i.e. Dallara making chassis for Hispania and in 2016 Haas F1 or Lola for the 08’s Haas, Larrousee and Scudaria Italia etc.

Singapore

Red bulls have a chance or not? I think no.

In reply to Advan046:

A chance? Yes. Will they? I don't think so. This is a much lower speed high downforce track, which suits them, but too much torque needed coming off all those slow corners. I don't think it flows well like Monaco or Montreal.

Not allowed to relay performance data over radio to the drivers anymore.

So how big of a E36 M3show are the new radio restrictions going to be?

Singapore has a very high chance of a safety car (IIRC, every Singapore race so far has had one), so that has the potential to mix things up. There's also a moderately high chance of rain, I think.

Lancer007 wrote: Not allowed to relay performance data over radio to the drivers anymore. So how big of a E36 M3show are the new radio restrictions going to be?

Well which Merc driver has needed more help? Nico is always getting the save gas message as even when much faster Lewis is better on gas. I think it will hurt nico more

codrus wrote: Singapore has a very high chance of a safety car (IIRC, every Singapore race so far has had one), so that has the potential to mix things up. There's also a moderately high chance of rain, I think.

I think it was last year that the BBC commentators said the safety car had led more laps at Singapore than anyone else...

Lancer007 wrote: Not allowed to relay performance data over radio to the drivers anymore. So how big of a E36 M3show are the new radio restrictions going to be?

Messages not permitted (either by radio or pit board)

Sector time detail of a competitor and where a competitor is faster or slower

Adjustment of power unit settings

Adjustment of power unit setting to de-rate the systems

Adjustment of gearbox settings

Learning of gears of the gearbox (will only be enforced from the Japanese GP onwards)

Balancing the SOC or adjusting for performance

Information on fuel flow settings (except if requested to do so by race control)

Information on level of fuel saving needed

Information on tire pressures or temperatures (will only be enforced from the Japanese GP onwards)

Information on differential settings

Start maps related to clutch position, for race start and pit stops

Information on clutch maps or settings, (ex. bite point)

Burnouts prior to race starts F1 teams concerned radio ban may lead to botched starts

Information on brake balance or BBW settings

Warning on brake wear or temperatures (will only be enforced from the Japanese GP onwards)

Selection of driver default settings (other than in the case of a clearly identified problem with the car)

Answering a direct question from a driver (ex. “Am I using the right torque map?”)

Any message that appears to be coded

Messages permitted (for the avoidance of doubt)

Acknowledgement that a driver message has been heard

Lap or sector time detail

Lap time detail of a competitor

Gaps to a competitor during a practice session or race

“Push hard,” “push now,” “you will be racing xx,” or similar

Helping with warning of traffic during a practice session or race

Giving the gaps between cars in qualifying so as to better position the car for a clear lap

Puncture warning

Tire choice at the next pit stop

Number of laps a competitor has done on a set of tires during a race

Tire specification of a competitor

Indication of a potential problem with a competitor’s car during a race

Information concerning a competitor’s likely race strategy Mercedes boss believes controversy is inevitable after FIA radio crackdown

Yellow flags, blue flags, Safety Car deployment or other cautions

Safety Car window

Driving breaches by team driver or competitor (ex. missing chicanes, running off track, time penalty will be applied, etc.)

Notification that DRS is enabled or disabled

Dealing with a DRS system failure

Change of front wing position at the next pit stop

Oil transfer

Wet track, oil or debris in certain corners

When to enter the pits

Reminders to check for white lines, bollards, weighbridge lights when entering or leaving the pits

Reminders about track limits

Passing on messages from race control

Information concerning damage to the car

Number of laps remaining

Driver instructions from the team to swap position with other drivers

Test sequence information during practice sessions (ex. aero-mapping)

Weather information

Pit to retire the car

So, print these out and prepare to refer to them at any time during the race...