Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

AMuS on 2014 F1 team's payments & WDC / WCC bonus [Merged]


  • Please log in to reply
70 replies to this topic

#51 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 16 November 2013 - 22:40

Lotus and Sauber cannot afford to pay salaries to their drivers, so Ferrari just can pay Hulks salary in order to hinder Lotus get more points

 

Good point. :lol:  So that's what it is, if there is such a disparity in financial state. Many teams struggle to hire even one driver to who they can pay, while Ferrari can pay drivers NOT to race. Some teams would prefer paydrivers to bring in excess of 30M $ together (like Maldonado's 30M and Grosjean's 10M for Lotus), while the likes of Ferrari can pay in excess of 30M $ as salaries for drivers.

 

Big teams have an advantage in everything. They get more WCC prize money, they get bonus money and they get more sponsorship money as they are at the front of the field and more marketable. I also understand Ferrari's (di Montezemolo's?) claim years ago that Fiat even doesn't financially support Ferrari. And looking at the figures, they don't need to. Huge payments from FOM plus big partners (Philip Morris, Santander). Why would Fiat bother? They are in a luxurious situation - get free advertising on one of their brands. While other car manufacturers, if they want to join, need to invest 200M $ from their own pocket alone to build up a serious F1 team and have a hope of being competitive.

 

You have to ask, how could others even compete against Ferrari & RBR. Only if a car manufacturer or other company is prepared to join F1 and just put in 200M $ annually. Basically Red Bull did this though. Is Honda prepared to do that with McLaren? The rest of the field is just trying to get funds together just to be on the grid, forget about winning. Red Bull having a 1-second advantage in US Grand Prix qualifying is just an ominous sign of the state of game.



Advertisement

#52 prty

prty
  • Member

  • 5,161 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 17 November 2013 - 00:58

So you mean that Horner didn't go on holidays with Bernie because they are best friends? I'm ouraged ):



#53 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 17 November 2013 - 07:44

In normal world this would be a big scandal. In the world of F1 this is business as usual. Just how out of touch with reality can a sport go and could be allowed to go!?

 

Ironically, these two teams are the ones that are always bxxxhing about how advantageous and favoured the other team is. Resource Restriction Agreement (RRA) and FOTA RRA compliance my axx. Who even wants to hear about cost reduction under such situation? I am totally with Force India on this. The established teams have basically made sure that no one ever comes up in future to challenge them. Sure there must be some advantage to the recent success and also to historic success, but that shouldn't basically wipe out every other team. F1 is the epitome of unsporting competition. I don't care if anyone cheats, anything is fair as long as you are able to get away with it in such a world of sharks.

 

No wonder guys like Hulkenberg and di Resta don't have a drive, and, drivers like Maldonado, Grosjean and Perez not only get pay-drives but actually dictate the financial viability of teams.

 

PS: What happened to the smileys? I haven't seen them for a while. Is it due to my new browser?


Edited by SpaMaster, 17 November 2013 - 07:58.


#54 nosecone

nosecone
  • Member

  • 797 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 17 November 2013 - 08:07

Maybe they should also show which "team" gets the biggest amount: CVC Capitals (Bernie) gets nearly 50%*. If he would just get 25% there would be no financial problems in F1 (my opinion)

 

 

*Of the money earned by selling the tv and commercial rights


Edited by nosecone, 17 November 2013 - 08:08.


#55 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 5,853 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 17 November 2013 - 08:22

In normal world this would be a big scandal. In the world of F1 this is business as usual. Just how out of touch with reality can a sport go and could be allowed to go!?
 
Ironically, these two teams are the ones that are always bxxxhing about how advantageous and favoured the other team is. Resource Restriction Agreement (RRA) and FOTA RRA compliance my axx. Who even wants to hear about cost reduction under such situation? I am totally with Force India on this. The established teams have basically made sure that no one ever comes up in future to challenge them. Sure there must be some advantage to the recent success and also to historic success, but that shouldn't basically wipe out every other team. F1 is the epitome of unsporting competition. I don't care if anyone cheats, anything is fair as long as you are able to get away with it in such a world of sharks.
 
No wonder guys like Hulkenberg and di Resta don't have a drive, and, drivers like Maldonado, Grosjean and Perez not only get pay-drives but actually dictate the financial viability of teams.
 
PS: What happened to the smileys? I haven't seen them for a while. Is it due to my new browser?

My smilies have gone walkabout too. I guess another site glitch!



#56 krobinson

krobinson
  • Member

  • 202 posts
  • Joined: January 99

Posted 17 November 2013 - 08:53

Why would Red Bull get just extra payments? I understand Ferrari for their history, but then McLaren and Williams get very little and they are very historic teams as well. Red Bull getting such money is a joke, nobody cares about that team besides some gloryhunting fans. Once Newey leaves, their fans will disappear too when results stop coming in.



#57 LuckyStrike1

LuckyStrike1
  • Member

  • 5,574 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 17 November 2013 - 10:38

Because Red Bull put four cars on the grid plus a numerous of cars in the support categories and went to buy the Minardi team at a team when Bernie was facing a grid below 20 cars and thus huge penalty fees to broadcasting networks and championship sponsors. 

 

A little thanks from Bernie and good negotiation from Red Bull after they tried to sell Toro Rosso a few times but in the end kept it. 

 

Or in other words - Bernie values Red Bull higher than everyone bar Ferrari. 


Edited by LuckyStrike1, 17 November 2013 - 10:40.


#58 boldhakka

boldhakka
  • Member

  • 2,802 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 17 November 2013 - 11:38

Seems logical of you consider F1 as an investment vehicle. The ones who have put in the most time, effort, loyalty, and funds are proportionally compensated. The ones who have happily pimped out their teams and assets to the highest bidder when convenient (Sauber and Enstone) have been left to exploit that channel to the fullest.

#59 Matt Somers

Matt Somers
  • Member

  • 550 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 17 November 2013 - 11:39

The 'bonus' element as I understand is part of the negotiation process between CVC/Bernie and the teams in signing the latest Concorde Agreement.  Ferrari have and always will be the biggest winners here as they have been with the sport since the start and really are 'F1'.  Mercedes tried to argue that their net worth to Formula One should entitle them a bigger share than the 12m, arguing that they too were there in the early days but conveniently forgetting that prior to 2010 they hadn't partook as a Constructor since 1955.  (Yes, yes, I know they've been an engine supplier for a large proportion of time in the last few decades).

Mercedes finally conceeded to the fact that they should cut and run with the 12m bonus offer knowing that, that put them on par with McLaren.  Meanwhile Williams a team that have been around (and independant) since the late 70's only get a 9m heritage bonus.

Red Bull are being paid the 72m bonus for 2014 of which I believe is 50m due to their row of constructors win, this still leaves them in a stronger position than the other teams (+10m) than the heritage payouts because it's believed their brand reach within the sport is a necessity going forward.  I could however be wrong on this one and CVC/Bernie really do value their interest in the sport at 72m :(


Edited by Matt Somers, 17 November 2013 - 11:41.


Advertisement

#60 Wingnut

Wingnut
  • Member

  • 711 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 17 November 2013 - 12:02

F1 really is broken.



#61 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 17 November 2013 - 12:27

I think it sounds logical that some (or significant) part of Red Bull's 72M $ bonus is actually the championship bonus. Be it WDC, WCC, combined, consecutive years, whatever.

 

While I see why Bernie might be reluctant in giving money to teams that are not committed to F1 (and only 5 of them are as we see, though Sauber has a strong case of getting included there). Just looking at cases - someone like MF1 back in 2006 came in for one year, would get automatically 10-20M $ bonus and sells the team again.

 

However, some thought can be given, how to energize the competition in F1, because based on figures Marussia doesn't really have much chance despite Chilton's AON sponsoring them. And the Virgin/Marussia team has been quite committed to F1, competing in F1 since 2010. For a backmarker team this is a pretty big commitment, because with lack of success it is much easier to close the doors.

 

Maybe they can mandate somehow that the bonus goes to the racing team itself regardless of who the owners are. Because the bases from which they operate, have been pretty much the same, even if owners change and Bernie doesn't want to give money to guys, who come and go - don't invest in the team and just leave.



#62 Pothead4Philosopher

Pothead4Philosopher
  • Member

  • 541 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 17 November 2013 - 16:44

I think it sounds logical that some (or significant) part of Red Bull's 72M $ bonus is actually the championship bonus. Be it WDC, WCC, combined, consecutive years, whatever.

 

While I see why Bernie might be reluctant in giving money to teams that are not committed to F1 (and only 5 of them are as we see, though Sauber has a strong case of getting included there). Just looking at cases - someone like MF1 back in 2006 came in for one year, would get automatically 10-20M $ bonus and sells the team again.

 

However, some thought can be given, how to energize the competition in F1, because based on figures Marussia doesn't really have much chance despite Chilton's AON sponsoring them. And the Virgin/Marussia team has been quite committed to F1, competing in F1 since 2010. For a backmarker team this is a pretty big commitment, because with lack of success it is much easier to close the doors.

 

Maybe they can mandate somehow that the bonus goes to the racing team itself regardless of who the owners are. Because the bases from which they operate, have been pretty much the same, even if owners change and Bernie doesn't want to give money to guys, who come and go - don't invest in the team and just leave.

 

 

No, RBR receives $90 million for the WCC (winning the WDC does not directly translate to Bernie bonus). The $72 million bonus is for reasons that I guess only Bernie could justify. Well, maybe not justify, but to shed light and explain as to why he's greasing RBR's wheels to such extend.

 

The Ferrari bonus is even more incomprehensible.



#63 F1Champion

F1Champion
  • Member

  • 2,924 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 17 November 2013 - 18:28

This just makes me think that teams like Williams, Force India, Sauber and Lotus will never move forwards again and that makes me incredibly despondent with the 'sport'. :cry:

 

I kinda think this should go to a competition commission but I'm not certain things would change.


Edited by F1Champion, 17 November 2013 - 18:32.


#64 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 17 November 2013 - 18:31

72 and 90 million is too much, a bonus should be about 10 million, all the teams should get a split like the lowest team in the premiership does.

 

Still don't know how the EU has stayed away and not ripped F1 apart for corruption.


Edited by study, 17 November 2013 - 18:31.


#65 Anders Torp

Anders Torp
  • Member

  • 505 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 18 November 2013 - 17:44

Seems logical of you consider F1 as an investment vehicle. The ones who have put in the most time, effort, loyalty, and funds are proportionally compensated. The ones who have happily pimped out their teams and assets to the highest bidder when convenient (Sauber and Enstone) have been left to exploit that channel to the fullest.

How does that logic apply to Tyrrell/BAR/Honda/Brawn/Mercedes?

#66 F1Champion

F1Champion
  • Member

  • 2,924 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 23 November 2013 - 16:27

Makes me a bit sick to hear Horner saying that RB are working to the same regs and are simply better at designing a car. They are in a different funding league altogether and he knows it. The likes of Lotus and Mercedes are doing a great job to even compete with RB and Ferrari with that disparity.



#67 kosmos

kosmos
  • Member

  • 6,828 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 26 November 2013 - 10:55

 
The Horse Whisperer – Slow on the uptake with summer blunders

When the championship finishes, the moment arrives to take stock. If it’s enough in sport to look at the points standings, in business some trust in summer valuations, even if they are carried out under a parasol.

For that reason, months later, a reconstruction of the budgets of Formula 1 teams developed by an Autosport colleague has transformed itself into journalistic fact. It’s a pity that the cited figures are largely fantasy and they can draw even distinguished newspapers into conclusions that are wildly erroneous.

It would be easy to deny the figures with facts but the truth about business matters has to stay confidential: this too, like technology, is a crucial factor in competition.

 

 

 

http://formula1.ferr...summer-blunders


Edited by kosmos, 26 November 2013 - 10:55.


#68 prty

prty
  • Member

  • 5,161 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 26 November 2013 - 11:11

While it's disgusting to read how much Ferrari gets, it's same time hilarious to see that they haven't won anything since Kimi left

 

More like when the rules changed, Kimi was still there when they started not to win :)



#69 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,171 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 26 November 2013 - 11:28

Here is a breakdown that Joe Saward did in 2012 on 2011 payments based on "company returns".

 

http://www.hindustan...le1-949214.aspx

 

It estimates the 17.5 Million Dollars was paid to Ferrari in 2011 as a historical bonus.



#70 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,477 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 26 November 2013 - 11:30

The 'bonus' element as I understand is part of the negotiation process between CVC/Bernie and the teams in signing the latest Concorde Agreement. 

I thought this was public knowledge already? I swear we've all had this argument before.

And again, just because you get money doesnt mean you put that all straight into the budget. Ferrari is more than just an F1 team, dont forget.

#71 Gilles4Ever

Gilles4Ever
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 20,174 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 28 November 2013 - 05:51

Makes me a bit sick to hear Horner saying that RB are working to the same regs and are simply better at designing a car. They are in a different funding league altogether and he knows it. The likes of Lotus and Mercedes are doing a great job to even compete with RB and Ferrari with that disparity.

http://www.motorspor...bull-whitmarsh/

 

In fact, Whitmarsh said that meteoric level of spending has actually "distorted the sport".

And he said his counterpart Christian Horner's claim that Red Bull doesn't spend the most is "just rubbish".

"You'll see that's just rubbish but everyone knows that and they know it as well," Whitmarsh is quoted as saying by Bloomberg.