316 replies to this topic

[Tarzaan]

1: very limited price for engines/gearbox + hibrid parts

2: limited number of staff in the pit on race weekends

3: new system for money redistribution

[Paco]

Staff at gp is such an small part of a teams budget it makes zero impact on being able to run in F1... It's easily less then 5% of a teams operating budget..

Redistribution does nothing. Big teams will still outspend small teams and small teams will outspend their resources to try and move up. ...

What's hurting is simply cost of engine package, such limited testing you need to computer model very thing and it simply doesn't translate to real world results so monthly testing needs to come back stat, open rule book so teams can innovate again!...

[Ferrari_F1_fan_2001]

How much is a mechanic paid these days, £50,000? Does that sound about right? How much would a 'sustainable reduction' be? 

[katmen]

1. get rid of Bernie and CVC - big earnings

2. explore internet- very reasonable earnings

3. cap salaries- moderate earnings, no pay drivers better F1 as a product see balanced NHL

4. no ferrari extras

5.make technology more road relevant- more mfgs., more money to r&d 

6. no restrictions to recuperate of energy

7. lower tickets prices, more spectators at GPs more earnings  in the end, more merchandised products bought

8. no more Oil GPs they are cancer for F1 see Abu Double 

[Paincake]

Nobody watches TV anymore, so I will have to agree with more internet services.

[Lopek]

I'd limit the number of wing (and other aero part) specifications allowed each year. Maybe to 5?

 

Right now big teams are bringing new specification wings, break ducts, etc to almost every race - in some cases multiple versions. Often they even bring 4 of each - one for each car & a spare for each - and on occasion they are discarded after first practice. That's ridiculously wasteful - both in people designing/making them & production materials - and from a fans perspective unless you put photos side by side the differences are not noticeable.

 

Allow the team some opportunity to develop, and to have different specifications for Monaco & Monza (for example), but the current situation is a complete farce imo.

[pdac]

Don't get me started!

 

Really, I've never understood professional sport - a bunch of people 'playing' and getting paid for it? Doing something they would happily pay to do.

 

Anyway, back to the topic:

 

1. Fixed price, below cost price, major components such as PUs and Tyres (I'm sure there will always be manufacturers who want to provide them for the exposure and prestige)

2. Very much looser technical regulations so that someone can come up with fairly cheap novel ideas that would give good returns and it won't be immediately banned.

3. Teams free to change their names to accommodate anyone who wants to pay them for some exposure (with, of course, no obligation on commentators to call teams by their official names)

4. Even distribution of the 'prize fund' - it's entertainment and all those taking part should get well paid. The 'prize' should be the trophy, not the money (well, maybe a little money so that they can all buy themselves a celebratory drink).

Edited by pdac, 10 March 2015 - 20:28.

[ninetyzero]

1. get rid of Bernie and CVC - big earnings Good idea, what/who would you replace them with?

2. explore internet- very reasonable earnings Good idea, though would only happen after completion step 1

3. cap salaries- moderate earnings, no pay drivers better F1 as a product see balanced NHL Would that help the struggling teams though? It's not like Sauber are paying Nasr millions..

4. no ferrari extras Good Idea, does this include the extras teams like Williams get as well?

5.make technology more road relevant- more mfgs., more money to r&d How?

6. no restrictions to recuperate of energy Good idea, would LM style 4wd be legal?

7. lower tickets prices, more spectators at GPs more earnings  in the end, more merchandised products bought Lower ticket prices=bankrupt circuits unfortunately

8. no more Oil GPs they are cancer for F1 see Abu Double Fair enough, would these GPs be replaced by anything or would there be less races?

 

Sorry, can't be ared to write my own so I thought I'd critique someone else's instead...

Edited by ninetyzero, 10 March 2015 - 20:45.

[pdac]

Nobody watches TV anymore, so I will have to agree with more internet services.

 

Actually, you've just helped me think of a really good way to cut costs ...

 

No more TV coverage. Given that TV revenue is by far the biggest source of money for F1, without it they couldn't possibly be able to spend as much.

[katmen]

katmen, on 10 Mar 2015 - 21:10, said:

1. get rid of Bernie and CVC - big earnings Good idea, what/who would you replace them with?

Maybe Horner tyope person could be good

2. explore internet- very reasonable earnings Good idea, though would only happen after completion step 1

3. cap salaries- moderate earnings, no pay drivers better F1 as a product see balanced NHL Would that help the struggling teams though? It's not like Sauber are paying Nasr millions..

yes it will help a lot, instead entry fee there should be salary money and policy like a UCI requires for  World Tour cycling teams, the cap will create balanced opportunities for all teams, it could lead to have ham in lesser team and more fun on track or have draft and trade idea introduced see NHL, NFL, NBA

4. no ferrari extras Good Idea, does this include the extras teams like Williams get as well?

yes, money should be balanced between teams

5.make technology more road relevant- more mfgs., more money to r&d How?

because if you inventing for example fuel sparing technologies with aim to get a high output it is more acceptable to attract more mfgs and more money invested to F1 instead to inhouse inventing ala wolksvagen

6. no restrictions to recuperate of energy Good idea, would LM style 4wd be legal? why not

7. lower tickets prices, more spectators at GPs more earnings  in the end, more merchandised products bought Lower ticket prices=bankrupt circuits unfortunately

no it is not true, better have 1000 spectators at 5 € as 10 at 500 €, why? more people more hotel reservations, more burgers bought, more willingness to come next year, CAVEAT no more promoters licking cvc and bernies butt , people spends more when there are lower prices.... its psychology

8. no more Oil GPs they are cancer for F1 see Abu Double Fair enough, would these GPs be replaced by anything or would there be less races?

there will be replaced by circuits which are now not so able to pay horrible fees to cvcs and Bernie 

 

Sorry, can't be ared to write my own so I thought I'd critique someone else's instead... 

dont worry this is discussion  forum :-)

 

Edited by ninetyzero, Today, 21:45.

[Atreiu]

Customer chassis.

[Atreiu]

Pilot drafting.

[Kalmake]

Customer PU cost cap tied to a fraction of equal share FOM money.

[ronsingapore]

This is going to sound terrible; from a personal perspective as a sports fan, i would say power would first needs to be removed from the CVC so that more money can be re-distributed fairly and equally between all the teams and instead of most of the profits going to CVC, a certain percentage should go to investing to the sport.

 

But from a business perspective, companies that can't keep up should not join. From a cold-blooded perspective, only teams that can afford to build both their own chassis and engines should particpate, as they would have the financial strength to do so.

[ch103]

Wouldn't CVC's 10-K statement have to disclose the true financial #'s of F1?

[Ferrari_F1_fan_2001]

I said this in another thread a few weeks ago but forgot to add it here.

Standard front wing

Standard hybrid system

This is where huge amounts of money have gone in recent years. Cut the RD money to these areas and literally tens of millions are saved per annum.

[Henri Greuter]

I said this in another thread a few weeks ago but forgot to add it here.

Standard front wing

Standard hybrid system

This is where huge amounts of money have gone in recent years. Cut the RD money to these areas and literally tens of millions are saved per annum.

 

 

I would add a standard rear wing and less freedom for any bodypart under the rear wing and behind it as well. Eliminate much of the freedom of the add on bodywork parts and make them specified to bring the wind tunnels to a stand still instead of looking for yet another kg of downforce.

 

And get rid of that stepped nose and teatray under the monocoque as well becaause as long ast that is permitted teams will keep searching for making the best use of it aerodynamically which measn yeat agan: crank up the windtunnel....

 

 

 

Henri