35 replies to this topic

[taran]

As I understand it, Bernie is obliged to provide a show with a minimum of 20 cars to a race promoter in order to get his racing fee. Notwithstanding the FIA and Bernie allowing some teams to skip the races, the promoters haven't said they agree with this AFAIK.

 

So with less than 20 cars, do Austin and the remaining races (if Caterham and Marussia don't show up again) still have to pay? Or is Bernie the one not holding up his end of the bargain and therefore liable?

[garoidb]

As I understand it, Bernie is obliged to provide a show with a minimum of 20 cars to a race promoter in order to get his racing fee. Notwithstanding the FIA and Bernie allowing some teams to skip the races, the promoters haven't said they agree with this AFAIK.

 

So with less than 20 cars, do Austin and the remaining races (if Caterham and Marussia don't show up again) still have to pay? Or is Bernie the one not holding up his end of the bargain and therefore liable?

 

Or does Bernie (or the commercial interests that he represents) have a back up plan? If absolutely necessary (and I suspect it isn't that important), could two of the existing teams be prevailed upon to field an extra car for a small consideration?

[scheivlak]

From what I've read from The People Who Have Seen Some Document (like Joe Saward) it's the FIA who wants a minimum of 20 cars but Bernie has only to guarantee a number of 14 cars in his contracts with race organisers. Yes, the world of FOM is a strange world.

 

It's of course rather crazy that we as simple fans are not allowed to find that out ourselves somewhere.

[Risil]

Wouldn't be surprised if the minimum car count demanded by the promoters is kept secret from the teams too. It weakens the "threshold" team's bargaining position when it comes to extra support, prize money advances etc if they don't actually know whether pulling the plug will give Bernie a headache or not.

Edited by Risil, 26 October 2014 - 20:58.

[george1981]

Bernie rarely gets financial things wrong. Were he to start losing fees from race promoters then I think he would have done more to keep 20 cars on the grid.

[Viceroy]

Bernie rarely gets financial things wrong. Were he to start losing fees from race promoters then I think he would have done more to keep 20 cars on the grid.

Very well, said. When BAR was suspended for two races in 2005, hence the grid dropping to 18, Bernie said, 16 is enough in regard of the organizers. Toto Wolff confirmed this figure earlier today.

Thereore I am convinced, that 16 is the correct number, but whether 14 or 16, your post explains perfectly  that B.E will not lose any promoters fees.

[Cyanide]

No, cause now some spectators are so devastated they will not attend the GP because their favorite teams of Caterham and Marussia are not competing. 

 

So about 0.05% less attendance. 

[Risil]

Be as flippant as you like but an entry south of 20 cars is rarely a sign of a healthy racing series.

[ForzaGTR]

The inconvenient truth is few will notice whether Marussia or Caterham attend a race or not.

Edited by ForzaGTR, 26 October 2014 - 21:53.

[superden]

The inconvenient truth is few will notice whether Marussia or Caterham attend a race or not.

Maybe not, but they will notice the fallout in the longer term, as the series gets less and less competitive (and I refer to genuine competition, not that which exists between 5 three car teams). The problem is, fans seldom look beyond the end of their nose, accepting the symptom as a cure. Its like politicians, selling something sh*t, to ensure that the 'compromise' outcome is actually perceived as a positive result.

Edited by superden, 26 October 2014 - 22:05.

[george1981]

The inconvenient truth is few will notice whether Marussia or Caterham attend a race or not.

 

Those two teams got very little air time. I doubt many people will notice they're not there.

 

It reminds of that time Force India had done something to annoy Bernie and he punished them by making sure they didn't get any air time during the race.

[Lemnpiper]

  Maybe nowadays it isn't   but in the  1960's  very often fields in fact were under 20   and I don't see many complaints about the racing back then or the competition(or lack thereof) those drivers faced

[Brother Fox]

Maybe he'll count the safety car and medical car?
Still wouldn't be the dodgiest thing he's done to get his money

[Disgrace]

No, cause now some spectators are so devastated they will not attend the GP because their favorite teams of Caterham and Marussia are not competing. 

 

So about 0.05% less attendance. 

 

There are four less cars racing on the circuit, period. Is this Bernie's brilliant answer to the lack of noise complaints?

[TF110]

Now Lotus and Sauber are in jeopardy of 'placing last'. With Caterham and Marussia gone.

[Jager]

If there are only 20 cars for the remaining races, should the points system be amended for these races and the points scaled back by 20/24 given its now theoretically easier to score points ?

[Peter0Scandlyn]

I'll go with Joe's view of 14.

I really can't see Bernme has not done the math, so no, there won't be any fee reduction.

And for the next race the money's long been in the bank anyway, months ago, so being possibly caught short late in the piece like here, well you can ask but if I say NO, well up to you really, couldn't give a rats.....back to you.

[DampMongoose]

If there are only 20 cars for the remaining races, should the points system be amended for these races and the points scaled back by 20/24 given its now theoretically easier to score points ?

 

Only if you're a Lewis Hamilton fan!

[Clatter]

Wouldn't be surprised if the minimum car count demanded by the promoters is kept secret from the teams too. It weakens the "threshold" team's bargaining position when it comes to extra support, prize money advances etc if they don't actually know whether pulling the plug will give Bernie a headache or not.

The minimum number of cars is defined in the Concorde agreement so certainly not kept secret from the teams.

[Clatter]

Very well, said. When BAR was suspended for two races in 2005, hence the grid dropping to 18, Bernie said, 16 is enough in regard of the organizers. Toto Wolff confirmed this figure earlier today.
Thereore I am convinced, that 16 is the correct number, but whether 14 or 16, your post explains perfectly that B.E will not lose any promoters fees.

16 is the number required in previous Concorde agreements. I doubt that is different in the current version.

[BRG]

I wonder when one of Bernie's cash-cow race promoters is going to ring him and say 'we don't want your bedraggled circus after all'.  It will be the tipping point when Bernie's whole house of cards starts to collapse.

[F1matt]

The inconvenient truth is few will notice whether Marussia or Caterham attend a race or not.

Always easy to spot people who don't attend the races, from an attendance point of view some of the best driving is on display further down the field, the tail end cars sonetines look a real handful.

[f1RacingForever]

Bernie always wins one way or another. If it comes to this sort of situation then then Bernie will probably lower his fee to make it fair.

[Fastcake]

16 is the number required in previous Concorde agreements. I doubt that is different in the current version.

 

It does not appear to be that simple anymore. There is no longer a Concorde Agreement as such, just a series of bilateral agreements between the teams, the FIA and FOM. There are also the individual contracts between FOM and the race promoters, and the commercial rights agreement between FOM and FIA. According to Joe Saward and a number of other reports written over the weekend, the minimum number of cars varies from 12 to 20 cars, depending upon the contract.

[Red17]

I wonder when one of Bernie's cash-cow race promoters is going to ring him and say 'we don't want your bedraggled circus after all'.  It will be the tipping point when Bernie's whole house of cards starts to collapse.

 

I suspect he wont be around to pick up the phone when that happens.

[Clatter]

It does not appear to be that simple anymore. There is no longer a Concorde Agreement as such, just a series of bilateral agreements between the teams, the FIA and FOM. There are also the individual contracts between FOM and the race promoters, and the commercial rights agreement between FOM and FIA. According to Joe Saward and a number of other reports written over the weekend, the minimum number of cars varies from 12 to 20 cars, depending upon the contract.

I would be very surprised if BE would agree to a minimum of 20 or that the promoters would agree to as few as 12. I think 16 is far more likely.

[Fastcake]

I would be very surprised if BE would agree to a minimum of 20 or that the promoters would agree to as few as 12. I think 16 is far more likely.

 

So would I, but this appears to be the case.

 

Joe Saward, who has written some extremely good articles over the past week, sums it up here.

 

Today we are looking at a situation in which there may be a need for Formula 1 teams to run extra cars in 2015, in order to meet a minimum number of cars that are required in the contract. One of the problems is that the number of cars required appears to differ from one contract to the next. The Formula One group and the teams are required to deliver 20 cars to the FIA, but the individual race contracts appear to vary between 16 and 14, depending on the deal. There is also the agreement between the FIA and the Formula One group which is known as the “Umbrella Agreement”. It is not known what is in these confidential agreements, but the prospectus of the aborted Formula One flotation included a summary of “key contracts” which said that Formula One “must attempt to procure that at least 16 cars participate in the World Championship”. The FIA rules say that an event “may be cancelled” if fewer than 12 cars are available for it. So, the answer to the question is somewhere between 12 and 20.

[Lee Nicolle]

The promoters are being screwed, 4 less cars is 4 less cars.From an already slim field. Really they need 30 cars.

F1 is unviable, the big teams need the small teams to make the sport?? viable.

Cars are way too hi tech, really hybrid racing cars,, Dumb!

Rules need to be simpler. Spending caps need to be in place. 

And then there is Bernie,,,,

[ensign14]

Back in 1982, 14 was the minimum needed to make a race a championship race.  Which is why the FOCA teams were incandescent with Tyrrell over his withdrawal from the San Marino boycott - it would have been a non-title race had he stayed out of the race.

 

One wonders what the consequences of that would have been for Gilles...

[DainBramaged]

The question is, would anyone be brave enough not to pay Bernie? Contracts are one thing, but I get the feeling that if you upset Bernie and he wants to take issue with what you have or haven't done, then he could probably make life difficult for you whether you are in the right or not. Is it worth upsetting him whether you care about getting another F1 race or not. Most people realize that Bernie won't be at the helm too much longer and will probably go for the easy life. Maybe I'm making more out of this and I've got it all wrong. I'm just asking the question.

[Slartibartfast]

The inconvenient truth is few will notice whether Marussia or Caterham attend a race or not.

 

I had no idea so many F1 spectators need to take their shoes off to count to twenty.

[Nicktendo86]

The people running this sport are morons. That's all I have to add to this.

[Longtimefan]

I had no idea so many F1 spectators need to take their shoes off to count to twenty.

No mate, thats football fans ;)

[taran]

The question is, would anyone be brave enough not to pay Bernie? Contracts are one thing, but I get the feeling that if you upset Bernie and he wants to take issue with what you have or haven't done, then he could probably make life difficult for you whether you are in the right or not. Is it worth upsetting him whether you care about getting another F1 race or not. Most people realize that Bernie won't be at the helm too much longer and will probably go for the easy life. Maybe I'm making more out of this and I've got it all wrong. I'm just asking the question.

 

 

The problem with Bernie is that he is increasingly chasing dollars in rather unsavoury places. Those places tend to be ruled by unsavoury types. So as powerful and scary as Bernie is, he is seriously outclassed by those dudes...For example, who´d win between Putin or Bernie....?

My guess would be the one with the plutonium.....

[chipmcdonald]

The inconvenient truth is few will notice whether Marussia or Caterham attend a race or not.

 

 

 Taking every negative in F1 as a singular item - quiet engines, goofy rules, cost, races at human rights abusing countries, boring tracks, Marussia/Caterham not being able to run - all of these things by themselves are not show stoppers. 

 

 All of it together is a different thing.

 

The bottom rung does actually have to be there, it provides context.  Otherwise you may as well have Champcar or IRL. 

 

F1 is dessicated. 

[BlinkyMcSquinty]

And the rich get richer while the poor are being strangled to death. Of the three teams that entered Formula One in 2010, there won't be any at Texas. Formula One is entering a phase where their own inbreeding is an attempt to cover the basic fact that it costs too much for a simple team to run.

 

I know of no other racing series that allows teams and manufacturers to have controlling power. And this has produced a scenario where teams only look after their own interests, and they refuse to allow true budget caps. Because of that, lesser teams are doomed to always stay at the bottom, and eventually expire.

 

Having less and less teams on the grid is a sign of an unhealthy series, and there is no solution being seriously contemplated.