86 replies to this topic

[LORDBYRON]

Ron said this that he thought some of the small teams might not make it to Melbourne

 

Is it so he dont have to run a third car as this and his drivers would be a cheap option ?

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/...008440164294656

[kimster89]

There is no place for socialism in F1.

[Goron3]

Makes sense given how expensive it is for them to run a 3rd car.

[Fastcake]

There is no place for socialism in F1.

 

Yeah, who needs more than eight cars on the grid?

 

[Nathan]

Who needs more than 16? Or 14 for that matter?

 

Why do we need cars 2-3 seconds of the pace? What did Marussia and Caterham provide to the casual F1 viewer? What have they done to deserve $20-30 million more?   At least Sauber can race mid pack, Force India can get podiums and Lotus can win.  They usually employ drivers on merit.

Edited by Nathan, 13 December 2014 - 20:21.

[Ross Stonefeld]

There is no place for socialism in F1.

 

Sure there is. We're interested in the races taking part on the track. Id like it to be a sport first, with only as much business issues as are necessary.

 

The NFL shows that not only can you do full-on socialism in sports, but it can work.

[RubalSher]

We definitely dont need Caterhams n Marussias to make up the numbers. They were an embarrassment for the sport.

[TheManAlive]

We definitely dont need Caterhams n Marussias to make up the numbers. They were an embarrassment for the sport.

 

Was Minardi an embarrassment? 

 

I do not buy in to the belief that all teams have to be front runners and that three or four car teams are good for the sport. I would happily have a spread across the grid, let younger drivers or pay drivers run at the back and then work their way up.

[RubalSher]

Was Minardi an embarrassment? 

 

I do not buy in to the belief that all teams have to be front runners and that three or four car teams are good for the sport. I would happily have a spread across the grid, let younger drivers or pay drivers run at the back and then work their way up.

 

A spread is fine but getting lapped 2-3 times in a race every race. We might as well let anyone with a car race in F1 just to make up the numbers then.

[ATM]

They didn't look that embarrassing to me. Now, Life, Lola, Andrea Moda...those names were really embarrassing. For Marussa and Caterham finishing 80% of the entered races, and about 1-2 laps down of the leaders, sure it's not something to write home about but it's not really the end of the world either. 

[sportyskells]

if it helps get Caterham on the grid for next season then i for that so go for it McLaren

[SealTheDiffuser]

There is no place for socialism in F1.

 

 

[Jackmancer]

Well, I read this as "Give Magnussen a seat and we'll give you a bag of cash for it."

[Knot]

There is no place for socialism in F1.

 

Well, except that it's socialist at it's heart.

 

Who do you think pays for the majority of the tracks? Bernie? Nope. FIA? Nope. Taxpayers of their respective countries pay for it.

 

I'm not saying that this is good, not at all, but it is what it is.

[Nicktendo86]

Who needs more than 16? Or 14 for that matter?

Why do we need cars 2-3 seconds of the pace? What did Marussia and Caterham provide to the casual F1 viewer? What have they done to deserve $20-30 million more? At least Sauber can race mid pack, Force India can get podiums and Lotus can win. They usually employ drivers on merit.

And yet Marrusia scored a point this season wheras Saubet didn't.

[Fastcake]

They didn't look that embarrassing to me. Now, Life, Lola, Andrea Moda...those names were really embarrassing. For Marussa and Caterham finishing 80% of the entered races, and about 1-2 laps down of the leaders, sure it's not something to write home about but it's not really the end of the world either. 

 

Exactly. Marussia and Caterham were far closer to the midfield than some of the jokers of the 90s, and possibly even the likes of Minardi and Spyker.

 

The latter of course being one of the many teams that moved from the rear of the grid to being a regular points scorer.

[ensign14]

There is no place for socialism in F1.

 

Fine.  Let's start by removing Ferrari's gigantic subsidy.

[Risil]

There is no place for socialism in F1.

 

[Bloggsworth]

Yeah, who needs more than eight cars on the grid?

 

 

Me - It's boring enough when 2 cars run away and hide from the rest of the field; but leaving only 3 teams, of varying quality to trail at 30 second gaps behind them? How thrilling! 

[Raziel]

Well, I read this as "Give Magnussen a seat and we'll give you a bag of cash for it."

 

And that´s a bad thing?

 

"Help us and we´ll help you" is not fair for you?

[Nathan]

Regardless Marussia and Caterham usually only took part in their own races at the back.  So for the spectator at the circuit, this provides added amusement.  The only reason they would ever nip at a Sauber is because that team is having a down on it's luck season. A pretty good driver that got a stroke of luck in a place where that kind of magic happens.  Otherwise Marussia wasn't scoring points.

 

My wondering is why should a team get $70 million just for showing up 20 times per year?  How else do you ensure the cream of F1 team ownership/management is always rising to the top?  Isn't it healthy to have teams fail when they are not properly funded and managed?  Why should the business side subsidize a billionaires, or corporate parents ego/marketing agenda? 

 

I can look at the extra money going to Ferrari and make sense of it because I think Ferrari adds noticeable value to the sport.  It's good having Ferrari around because a lot of fans and people in general care about Ferrari.  Let's consider Ferrari is a company that helps by putting engines in the back of other race cars.  Red Bull, Ferrari, Renault and Mercedes invest millions bringing up tomorrows stars.  Why shouldn't long standing independent teams like Williams and perhaps Sauber receive a little extra funding? The amount they have and continue to contribute to Formula 1 as a sport and entertainment proposition far outweighs that provided by Caterham and Marussia.  I'd hope they would get paid more by the business side of the sport. 

I think team owners should have to earn it considering most of them are only in it for their own corporate bottom line.
 

Edited by Nathan, 13 December 2014 - 22:40.

[Clatter]

A spread is fine but getting lapped 2-3 times in a race every race. We might as well let anyone with a car race in F1 just to make up the numbers then.

And did that happen every race? 

[RubalSher]

And did that happen every race? 

 

Pretty much barring races with safety cars that allowed them to unlap themselves and catch up with the pack again.

[Ferrari_F1_fan_2001]

We definitely dont need Caterhams n Marussias to make up the numbers. They were an embarrassment for the sport.

They were a platform for young talented drivers - in principle - like Bianchi, Ricciardo etc to showcase their abilities and get into top teams.

Fisichella, Webber, Trulli, Alonso all drove for Minardi. All turned out to be great drivers and winners. In Alonso's case.....an all time great.

Just imagine Minardi did not exist and teams like them.

[HoldenRT]

When I think of the word socialism I think of people like Stalin and associate it with dictators.  When I think of sports, especially the well managed ones, I don't think of socialism even though they may have some of those characteristics.  Cultural conditioning is a funny thing.  Or maybe it's just ignorance on my part.  Ignorance is bliss?

 

It's a good thing too because I wouldn't be able to enjoy watching some sports if they reminded me of Stalin.  But out of all the ones that do, F1 comes closer than those other "well managed healthy" ones that others may refer to as socialist.

 

Getting off topic so to bring it back to F1.. there seems to be an elitist vibe within F1.. "we wouldn't want you anyway".. "less is more".  An exclusivity.. and a feeling of taking more and giving less.  That's where the word sustainable pops up because anything that takes more than it gives is hard to sustain.  Or anything that is overly wasteful.  F1 has been both of these things lately.. just look at all the old discarded circuits that have been scratch built, used for a few years and then ditched like an oily rag.

 

Marussia or Caterham are less the concern IMO, it's more about the Lotuses and Force Indias but many in the paddock feel that those lower teams are important too, because it gives the rookie drivers somewhere to start.  Before Riccardio drove for STR, he was in HRT, Alonso was in Minardi etc etc.  There'd be a point where too many of these type of teams could be a bad thing, but still.. even in that case, better to have a few on the outside trying to get in.. with a grid of 30 cars, as opposed to having only 4 teams, as others have said.  There's a part of F1's elitism which is a part of it's image, but also another part which isn't helpful.. and actually hurts itself and is counter intuitive.

Edited by HoldenRT, 13 December 2014 - 23:17.

[RubalSher]

They were a platform for young talented drivers - in principle - like Bianchi, Ricciardo etc to showcase their abilities and get into top teams.

Fisichella, Webber, Trulli, Alonso all drove for Minardi. All turned out to be great drivers and winners. In Alonso's case.....an all time great.

Just imagine Minardi did not exist and teams like them.

 

Dont we have GP2, GP3 to showcase talent? In any case, it is all about pay drivers now, especially if you are a rookie. What value does Gutierrez, Chilton etc bring and how are they showcasing any talent? Quite obvious that they are only in the sport because of money and teams like Caterhams n Marussias just give an opportunity to the spoilt brats to go racing every alternate Sunday.

 

I for one so welcomed the Austin GP this year with only 18 cars. It was a sight for sore eyes to see all cars on the lead lap for almost 80% of the race and no clueless jokers trundling about as if they were in a different race.

[pdac]

We definitely dont need Caterhams n Marussias to make up the numbers. They were an embarrassment for the sport.

 

Last season everyone was an embarrassment except for Mercedes. Without any mechanical problems they were sailing off into the distance each race. So, essentially,  we could have done with a 2-car grid.

[Rob]

A spread is fine but getting lapped 2-3 times in a race every race. We might as well let anyone with a car race in F1 just to make up the numbers then.

 

We used to have the Forti Corse cars not being classified because they were 9 laps behind at the end. The spread of teams has narrowed by a huge margin.

[Fastcake]

Dont we have GP2, GP3 to showcase talent? In any case, it is all about pay drivers now, especially if you are a rookie. What value does Gutierrez, Chilton etc bring and how are they showcasing any talent? Quite obvious that they are only in the sport because of money and teams like Caterhams n Marussias just give an opportunity to the spoilt brats to go racing every alternate Sunday.

 

I for one so welcomed the Austin GP this year with only 18 cars. It was a sight for sore eyes to see all cars on the lead lap for almost 80% of the race and no clueless jokers trundling about as if they were in a different race.

 

There's a big gap between the feeder series and Formula One. Rookies need somewhere to show their potential in an F1 car, and with only 18 seats and a plethora of experienced drivers available, it becomes that much harder to gain a seat. They may have become over reliant on pay drivers over the past year, thanks to the out of control costs, but Caterham, Marussia and HRT have not only given seats to new drivers (paying or otherwise), but also given second chances to drivers like Kovalainen or Kobayashi. The model of hiring one pay driver to pay the salary of the other driver has long been with us.

 

Grand Prix racing has featured a large disparity between the top and bottom since long before I was born, and a huge number of its fans enjoy watching all the competitors take part, no matter where they may finish. It's part of the sport - heck it's the same with every sport.

[Jazza]

Dont we have GP2, GP3 to showcase talent? In any case, it is all about pay drivers now, especially if you are a rookie. What value does Gutierrez, Chilton etc bring and how are they showcasing any talent? Quite obvious that they are only in the sport because of money and teams like Caterhams n Marussias just give an opportunity to the spoilt brats to go racing every alternate Sunday.

I for one so welcomed the Austin GP this year with only 18 cars. It was a sight for sore eyes to see all cars on the lead lap for almost 80% of the race and no clueless jokers trundling about as if they were in a different race.

Letting the slowest die with no one to take their place is a bad direction for the sport. Even the big teams will start to feel the sponsors reducing their spending if the field compacts too much.

The problem is that when you only have 18 cars, one of the quality cars will finish 18th and therefore last. Without the small teams out there to look bad it will be one of the midfield teams doing that. How long until a couple of midfield teams become another Caterham and Marussia battle after a season of 15th-18th position finishes? Once they become the "jokers" do we care if they go as well, as only the the top 14 cars are worth watching? After all, if we still had a couple of really crap teams finishing 5-6 laps behind every race this year, both Marussia and Caterham would have looked like half decent back of the midfield teams.

The reality with Motorsport is that there is usually only 1 or 2 teams in a position to win races and the championship on any given season. But no one will watch a F1 race with only 2-4 cars in it. The sport needs the other 20 or so cars racing for non podium positions to make the podium positions worth something. If Mercdes was the only team out there this year then most wins and the championship probably wouldn't have looked much different to how it did anyway. But no one would have watched it. A 2 car race for the win in a grid of 22 cars is ok, but a literal 2 car race would be pointless. And if we keep cutting off the "jokers" then that's the direction we are heading in.

[BullHead]

Well I guess there is a marketable difference between a sport and a show

[Jimisgod]

There is no place for socialism in F1.

Yeah good old capitalist pay drivers are the bastion of the sport.

[keshav]

It is not about 'being an embarrassment'.

 

Firstly, this is a great platform for young drivers. Look at Bianchi. His splendid performance at Monaco was something which would catch eyes of all big teams. He could have made his way to a Merc or Red Bull, instead of a mid-level Ferrari, Could he have done that without having a drive with a minnow? People took notice of that performance.

 

Apart from the racing itself, F1 is the pinnacle of technology. People love to work on cutting edge technologies, pushing their limits, testing it on track, making their name in the world of motorsports. You can't just start of with a job at Mercedes. A few ideas implemented on a Caterham which can make it a bit faster again makes the engineers shine. 

 

Similarly, we can just throw away the teams below 8th position in the Premier League. They are made the lose. Maybe a Liverpool/Spurs fan will have to say something about that

[aramos]

It makes sense for McLaren, they don't want a third car and they need a team to place their junior drivers like Vandoorne and Magnussen at. This is best achieved by becoming a partner with a team like Caterham/Marussia(if they even exist anymore). Pumping in the realms of 30-40 million a year into the team and getting a seat for their junior drivers.

[aguri]

We definitely dont need Caterhams n Marussias to make up the numbers. They were an embarrassment for the sport.

 

Ferrari were an embarrassment for the sport being as slow as they were considering the huge amount of money they receive from FOM.

[aguri]

When I think of the word socialism I think of people like Stalin and associate it with dictators.  When I think of sports, especially the well managed ones, I don't think of socialism even though they may have some of those characteristics.  Cultural conditioning is a funny thing.  Or maybe it's just ignorance on my part.  Ignorance is bliss?

 

It's a good thing too because I wouldn't be able to enjoy watching some sports if they reminded me of Stalin.  But out of all the ones that do, F1 comes closer than those other "well managed healthy" ones that others may refer to as socialist.

 

 

Communism =/= Socialism.

 

Socialism in government policy is universal healthcare. Socialism in sports regulation is the NFL. 

 

Ignorance benefits no one. 

[aguri]

If Mclaren want to help smaller teams they should start by lobbying Bernie, RB, Ferrari and Merc to create a more equal revenue share for all teams. Anything else is a band-aid solution only.

[Jackmancer]

And that´s a bad thing?

 

"Help us and we´ll help you" is not fair for you?

 

It's not bad, it's not help either, it's business. 

[george1981]

Was Minardi an embarrassment? 

 

On Minardi, they were in the sport for 20 years and a large part of their following was arguably down to their longevity and their never give up attitude.

The 2010 new teams don't come close to that and in my opinion don't have the same following and support as Minardi. There is a place in F1 for the small teams

 

I'm assuming that Ron Dennis is not referring to Caterham and Marussia when he says two teams might not make it to Melbourne, but a further two teams. That would be worrying to say the least. I would have suggested McLaren try to place Magnussen at Sauber in 2015 to give Magnussen more race experience and give Sauber a financial boost, but Sauber have got more than enough drivers.

[Hans V]

Nice initiativ from from Ron, but maybe he shoud get his own house in order first. Considering he has a huge challenge financing the buyout of the Mclaren shares and that the team in 2015 most likely has operated on a big deficit and has dipped well into its reserves (if they have any), his and McLarens ability to help out (in order to find seats for their young drivers) might be somewhat limited. A cynic might BTW suggest that Ron intentionally has run the team into the dirt performancewise and financially to drive the price of the shares down.

[DrF]

I wonder if obliging the big teams to run a second team, like red bull and STR, would be the answer? It would ensure a full grid, give young drivers a place to learn and possibly provide a less disparate grid?

[johnmhinds]

The big teams don't need to "help" the smaller teams, they need to stop being greedy and split up the sports revenues more equally so that smaller teams can survive and compete on their own.

F1 racing won't get better by having half a grid of B teams that pull over every time an A teams car wants to pass them.

The F1 Strategy Group needs to pull their heads out of their butts and create a system that builds a healthy sport for everyone instead of just writing rules to fill their own pockets.

Edited by johnmhinds, 14 December 2014 - 10:41.

[LORDBYRON]

On Minardi, they were in the sport for 20 years and a large part of their following was arguably down to their longevity and their never give up attitude.

The 2010 new teams don't come close to that and in my opinion don't have the same following and support as Minardi. There is a place in F1 for the small teams

 

I'm assuming that Ron Dennis is not referring to Caterham and Marussia when he says two teams might not make it to Melbourne, but a further two teams. That would be worrying to say the least. I would have suggested McLaren try to place Magnussen at Sauber in 2015 to give Magnussen more race experience and give Sauber a financial boost, but Sauber have got more than enough drivers.

Your well behind the times its been well reported that they have two new pay drivers for next year.

[Nathan]

"The big teams don't need to "help" the smaller teams, they need to stop being greedy and split up the sports revenues more equally so that smaller teams can survive and compete on their own.

F1 racing won't get better by having half a grid of B teams that pull over every time an A teams car wants to pass them.

The F1 Strategy Group needs to pull their heads out of their butts and create a system that builds a healthy sport for everyone instead of just writing rules to fill their own pockets"

 

Why do they *need* to?  What business with hundreds of employees, millions in infrastructure investments, that relies on performing better than the others to exist says "hey, give my business less money so you can give more to my competitors so they have a better chance beating me."  That is ridiculous, is it not? F1 isn't society or the playground, it is a sport/business where every player knows how ruthless it is.

[aditya-now]

 

Ron said this that he thought some of the small teams might not make it to Melbourne

 

Is it so he dont have to run a third car as this and his drivers would be a cheap option ?

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/...008440164294656

 

 

It is so he can run a third car and have a place for Magnussen, whom he wanted to race anyway all the way through.

[aditya-now]

F1 racing won't get better by having half a grid of B teams that pull over every time an A teams car wants to pass them.

 

 

If Ron were really "to help" another team, yes, Nathan - you are right - it would be to gain influence and control over said team and thus, a B-team.

[pacificquay]

A spread is fine but getting lapped 2-3 times in a race every race. We might as well let anyone with a car race in F1 just to make up the numbers then.

 

 

Nonsense. If you look at the early 90s you could finish 2 laps down and still be in the top 6.

[LuckyStrike1]

Well, McLaren and all the other teams could help by defaulting their contracts with FOM and start from scratch again with a more even distribution of the FOM money to the teams that sees the smaller teams get a larger percentage of the money. 

 

There could be solutions such as 70 % of the money distributed to the teams being split equally among the teams participating and the remaining 30 % of the team money being split out on a result basis. 

 

That would be a very good way for the big teams to help the smaller teams. 

 

Hard to expect it to happen though. 

[wj_gibson]

There is no place for socialism in F1.

Nor is there any place for failed business models that reduce the grid to a size that is completely untenable for a category that professes to be the pinnacle of the sport.

[Ross Stonefeld]

I assume the two teams in dager don't include Marussia(the auction makes me think they're dead?) but might include Caterham? So there's an additional team on the brink, or two more entirely?