NASCAR vs F1 - how are they run differently
#1
Posted 15 June 2015 - 16:35
Can you guys* help me out.
I have a rough understanding of how F1 is run. But I have no idea about how NASCAR is run except for the general idea that it is much more centralised ("NASCAR" punished this driver and "NASCAR" changed that rule).
Is it that simple?
What are the differences in terms of control of the rights, race organisers, sporting rules etc?
* Please note no sexual orientation on the behalf of the reader is intended to be implied by the use of this term.
Advertisement
#2
Posted 15 June 2015 - 16:36
NASCAR is a sanctioning body. But they provide the role of both the FIA and the commercial rights. And it's run by one man/one family.
And they 'own' the majority(?) of the tracks on the calendar so....
#3
Posted 15 June 2015 - 17:00
Is one approach obviously better than the other?
I'm thinking about things like the F1 strategy group being a bit of headless chicken. Does the FIA have to act like it does our could it impose itself more authoritatively? Why does it feel like Bernie's F1 more than the FIA's F1?
#4
Posted 15 June 2015 - 17:49
There is another difference I have noticed over the years.
In Nascar, "suspicious things" are not open to lawyer talk, if Nascar says it's illegal you are in deep trouble and there is little room for appeals.
#5
Posted 15 June 2015 - 18:15
NASCAR is owned and run by the France family, begun by Bill France. They control everything, it is a complete dictatorship, you either play by their rules or leave.
Because of this, they make the rules with the interests of the family, and thus NASCAR. If teams or manufacturers are unhappy, they have left. But because NASCAR offers a stable business environment and even very small teams can turn a profit, there is never a shortage of teams and drivers.
NASCAR does weird things and enact weird rules. In the early days (and many believe even today) NASCAR will throw a caution to bunch the field up if anyone is running away in the lead. Of course it is not fair to the competitors, but it draws the fans in, they pay their tickets, and the revenue eventually finds it's way to the teams. Even if the rules can ruin your day, those same rules are the goose that lays the golden eggs. NASCAR's rules exist just to draw thew fans in, for instance if you swear on TV you will definitely receive harsh penalty. But if you get into a fist fight, most times they turn a blind eye. Weird, but all designed to attract the fans.
NASCAR negotiates the TV rights, no one else is involved in that process.
Although NASCAR pays out cash at the end of the year for championships and such, the great majority is paid out for each race. You win, you get that money immediately. And the pay out is quite substantial even further back in the field. If you finish 20th you still make a profit for the weekend's expenses. This method is very beneficial for small teams that cannot afford to support a million dollar debt for a year.
#6
Posted 15 June 2015 - 23:34
One thing I gather is that even if you ignore the different barriers to entry related to technology and cost, NASCAR is much less of a closed shop than F1. I think they have seeded qualifiers, provisionals or something to protect their full time, regular, successful entries, but I'm under the impression that if you pay your entry fee, rock up to the track with a legal car and suitable driver, you get your shot to qualify for one of the remaining spots on the grid, without needing a franchise or committing to a full season entry etc, is that correct?
Because I must admit I don't follow NASCAR, as the racing is not my cup of tea, but I've always admired that aspect, if true.
Edited by FerrariV12, 15 June 2015 - 23:35.
#7
Posted 16 June 2015 - 03:18
#8
Posted 16 June 2015 - 04:55
One thing I gather is that even if you ignore the different barriers to entry related to technology and cost, NASCAR is much less of a closed shop than F1. I think they have seeded qualifiers, provisionals or something to protect their full time, regular, successful entries, but I'm under the impression that if you pay your entry fee, rock up to the track with a legal car and suitable driver, you get your shot to qualify for one of the remaining spots on the grid, without needing a franchise or committing to a full season entry etc, is that correct?
Because I must admit I don't follow NASCAR, as the racing is not my cup of tea, but I've always admired that aspect, if true.
If you have a valid owners license with a licensed driver they can be the same person), present a compliant vehicle and pay the inspection fee (technically it's not an entry fee) you can have a shot a qualifying for the race. You'd have to work your way up through the ranks to get the license or have a license from another sanction (for example FIA) to prove you have experience.
Big Bill learned a long time ago that if you are making a lot of money and spread it around to everyone involved, even your enemies will be more friendly.
He realized that everything happens because of the fans. No fans means tracks don't sell seats, teams don't sell merch, TV doesn't sell ads.
#9
Posted 16 June 2015 - 05:10
Although NASCAR pays out cash at the end of the year for championships and such, the great majority is paid out for each race. You win, you get that money immediately. And the pay out is quite substantial even further back in the field. If you finish 20th you still make a profit for the weekend's expenses. This method is very beneficial for small teams that cannot afford to support a million dollar debt for a year.
Most teams won't break even with the purse from the weekend. It costs them $300-400 grand a race, once all is said and done including the driver and not counting the hard infrastructure of the team. The little guys can make a bit of money and can do it for less than half that and run solid mid field, The start and parks can make money by showing up and qualifying and parking after 8 or 10 laps.
Here's the order and payout from the Michigan race http://www.jayski.co...2015results.pdf