25 replies to this topic

[HistoryFan]

There are so many problems in current Formula One. But different to the past, there are no more boycotts. Why?

 

1) Why don't the race organiser boycott F1 for their huge money asked for coming?

2) Why don't the small F1 teams boycott for huge costs and unfair prize money system?

3) Why don't the driver boycott for not having any fun in F1 currently?

 

Is it because Ecclestone had made safe contracts?

Is it because today it's a more medial and commercial sports and such boycotts would not help?

Is it because the guys aren't so charismatic as in the 70s/80s when boycotts were very normal?

 

What's your opinion on that case?

[HuddersfieldTerrier1986]

1: If the circuits don't want a race then they'll tell Bernie and he'll go somewhere else. You won't get every circuit doing that. Ever.

2: Because they'd be fined millions of pounds for failng to fulfil their contract with FOM

3: Boycott because they're having no fun in F1? If they're not having fun, go drive somewhere else. They'd also be in breach of their contracts with the team they drive for.

 

Ultimately, all 3 of your questions are, with all due respect, nonsense, and won't happen.

[brr]

There are so many problems in current Formula One. But different to the past, there are no more boycotts. Why?

 

1) Why don't the race organiser boycott F1 for their huge money asked for coming?

2) Why don't the small F1 teams boycott for huge costs and unfair prize money system?

3) Why don't the driver boycott for not having any fun in F1 currently?

 

 

All three can boycott F1 by leaving F1. Some have done that.

[HistoryFan]

1: If the circuits don't want a race then they'll tell Bernie and he'll go somewhere else. You won't get every circuit doing that. Ever.

2: Because they'd be fined millions of pounds for failng to fulfil their contract with FOM

3: Boycott because they're having no fun in F1? If they're not having fun, go drive somewhere else. They'd also be in breach of their contracts with the team they drive for.

 

Ultimately, all 3 of your questions are, with all due respect, nonsense, and won't happen.

 

1) If Silverstone, Monza and many other racing circuits together will boycott F1, then they could reach cheaper arrangements with Ecclestone

2) They can say they had technical problems...
 

[AustinF1]

As long as the state and/or national governments continue to pay F1 sanctioning fees, very few tracks will protest. That said, COTA gets all its sanctioning fees paid for and still isn't profitable yet, so who knows.

[LuckyStrike1]

There are so many problems in current Formula One. But different to the past, there are no more boycotts. Why?

 

1) Why don't the race organiser boycott F1 for their huge money asked for coming?

2) Why don't the small F1 teams boycott for huge costs and unfair prize money system?

3) Why don't the driver boycott for not having any fun in F1 currently?

 

Is it because Ecclestone had made safe contracts?

Is it because today it's a more medial and commercial sports and such boycotts would not help?

Is it because the guys aren't so charismatic as in the 70s/80s when boycotts were very normal?

 

What's your opinion on that case?

 

 

1: It's up to each organise to choose not to organise an F1-race. Like Nürburgring did this year. 

 

2: Last time teams tried t o "boycott" was during the manufacturer era when the big teams threated to start a break away series. That led to some negotiations  and Bernie quickly then bought off Ferrari and Red Bull and then the rest followed while BMW first and a bit later Toyota withdrew completely from F1. No one is forcing any teams to be in F1, any team can quit but quitting would come at a huge expense for the owners of teams as the teams are bound to agreements with FOM, need to stay to get their share of the prize money from previous years plus there are big costs involved in laying off the work-force so it's not that simple. And small teams threatened to boycott some races last year but theo nes who would lose out the most is in the end the boycotting teams. For a boycott to be succesful all the teams needs to be in on it and that will probably never happen as they never seem to agree on anything. All the teams have signed and accepted their current agreements for prize money so they have only themselves to blame although they probably was a bit forced into a corner but that just comes with having a weaker position. Put it this way - I want a pay increase at my job. My employeer and I have different ideas about the level of the increase. I can't threated to quit the job as I don't have another job lined up, so that would mean I would be unemployed so I don't have the strongest negotiating position to start with but there are some things in my favor. In the end we will reach an agreement and if I accept that, I can't really complain too much about it afterwards as I have accepted. I just have to negotiate better next time. That's what the teams have to do. 

 

3: This means quitting F1. Any driver is free to leave F1 if they don't want to be there. There are plenty of drivers waiting in line to fill their place. Any driver boycotting an individual race for that reason, or any reason bar a serious safety issue, would be sacked from the team and left without an F1 drive. 

[SealTheDiffuser]

Germany doing a boycott 2015

[Steve99]

"1) If Silverstone, Monza and many other racing circuits together will boycott F1, then they could reach cheaper arrangements with Ecclestone"

 

Not sure how you work that one out?

[Maustinsj]

Geoff Boycott doesn't have a jet.

[krapmeister]

No one dares boycott because they know that Bernie will ream them a very expensive new one...

Edited by krapmeister, 18 May 2015 - 12:02.

[HuddersfieldTerrier1986]

1) If Silverstone, Monza and many other racing circuits together will boycott F1, then they could reach cheaper arrangements with Ecclestone

2) They can say they had technical problems...
 

 

1: That wouldn't work. If 10 circuits said they'd boycott F1 then they'd have to pay Bernie a pretty penny for breaching their contract, especially before it ended. Bernie would then easily be able to find another 10 circuits/countries to host a race. A load of them boycotting wouldn't mean they could reach cheaper agreements, it just means Bernie would say "as long as I'm alive and I have a say in where we go, you'll not be hosting a race here again"

 

2: Oh yeah, cos 4 teams are really likely to not turn up to the track because they have totally unsolveable technical issues aren't they? No. Same goes for if they qualified and then 'boycotted' just the race, Bernie wouldn't be stupid enough to fall for a claim that for example 8 cars all magically had technical issues at the same time before the race started. He might be stupid sometimes, but he sure as heck isn't THAT stupid.

[DogEarred]

Boycott boycotts Boycott boycott.

 

Owzat for a correct sentence?....

Edited by DogEarred, 18 May 2015 - 12:02.

[johnmhinds]

 

 

1) Why don't the race organiser boycott F1 for their huge money asked for coming?

If a track can't (or chooses not to) host a race, FOM will fine them 2x the original race fee.

 

So you either carry on hosting an expensive race or your pay double to have no race, and then never have F1 return to your track.

 

 

 

2) Why don't the small F1 teams boycott for huge costs and unfair prize money system?

F1 management doesn't care about small teams losing money, nowhere in their contracts does it say FOM or the FIA has to make sure the teams are profitable.

 

 

 

3) Why don't the driver boycott for not having any fun in F1 currently?

For every F1 driver there are 20 more drivers waiting to take their place, if you boycotted F1 you'd never get your race seat back.

[purplehaireddolphin]

Firstly, Bernie isn't daft, that's why the circuit contract end dates are staggered, they could all say that at the end of their contract they won't sign another, but they won't all end at the same time.

 

Also, there's always another country ready to step in, as there is with drivers. Indeed in any walk of life there's always someone waiting to take your place. Try boycotting your job and see how long it takes before there's someone in your place. As a musician, I know that if I turned down a job, there'd be someone else there in a heartbeat

[Fatgadget]

.More or less the same reasons  students are no longer radical and do not hold  hold demos and protests each and every week like they used to  during the 60s/70s.....And   And car workers and miners  and steel workers no longer strike! 

Edited by Fatgadget, 18 May 2015 - 12:37.

[BlinkyMcSquinty]

Despite the numerous issues that Formula One has, Bernie has created a system that is impossible to turn down. And once you decide to play his game, you are locked into contracts that are punishing if you break them. Although the tracks are subject to insane fees, all studies indicate that hosting a Formula One event confers tremendous economic benefits to the community in the form of increased tourism and positive world-wide exposure.

 

Bernie is the goose that lays the golden eggs. The teams and others involved know this. Because of what he has created, a lot of people that have been in Formula One for a long time are very rich people. Two examples are Sir Frank Williams, and Ron Dennis. They have their differences with Bernie at times, but they know that without him they would not be the very rich men they are today.

 

There are people and organizations that have decided that they do not want to play in Bernie's sandbox. For instance, when Bernie attempted to hike the fees for Indianapolis Speedway, Tony George basically told him to stuff it. Indy makes a lot of money from other events, it would not be the end of the world for IMS if Formula One was not there. And when Montoya got sacked from McLaren, he could have easily found a ride in another team. But he chose to go elsewhere, away from the crazy politics and insanity.

 

But basically, if you are involved in Formula One, you are locked into contracts impossible to break, and once you burn that bridge, you can never return.

[tmekt]

F1 management doesn't care about small teams losing money, nowhere in their contracts does it say FOM or the FIA has to make sure the teams are profitable.

That's not a reason to not to. That's exactly why they should boycott.

[wrcva]

the only boycott that would put fire under Bernie's a$$ can only come from F1 followers, and spectators not attending or watching races or not buying sponsor stuff or F1 merch.    They made it nearly impossible to follow races unless you pay.  Sorry state of live timing tells you how much Bernie gives a sh*t as he obviously is still making enough money to keep everyone happy.   Small teams loosing money or not getting enough is another bull **** pr drama for the public who likes Robin Hood stuff.   People who are frustrated (like us) because F1 is no longer a sport but an entertainment show are just .01% of overall F1 universe, hence we don't even count.  F1 is the wrong sport show if you are interested in competitive motor racing.   That said, I do admire Bernie for creating this amazing empire in which the only thing matters is money and how it flows to keep everyone bitching but still happy.  

[ardbeg]

Divide and Conquer is Bernie's favourite game. That's why.

Edited by ardbeg, 18 May 2015 - 16:21.

[Sterzo]

There are so many problems in current Formula One. But different to the past, there are no more boycotts. Why?

I'm a history lover too, and I simply say: what boycotts in the past?

[johnmhinds]

That's not a reason to not to. That's exactly why they should boycott.

What do you think a team boycotting a race would really do?

Teams have missed races lots of times in the past for safety reasons or after getting banned for cheating, it hasn't ever hurt the sports owners in any real way when one team doesn't race because everyone forgets it all by the next race.

The only group who gets hurt by a team boycott are the team itself when they lose whatever sponsorship money they were going to get for that race.

[NoSanityClause]

Because boycotts are being boycotted?

[kevinracefan]

boycott??? please... show me evidence anyone has a gun held to their head...

they're ALL in it because they want to be...

there's even teams under-qualified there because they want to be...

perhaps boycotting this thread makes more sense, LOL...

buh - bye

[ninetyzero]

There are so many problems in current Formula One. But different to the past, there are no more boycotts. Why?

 

1) Why don't the race organiser boycott F1 for their huge money asked for coming?

2) Why don't the small F1 teams boycott for huge costs and unfair prize money system?

3) Why don't the driver boycott for not having any fun in F1 currently?

 

 

1) Because they would be beaching the terms of their contracts with FOM and would get a large fine and/or kicked out of the sport.

2) Because they would be beaching the terms of their contracts with FOM and would get a large fine and/or kicked out of the sport.

3) Because they would be beaching the terms of their contracts with their employers and would get probably get shown the door.

 

 

There are so many problems in current Formula One. But different to the past, there are no more boycotts. Why?

 

Is it because Ecclestone had made safe contracts?

Is it because today it's a more medial and commercial sports and such boycotts would not help?

Is it because the guys aren't so charismatic as in the 70s/80s when boycotts were very normal?

 

What's your opinion on that case?

 

It isn't the 70's anymore.The circuits/teams/drivers are locked into contracts to prevent boycotts. Why would you want anyone to boycott F1 anyway? If circuits boycotted F1 (say Silvertone/Monza/whoever) The Poison Dwarf would use it as an excuse to throw them out so he can replace them with races in middle eastern shitholes. Do you want that? No.

As for teams not racing, do you know what happens when teams don't race? The 2005 US GP happens. Do you want races like that again? Of course you don't.

Do you want top drivers not showing up to races? No sir you don't. Why would anyone want that?

 

Further questions:

What does charisma have to do with boycotting stuff?

Is a 'boycott jet' a new type of jet engine that you want to replace the 1.6T's with?

Edited by ninetyzero, 18 May 2015 - 18:22.

[RealRacing]

the only boycott that would put fire under Bernie's a$$ can only come from F1 followers, and spectators not attending or watching races or not buying sponsor stuff or F1 merch.    They made it nearly impossible to follow races unless you pay.  Sorry state of live timing tells you how much Bernie gives a sh*t as he obviously is still making enough money to keep everyone happy.   Small teams loosing money or not getting enough is another bull **** pr drama for the public who likes Robin Hood stuff.   People who are frustrated (like us) because F1 is no longer a sport but an entertainment show are just .01% of overall F1 universe, hence we don't even count.  F1 is the wrong sport show if you are interested in competitive motor racing.   That said, I do admire Bernie for creating this amazing empire in which the only thing matters is money and how it flows to keep everyone bitching but still happy.  

Would love to see the data on that.

 

I guess we could start by not watching races, watching other series, signing on-line petitions, not buying products or services advertised by F1, cars made by manufacturers in F1...We live in a time where it's easier than ever to let others know what you think via the internet. On the flipside, we are also in a time where people are ignored more than ever before so that may not work out. The best you can do is use your time and $s in accordance with your beliefs and hope for the best.

[Lemans]

Because boycotts are being boycotted?

 

Yup. It's what all the cool kids are doing on the Tumblr.