392 replies to this topic

[V8 Fireworks]

If Ferrari quits. Then Mercedes AMG is likely to follow. Who would Mercedes AMG be competing against once Ferrari is gone?

 

I dunno, Mercedes AMG seem to fear Red Bull Racing and McLaren F1 enough to not want to supply them with power units...

[V8 Fireworks]

 

Ferrari wants to be in F1 - but not at any cost. It doesn't have to be so binary.

 

Well they shouldn't be given 100m just for turning up, that's absurd, no?

 

If they are unhappy to compete on the same terms as everyone else, they are welcome to leave.

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 20 December 2017 - 14:11.

[Timstr11]

It's a shame this thread is not addressing Ferrari's complaint.

 

Marchionne's threat is specifically related to the proposed engine rules, which he feels dumbs down the engine technical rules with a high number of standardised parts.

I can see why that's not acceptable for a company like Ferrari.

 

Why not have a debate about whether you think that is an acceptable or understandable argument from Ferrari's perspective?

Edited by Timstr11, 20 December 2017 - 14:58.

[Forghieri]

Well they shouldn't be given 100m just for turning up, that's absurd, no?

 

If they are unhappy to compete on the same terms as everyone else, they are welcome to leave.

 

Everyone else is not on the same terms. Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren and Williams get extra money too.

 

https://www.autospor...r-2017-revealed

[Forghieri]

It's a shame this thread is not addressing Ferrari's complaint.

 

Marchionne's threat is specifically related to the proposed engine rules, which he feels dumbs down the engine technical rules with a high number of standardised parts.

I can see why that's is not acceptable for a company like Ferrari.

 

Why not have a debate about whether you think that is an acceptable or understandable argument from Ferrari's perspective?

 

It looks like the main purpose of this thread is to let everyone who wants to have a go at Ferrari to be able to do so.

[P123]

Any F1 going forward without Ferrari and/or Mercedes needs a spending cap imho, or many of the same current problems will remain.

They just need to limit things- wind tunnel hours, dyno running, simulator use, number of aero updates allowed per season (especially on those hideous front wings), etc. With a spending cap I suspect the likes of Red Bull, Ferrari, Merc, even Williams too, could hive off that spending to another entity. A bit like Man city and other football clubs fiddling the books to meet financial fair plays regs.

[AustinF1]

It's a shame this thread is not addressing Ferrari's complaint.

 

Marchionne's threat is specifically related to the proposed engine rules, which he feels dumbs down the engine technical rules with a high number of standardised parts.

I can see why that's not acceptable for a company like Ferrari.

 

Why not have a debate about whether you think that is an acceptable or understandable argument from Ferrari's perspective?

Because this is a thread about the effects of yet another instance in an ongoing pattern of Ferrari footstomping whenever they think they might not get their way, regardless of the issue. Iirc there is a thread for discussing the merits of their argument.

[AustinF1]

They just need to limit things- wind tunnel hours, dyno running, simulator use, number of aero updates allowed per season (especially on those hideous front wings), etc. With a spending cap I suspect the likes of Red Bull, Ferrari, Merc, even Williams too, could hive off that spending to another entity. A bit like Man city and other football clubs fiddling the books to meet financial fair plays regs.

That might work, and I've had my doubts about enforcing a budget cap. One thing is for sure imho, something has to be done to get these teams on a level playing field. The sport will suffer even more going forward if nothing is done.

[Tsarwash]

To be honest, I'm surprised the Bernie allowed Ferrari to have so much influence for as long as they did. For me, the ideal model in the future is a return to 13 private teams, with around six or seven major auto manufacturers providing cheapish engines for them. There should be no space for minnows in modern F1, all teams should have some chance of at least getting into the points and the current pattern of domination by one team should be avoided. 

 

I do understand Ferrari's stance this time however. What is the point of their continued expenditure if the sport is moving towards spec engines ? Fuel economy is probably the only way to go forward with engine development as the cars simply cannot keep on going faster and faster every year. Let them have a hundred kilos of standard fuel and try to get as much power out of that in any way that they can. 

[Timstr11]

Because this is a thread about the effects of yet another instance in an ongoing pattern of Ferrari footstomping whenever they think they might not get their way, regardless of the issue. Iirc there is a thread for discussing the merits of their argument.

 

Marchionne has a responsibility to a billion dollar business with string competition.

It's not kids play and there are real conflicts of interest.

I wish people debated those.

[PayasYouRace]

This thread is specifically about what Ferrari leaving F1 would mean for the sport’s and the marque’s future. If you wish to discuss Ferrari’s reasons behind their threats, go to the thread relating to future engine rules.

[AustinF1]

Wolff warns Liberty Media to stop "provoking" Ferrari

 

http://www.grandprix...ns/ns37970.html

 

Seems best read in a very shrill, high voice.

 

 

...

 

In recent days, Marchionne doubled down on his threat to pull Ferrari out of the sport, accusing F1 sporting boss Ross Brawn of "behaving like Moses".

 

...

 

"We currently have a powertrain that is the most powerful and efficient racing engine ever," he told Welt am Sonntag newspaper.

"With new engine regulations there are possibilities to optimise this. But to develop a new engine that does not meet the high tech aspects of electrification, efficiency and power - that is, some archaic engine - is not what we want."

So asked if Marchionne's quit threat makes him "afraid", Wolff answered: "I'm not afraid, but Marchionne is to be taken seriously.

"I'm relaxed, because Ferrari is formula one, and formula one is Ferrari," he added. "But if I were Liberty Media's new formula one promoter, I would not continue provoking Marchionne with unacceptable suggestions or demands or nonsensical changes."

Asked what he means, Wolff explained: "Bringing rules or show elements into the game and turning F1 into a cheap shopping channel.

"Formula one must remain in its basic structures what it was and what it is. We have to improve them and face the new media environment. But we need evolution, not naive revolution," he insisted.

Wolff said F1 is currently missing the guiding hand of its former supremo Bernie Ecclestone.

"I wish that, three or four years ago, he would have known better and taken another role without losing it altogether," said the Mercedes team boss.

"A role that helps to build a new era in formula one. That he did not do that - with his experience and his enthusiasm and as a racer and a businessman - is the only criticism I have of him."

Toto is exactly wrong imho. F1 does need a revolution. Evolution is not the answer.

Edited by AustinF1, 20 December 2017 - 15:57.

[Pimpwerx]

I'm not convinced open-wheel racing ever fully-recovered from the CART-Indycar split spurred on by that megalomaniac Tony George. I think a split like this would only serve to diminish F1, and any fledgling series Ferrari started would have a nightmare of time gaining traction with fans. That said, I'd continue to watch F1 until things completely fell apart. I assume history will serve as a guide, and cooler heads will prevail.

[Nathan]

Well they shouldn't be given 100m just for turning up, that's absurd, no?

 

 

No.  We are talking 5% of the revenues for the only team that starts "Will F1 survive if Ferrari quits" threads.  Look at the sea of red at every Grand Prix.  Any other promoter would pay 5% of revenues to have such a draw.  Unfair to the others? Yes.  Fiscal sense?  Yes.

[BalanceUT]

There is not a cat in hell's chance of Ferrari pulling out of F1. It is absolutely at the heart of its brand identity.

Ferrari have boxed theirselves into a corner. They've made their participation in F1 such a cornerstone of their brand that should they leave, they weaken it substantially. It would take them years to recover, if ever. On the other hand, if they start now to emphasize other marketing avenues and ways of featuring the brand, reducing slowly the importance of F1 in their strategies, perhaps in about 5-10 years they could leave F1 with minimal to no impact. But, they have to lay the groundwork to get there to be in a position where a threat to leave is viable. 

[BalanceUT]

Same goes for Mercedes and other car manufacturers.

 

There's a big revolution looming in auto land.

I don't think many people realize it but in 10 years time, electric propulsion will the norm rather than the exception.

This will be ramping up significantly in the coming years.

 

F1 as a whole will have to think about what it might do with their image if they hang on to fossil fuel burning too strongly.

Because I seriously believe F1 will have a big image problem when electric driving becomes mainstream.

That image will impact on team sponsors: associate yourself with 'fossil' automobility or find a different more modern arena to spend your sponsor dollars.

 

All car manufacturers involved in F1 will have a good think about how F1 will help them (if at all) in the messaging around electric drive technology.

 

It is all up in the air if you ask me.

This is why there is Formula E, so that the technologies are developing to replace F1, or become F1 when the time comes. 

[Reynardff]

Nobody (Liberty) is suggesting spec engines. What they are trying to do is make a few parts of the engine spec, those being the real expensive unreliable areas. F1 is not some sort of dyno shoot out at the local garage although some seem as though they would be happier with this form. 

The bulk of the fans could not care less whether the cars had 100 or 1000kgs of fuel or how much HP the electric motor was able to produce etc etc. Does the majority of long time fans talk about a particular engine that powered Nigel Mansell, Stirling Moss etc. No they remember the drivers and secondly the brand of  car they drove. 

So how much fuel did Nigel use to win ??????        

[PayasYouRace]

So how much fuel did Nigel use to win ??????     

220 litres for his first win.

[WOT]

220 litres for his first win.

 

I thought it was 219....

 

Didn't they have to have a litre left in the tank for testing?

 

[RacingGreen]

Well they shouldn't be given 100m just for turning up, that's absurd, no?

 

If they are unhappy to compete on the same terms as everyone else, they are welcome to leave.

 

On sporting fairness terms I can't help myself agreeing 100%,   I've even heard myself say the same thing time and again.

But Formula one isn't a sport, it's a business. To the organisers Ferrari equals bums on seats. I'm sure the likes of Tiger Woods get money just to turn up because it makes commercial sense to the event promoters. Ferrari add more value that way than Haas or Force India.

Ferrari having a representative on the WMSC, a say in the rules and even a veto - now that's too far for me, but a financial payment isn't really a game breaker. (Although I would have thought 100m was too much.)

Edited by RacingGreen, 20 December 2017 - 21:50.

[BalanceUT]

Nobody (Liberty) is suggesting spec engines. What they are trying to do is make a few parts of the engine spec, those being the real expensive unreliable areas. F1 is not some sort of dyno shoot out at the local garage although some seem as though they would be happier with this form. 

The bulk of the fans could not care less whether the cars had 100 or 1000kgs of fuel or how much HP the electric motor was able to produce etc etc. Does the majority of long time fans talk about a particular engine that powered Nigel Mansell, Stirling Moss etc. No they remember the drivers and secondly the brand of  car they drove. 

So how much fuel did Nigel use to win ??????        

I'm guessing 10 polar bears died for his career... 

[RacingGreen]

This is why there is Formula E, so that the technologies are developing to replace F1, or become F1 when the time comes. 

 

Which is why Fiat/Ferrari need to be in FE now.

[sblick]

Let Ferrari leave it will kill the ills of F1.  Unequal payments, right to veto any rules.  In short term you will see some drop in fans but long term could be better.  If Ferrari leave FIA can go to Mercedes and Renault and say you can make engines or chassis but not both.  We can go to engine supplier only and keep the spending related to that.  The hope would be the mega-cash of the OEM's would leave the sport and bring budgets down to something sustainable for teams.  Maybe get rid of those politics also.

Ferrari did this threatening last time the Concorde came up.  They are just blow harding to get their way and get good negotiation stance with Liberty.  It is all bluster and Liberty should ignore them.

[Nonesuch]

Well they shouldn't be given 100m just for turning up, that's absurd, no?

 

It's not absurd at all. Ferrari is a big part of what makes F1 special compared to all those single seater categories nobody but the driver's parents watch.

Keeping Ferrari committed to F1 was a great move by FOM at the time, and it's a deal that's been worth every cent Ferrari has received since.
 

If they are unhappy to compete on the same terms as everyone else, they are welcome to leave.

Ferrari is perfectly happy to do so. They're not the ones whining about wanting others to do half the work by providing them with an engine.

Ferrari plays by the same technical and sporting rules as all the other teams, and there is nothing stopping other teams from outspending Ferrari - which, if rumoured budgets are to be believed, at least two and probably three teams also do.

[Anuity]

Ferrari can go on without F1, I reckon.
At the same time F1 without Ferrari, we'll I'm not sure. It will probably survive, but yeah.... I'm not even a Ferrari fan, but it's clearly the most important team to the sport.

[loki]

Nobody (Liberty) is suggesting spec engines. What they are trying to do is make a few parts of the engine spec, those being the real expensive unreliable areas. F1 is not some sort of dyno shoot out at the local garage although some seem as though they would be happier with this form. 

The bulk of the fans could not care less whether the cars had 100 or 1000kgs of fuel or how much HP the electric motor was able to produce etc etc. Does the majority of long time fans talk about a particular engine that powered Nigel Mansell, Stirling Moss etc. No they remember the drivers and secondly the brand of  car they drove. 

So how much fuel did Nigel use to win ??????        

 

Indeed.  I love the tech but for me it's secondary to the wheel to wheel and the personalities.  I'd rather see something like, "here's your fuel tank maximum size, here's your displacement and basic specs, here's your air/fuel method (turbo, aspirated, supercharge, whatever) here's how long the races are, now go make an engine".  Add the hybrid spec bits as needed but allow the teams to implement them as they see fit.  They could reduce turbo lag, perhaps a push to pass, however they'd like to use them but the battery and generators are spec.

[Nova]

For me interest in F1 is more about engines than teams or drivers. If Ferrari goes it's an indication that F1 goes to a more spec series, with less emphasis on engine competition, and more wrestling entertainment, driver oriented spectacle, more than a sport.

 

Ferrari is the canary in the mine.

[Nova]

I'm not convinced open-wheel racing ever fully-recovered from the CART-Indycar split spurred on by that megalomaniac Tony George. I think a split like this would only serve to diminish F1, and any fledgling series Ferrari started would have a nightmare of time gaining traction with fans. That said, I'd continue to watch F1 until things completely fell apart. I assume history will serve as a guide, and cooler heads will prevail.

 

I stopped watching CART-Indycar at that time, never have found my way back. In an eventual split in F1 I would follow Honda wherever that would be. But if Honda were to enter a more or less speck series it would not be worth looking at anyway. F1 is already where I can't be arsed to watch, with limits in development, I just read the result as a long time fan of Honda. Sort of basic tribalism.

 

F1 need to open up more than further restrict for me to be interested.

[Motorist]

Which is why Fiat/Ferrari need to be in FE now.

 

I'm not sure if FCA believes in electric vehicles. And that is good, because at the moment it is not the solution, but just another way of diverting one source of carbon dioxide to other (vehicles to power plants). Plus the price of vehicle more or less doubles... Who would like to pay double for (lets say) 500, just for (false) idea to help reduce emissions? 

 

And Ferrari really don't need to be in FE. 

Edited by Motorist, 21 December 2017 - 09:48.

[Timstr11]

I'm not sure if FCA believes in electric vehicles. And that is good, because at the moment it is not the solution, but just another way of diverting one source of carbon dioxide to other (vehicles to power plants). Plus the price of vehicle more or less doubles... Who would like to pay double for (lets say) 500, just for (false) idea to help reduce emissions? 

 

And Ferrari really don't need to be in FE. 

 

It's not a question of what FCA believes.

The Paris agreement and Government regulations will necessitate them to produce electric cars, whether they like it or not.

If they don't, they will lose business, plain and simple.

 

There are also breakthroughs in battery research and Solid-State batteries are coming.

Cheaper than Li-Ion, much higher energy density and can be charged within a minute.

I wouldn't invest my stock in FCA at the moment.

Edited by Timstr11, 21 December 2017 - 10:41.

[PayasYouRace]

There’s a perfectly good thread for discussing electric cars in the technical forum:

http://forums.autosp...24#entry8206760

This is about Ferrari and F1 which I’ve already noted further up the page.

[Ben1445]

I do actually think the looming electrification of the automobile has much wider impacts on where manufacturers place their road and racing futures. I'd argue that discussing what the parent company plans to do in regards to EVs has a direct impact on wether Ferrari stay or not, and the futures of both F1 and Ferrari. But I am happy to be overruled. 

[Nonesuch]

Toto Wolff: "Formula one is Ferrari."

 
Who does he think he is to say such things? Hasn't he heard F1 without Ferrari will be great and Ricciardo will be champion and Alonso will win in Singapore and ... !

 

More to the point, Wolff nicely demonstrates the game being played. Ferrari raises the biggest stink because, whether some people like it or not, Ferrari is the most important team.

 

Mercedes backs them up in more diplomatic terms, suggests more discussion is needed, and emphasises Ferrari is serious - while forming a nice solid front behind the scenes.

 

But of course Mercedes and Ferrari are scheming corporations who are out to make sure nobody else gets to play (Honda and Renault don't count). Oh well... whatever works to help get all excited about some half-baked potential-perhaps suggestion to possibly-maybe participate by an outfit that utterly embarrassed itself the last time it took part in a high-profile, non-BoP, race.

Edited by Nonesuch, 21 December 2017 - 15:27.

[Atreiu]

It's a shame this thread is not addressing Ferrari's complaint.

 

Marchionne's threat is specifically related to the proposed engine rules, which he feels dumbs down the engine technical rules with a high number of standardised parts.

I can see why that's not acceptable for a company like Ferrari.

 

Why not have a debate about whether you think that is an acceptable or understandable argument from Ferrari's perspective?

 

 

Has he made a concrete counter proposal which adresses the flaws in the current proposal or just voiced his complaints?

 

The existence and length of such a thread should surely be an indication of the credibility of quit threats and complaints.

Edited by Atreiu, 21 December 2017 - 17:21.

[Timstr11]

Has he made a concrete counter proposal which adresses the flaws in the current proposal or just voiced his complaints?

Sure he has. Just not in public.

[loki]

Has he made a concrete counter proposal which adresses the flaws in the current proposal or just voiced his complaints?

 

The existence and length of such a thread should surely be an indication of the credibility of quit threats and complaints.

There have been no engine rule proposals at this point.  There were general talking points and ideas for a direction but nothing formally proposed.  Marchionne is assuming it will be a spec engine hence his using Nascar as a derogatory term.  This isn't about engine rules, it's about Ferrari losing power in the new structure.  Malone will not let others, regardless of who it may be dictate the terms of his business.  He hasn't done it in 40 plus years and he's not about to start now.  Marichonne is "fighting the last war" as he's using tactics that might have been useful in the Ecclestone era but not so useful now.  Ecclestone did what was best for his personal situation and that of CVC in the near term.  He did that by buying people off with payments and allowing them some say in the power structure.  Liberty are grooming a long term asset and having a team, any team dictate those terms isn't a sustainable solution.

[Tsarwash]

Nobody (Liberty) is suggesting spec engines. What they are trying to do is make a few parts of the engine spec, those being the real expensive unreliable areas. F1 is not some sort of dyno shoot out at the local garage although some seem as though they would be happier with this form. 

The bulk of the fans could not care less whether the cars had 100 or 1000kgs of fuel or how much HP the electric motor was able to produce etc etc. Does the majority of long time fans talk about a particular engine that powered Nigel Mansell, Stirling Moss etc. No they remember the drivers and secondly the brand of  car they drove. 

So how much fuel did Nigel use to win ??????        

People also remember the engine. It has always been a sport where the best engine will bring you success. 

[RacingGreen]

Ferrari leaving has the potential to turn F1 into a second rate series overnight. Sure we'd still watch but we're not the average punters. Just like I suspect we aren't the average Ferrari buyers.

 

Liberty Media’s acquisition of F1 valued it at around $8 billion. While I'm sure they don't want Ferrari dictating the terms of their business they have to seriously consider how they are going to get their $8 billion back if Ferrari pull out. Every business in the world offers special terms and bigger discounts to their top customers and most important clients. Whether they get the special terms they want I suggest depends on what they ask for, ie is a negotiation. Liberty can't just ignore them as $8 Billion too much money to risk flushing down the toilet.

[BalanceUT]

I'm not sure if FCA believes in electric vehicles. And that is good, because at the moment it is not the solution, but just another way of diverting one source of carbon dioxide to other (vehicles to power plants). Plus the price of vehicle more or less doubles... Who would like to pay double for (lets say) 500, just for (false) idea to help reduce emissions? 

 

And Ferrari really don't need to be in FE. 

It is easier to control emissions and attain higher efficiencies in power plants than in millions of automobiles for several reasons. The source of the electricity from carbon-based fuels is declining. Increasing amounts of power are generated by solar, wind, hydro-electric and other. So, to put it simply, that old canard is just an error. 

[BCM]

Ferrari would do well to remember the quote often attributed to Charles de Gaulle - "The graveyards are full of indispensable men."

[loki]

 

Ferrari leaving has the potential to turn F1 into a second rate series overnight. Sure we'd still watch but we're not the average punters. Just like I suspect we aren't the average Ferrari buyers.

 

Liberty Media’s acquisition of F1 valued it at around $8 billion. While I'm sure they don't want Ferrari dictating the terms of their business they have to seriously consider how they are going to get their $8 billion back if Ferrari pull out. Every business in the world offers special terms and bigger discounts to their top customers and most important clients. Whether they get the special terms they want I suggest depends on what they ask for, ie is a negotiation. Liberty can't just ignore them as $8 Billion too much money to risk flushing down the toilet.

 

 

It's a publicly traded company.  The product is the stock, not necessarily what the company does.  What the company does is a means to drive the stock price.  The shares are largely institutional and they're looking for long term return.   The goal is not to get the 8 billion back but to use it to fund the investment.  Completely different business model than the fleecing CVC gave the sport.  Regardless of what happens on the track or in the paddock the share price is what dictates success.  The market isn't too concerned.  If they were the share price would reflect it.  Marchionne would then have to explain not only to the Agnellis but to the other shareholders why he shuttered a billion dollar business over what's going to amount to US$50-60 mil/year in revenue reduction not counting any cost savings.  Basically they'd be shutting down because of a 10% drop in revenue.  That would be an incredibly poor business move.  He'd be fired or sued by the non-voting shareholders.   Regardless of people saying they'd race something else or start another series there isn't anything that could scale to support an operation that size.  Carey knows it.  Marchionne knows it.  The Agnelli family know it.  John Malone knows it.

 

Using a customer relationship is the wrong comparison.  FOM aren't selling Ferrari anything.  FOM customers are first the broadcast media, sponsors and promoters.  And soon enough the end user.  Ferrari is a participant that are paid part on being there, part on how well they do in the competition.  No other motorsport has terms for a particular team alone and almost all sports don't have terms for a particular team alone. 

[YoungGun]

Ferrari threatening to quit F1 if they don’t get their own way is a yearly tradition.

 

If only they sold "energy drinks"  

Edited by YoungGun, 22 December 2017 - 02:28.

[RacingGreen]

It's a publicly traded company.  The product is the stock, not necessarily what the company does.  What the company does is a means to drive the stock price.  The shares are largely institutional and they're looking for long term return.   The goal is not to get the 8 billion back but to use it to fund the investment.  Completely different business model than the fleecing CVC gave the sport.  Regardless of what happens on the track or in the paddock the share price is what dictates success.  The market isn't too concerned.  If they were the share price would reflect it.  Marchionne would then have to explain not only to the Agnellis but to the other shareholders why he shuttered a billion dollar business over what's going to amount to US$50-60 mil/year in revenue reduction not counting any cost savings.  Basically they'd be shutting down because of a 10% drop in revenue.  That would be an incredibly poor business move.  He'd be fired or sued by the non-voting shareholders.   Regardless of people saying they'd race something else or start another series there isn't anything that could scale to support an operation that size.  Carey knows it.  Marchionne knows it.  The Agnelli family know it.  John Malone knows it.

 

Using a customer relationship is the wrong comparison.  FOM aren't selling Ferrari anything.  FOM customers are first the broadcast media, sponsors and promoters.  And soon enough the end user.  Ferrari is a participant that are paid part on being there, part on how well they do in the competition.  No other motorsport has terms for a particular team alone and almost all sports don't have terms for a particular team alone. 

 

I know that FOM's customers are the tracks, (hosting fees) and the broadcasters (TV rights) not Ferrari directly, but aren't those rights worth more when more people come, and more viewers turn on their TV's. Ferrari attract viewers just like Manchester United attract viewers and Tiger Woods (who gets big appearance fees although lets face it his best golf is behind him) still attracts viewers.

 

Broadcasters always show Manchester games because they get better ratings so they can charge more for the adverts. To Sky the rights are worth more because they include Manchester United games, and F1's rights are worth more because they include Ferrari. 

 

Using the EPL model an example Manchester United got a bigger "Facility Fee" (fee per match) - not because their matches were televised as part of the title race, but because they were televised because they involved Manchester United. It recognises the clubs importance to the league's fan-base and therefore the overall value of the broadcast rights deal. 

Like I said before I think Ferrari get much too good a deal, but their participation is worth more than say Haas or Force India, and if Liberty think it isn't they're kidding themselves.