FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Gaz]

a logical and fascinating post Han

What me

yes Spock

Woo

Gotta love that spock too

[Hanwombat]

a logical and fascinating post Han

What me

yes Spock

Woo

Gotta love that spock too

Looking like a monkey !

[gaetanomarano]

Currently they would just spend the £250mil but under your regs they would have to spend £300mil.

but I suggest to adopt the 300m euro figure only in 2010, while, in 2012, the max budget should fall to 50-100m per team (allowed) or 150m max

But Ferrari wouldn't of spent 57mil for the sake of getting 7mil. Mclaren might of spent the extra 60mil but i expect they would of just scaled back. I can't see them spening 110mil (half there budget) just go get 60mil worth of upgrades.

the big teams haven't so much problem to find/pay these amounts if they can (in the same time) invest 300+ million to be the most competitive F1 teams

.

[Gaz]

Currently they would just spend the £250mil but under your regs they would have to spend £300mil.

but I suggest to adopt the 300m euro figure only in 2010, while, in 2012, the max budget should fall to 50-100m per team (allowed) or 150m max

But Ferrari wouldn't of spent 57mil for the sake of getting 7mil. Mclaren might of spent the extra 60mil but i expect they would of just scaled back. I can't see them spening 110mil (half there budget) just go get 60mil worth of upgrades.

the big teams haven't so much problem to find/pay these amounts if they can (in the same time) invest 300+ million to be the most competitive F1 teams

.

Yeh but for 2010 it wouldn't be fair the big teams would go under the cap just and trounce the smaller teams.

And there's no way Ferrari would spend 57mil for the sake of 7mil.

[gaetanomarano]

And there's no way Ferrari would spend 57mil for the sake of 7mil.

my proposal is that big teams should not pay anything to small teams in 2010 if their budgets will be in the 100-200m euro range

but, if Ferrari will pay the (shared) amount of 50m euro to small teams, it will be allowed to invest 50 further million in its cars, NOT just "7m more"

.

[Gaz]

And there's no way Ferrari would spend 57mil for the sake of 7mil.

my proposal is that big teams should not pay anything to small teams in 2010 if their budgets will be in the 100-200m euro range

but, if Ferrari will pay the (shared) amount of 50m euro to small teams, it will be allowed to invest 50 further million in its cars, NOT just "7m more"

.

Yeh but what if they only need to spend 7mil over the budget for upgrades.

They wouldn't spend 57mil.

If a small team comes in and spends 50mil and Ferrari can spend 200mil whats the point Ferrari will still be able to trounce them.

[csrracer]

I think the Budget cap should be run on a "Declared Value" . Every team would have to declare a value to various systems of the car that they produce themselves, as long as the sum of the "declared value" of the systems does not exceed the budget cap, they could spend more on these systems , but would have to make the various systems available to customers for their declared value. ie:
$40 million budget cap Ferrari declares:
Chassis 15 mil.
Engine 15 mil.
Kers 10 mil.
Other teams should be able to purchase from Ferrari any 1 of those systems for their "declared value", but not more than 1 system. This will leave the door open for the well funded teams to spend whatever they want, as long as they are willing to take a loss with their "Customers" on the "Declared value". New teams could then set their budgets according to what they are purchasing, ie. A Ferrari Chassis for 15 mil. with a Cosworth engine at 8 mil. and a Mclaren KERS for 12 mil. The well funded teams would have the advantage of being able to spend more on updates and any new teams would benefit by getting up to date hardware with less engineering costs. This could also lead to having outside Engine or Chassis builders that don't actually have teams. All the cars would still be running under the same specs, yet the richer teams would still have the advantage of spending, that they currently have, yet there would still be room for a "BraunGP" to buy in and do well.

[darwin dali]

I think the Budget cap should be run on a "Declared Value" . Every team would have to declare a value to various systems of the car that they produce themselves, as long as the sum of the "declared value" of the systems does not exceed the budget cap, they could spend more on these systems , but would have to make the various systems available to customers for their declared value. ie:
$40 million budget cap Ferrari declares:
Chassis 15 mil.
Engine 15 mil.
Kers 10 mil.
Other teams should be able to purchase from Ferrari any 1 of those systems for their "declared value", but not more than 1 system. This will leave the door open for the well funded teams to spend whatever they want, as long as they are willing to take a loss with their "Customers" on the "Declared value". New teams could then set their budgets according to what they are purchasing, ie. A Ferrari Chassis for 15 mil. with a Cosworth engine at 8 mil. and a Mclaren KERS for 12 mil. The well funded teams would have the advantage of being able to spend more on updates and any new teams would benefit by getting up to date hardware with less engineering costs. This could also lead to having outside Engine or Chassis builders that don't actually have teams. All the cars would still be running under the same specs, yet the richer teams would still have the advantage of spending, that they currently have, yet there would still be room for a "BraunGP" to buy in and do well.

Sounds doable and could take care of helping small, new teams to enter and/or survive. But it doesn't really address the spiraling costs for the big teams...

[csrracer]

Sounds doable and could take care of helping small, new teams to enter and/or survive. But it doesn't really address the spiraling costs for the big teams...

The big Teams aren't as big as an issue because they do have the money to spend, plus they spend huge amounts on Drivers and Hospitality motorhomes witch don't fall under the "Budget Cap", they could cut some of that costs out to save money. Additionally I think they would be less eager to spend millions on development , when they know they'd have to share their new developments with other teams at bargain basement prices.

[darwin dali]

Sounds doable and could take care of helping small, new teams to enter and/or survive. But it doesn't really address the spiraling costs for the big teams...

The big Teams aren't as big as an issue because they do have the money to spend, plus they spend huge amounts on Drivers and Hospitality motorhomes witch don't fall under the "Budget Cap", they could cut some of that costs out to save money. Additionally I think they would be less eager to spend millions on development , when they know they'd have to share their new developments with other teams at bargain basement prices.

True, they could cut out those extravaganzas, but their sponsors who bring in the $$$ probably want to see something for their dough and that's a big part of it.

[Ineluke]

They will up the budget but add more clauses on what you can spend it on.