FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[CookinFlat6]

If the NHL (under Gary Bettman no less) can broker an agreement among the stakeholders that includes a salary cap, a salary floor, and revenue sharing, while at the same time increasing player salaries and franchise values, then I am sure it can be done in F1. The problem is the "haves" don't want anything to do with a plan that may allow the "have-nots to compete on an equal basis, and they will draw on all manner of emotional, historical or purely fictional context to maintain the status quo.

Spot on operaman, the operative (see what I did) word there is stakeholders, they are all part owners of the franchise clooective that is run not for profit but for the benefit of the franchisees.
In F1 we have the collective sport run for the benefit of Bernie and whoever he can sell the shop to before buying it back cheap and flogging it to some new mugs. Problem is the mugs have wised up and want their pound of flesh before selling out. And theres the little matter of not appreciating getting their faces ripped off in the transactions.

So each team must becaome a part owner with all profits reinvested in the business. But Bernie has sold the business and his bright idea is floating most of the business and giving a stake to - guess who?

The big teams like Ferrari and RBR

You couldnt make a film about this affair that wouldnt be a scarcely credible comedy

[CookinFlat6]

Some teams are really hardup and cut costs where they can, but some take it to extremes - these chaps even rented out their garage

[racechick]

[acosmichippo]

So you subscribe to the theory that things have always been as they are now and have not gotten to a critical point? You dont think that right now the costs/income ratio is any different than its ever been?

I subscribe to the theory that the guy who's putting the money up is the guy who should determine how to use it. NOT someone sitting on the outside. Chickens and pigs - it's that simple.

So then how can you propose a solution that no team in F1 has even remotely suggested? Even Ferrari wants more cost control, through further rules and regulations limiting team activities.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/96825

Granted the article is two years old, but it should be even more relevant now with the impending regulation changes.

[spankyham]

So then how can you propose a solution that no team in F1 has even remotely suggested?

Because I feel I'm entitled to my own opinion. And because if this was followed then:-
- all the main teams would stay
- there would be plenty of scope and encouragement for new teams
- teams would have plenty of scope to discover cheap brilliant solutions
- race results would not be so boringly predictable

Even Ferrari wants more cost control, through further rules and regulations limiting team activities.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/96825
Granted the article is two years old, but it should be even more relevant now with the impending regulation changes.

Most large corporation, when offered a monopoly or oligopoly will take it. That doesn't make it right, because it will simply be a vehicle to make market entry more difficult for new teams and to control weaker teams.

I already stated that I believe people with your view have been getting their way in recent history, no one can deny there has been an explosion of rules and caps/limitation added to F1 recently. I've also said I fully expect your view to continue to hold sway and we will get more and more rules and limitations. I have also pointed out that as we career down the path, we will continue to get more of the results this sort of thinking and implementation has brought us. Namely lower teams being further and further blocked from being able to make quantum leaps forward and extremely predictable race results.