FORUMula1.com

[Jabberwocky]

The underlying greed is the issue.

[spankyham]

My biggest thing about the 3 car teams is that someone has to come last, and they get the least money from sponsors.

So if 2 more teams are going to go, I am guessing Sauber, and Force India. What happens in 2015 when Toro Rosso are back markers and bring in no TV money. Boom they fold, year later when Lotus are in the same boat?

I'm not against 3 car teams, but I don't think they are anything but a bandaid response.

It's ok to be a bottom ranked team, if there is a realistic way to climb up. For me, that takes you back to the rules. They need to simplify things. Hopefully bring diversity and the ability to change quickly.

[Jabberwocky]

I think what is different is that teams need to live to their means. Minardi did it for years. They knew they had a role in the sport and budgeted as such

[Hammer278]

My biggest thing about the 3 car teams is that someone has to come last, and they get the least money from sponsors.

So if 2 more teams are going to go, I am guessing Sauber, and Force India. What happens in 2015 when Toro Rosso are back markers and bring in no TV money. Boom they fold, year later when Lotus are in the same boat?

I'm not against 3 car teams, but I don't think they are anything but a bandaid response.

It's ok to be a bottom ranked team, if there is a realistic way to climb up. For me, that takes you back to the rules. They need to simplify things. Hopefully bring diversity and the ability to change quickly.

What do you mean by 'diversity'?

[Jabberwocky]

Think the different noses of this year

[Ferrari man 009]

I think what is different is that teams need to live to their means. Minardi did it for years. They knew they had a role in the sport and budgeted as such

Spot on

[What's Burning?]

I think what is different is that teams need to live to their means. Minardi did it for years. They knew they had a role in the sport and budgeted as such

That's like telling someone making minium wage to live within their means. The problems isn't that these teams are overspending on luxuries. The engines have a fixed price and they are the same for all customer teams. The rest is how you put the car together, the teams in questions have smaller staffs, less development, and they don't pay their drivers. What are they doing different than what Minardi was able to do other than the costs of the sport today don't equate to the costs when Minardi was around and technically the team was sold keeping the Minardi name but it was a new owner so Minardi even living within their mean couldn't quite do it either.

[Jabberwocky]

I am saying Minardi made a living being a tail end Charlie, I am sure the development bill for Minardi was at a different level to Caterham/Marussia due to the latter trying to beat each other.

[What's Burning?]

Follow the money, always follow the money. Who is the one profiting most from the current state of affairs? I quoted this interview yesterday... a little more impact this way. Seeing is believing.

[Jabberwocky]

I am not saying he is not a greedy little troll.

You said about people on minimum wage. The problem with the smaller teams that are on minimum wage are booking holidays to in 5 star hotels when really they should be booking into a bed and breakfast. Then at some point book into a 1 star hotel when they are having a better year.

There should be less money going into Bernie pocket without a doubt. However the teams can not just blame that.

It would be like me saying I will take out a loan because I should have the orders for 10,000 canvasses a week. In reality it is about 1% of that. So what level of loan to do I get? 10,000 or 100?

[LRW]

Bernie just said on sky:

"These small teams just spend beyond their means. that's the actual issue "

(Paraphrasing, but that was his sentiment.)

[sagi58]

I'd bet money it's a combination of not getting as much as the bigger teams as far as revenue goes
and spending more than they should...

Kinda like "keeping up with the Joneses"!!

[1Lemon]

Bernie just said on sky:

"These small teams just spend beyond their means. that's the actual issue "

(Paraphrasing, but that was his sentiment.)

Kinda true, I mean Force India are very very good at spending within their means, but when large some of their means goes to lining his and CVCs pockets, I don't think Bernie has a leg to stand on, he's as guilty for this whole debacle as he was at those corruption charges.

[LRW]

Are people finally running out of patience with the dirty little troll, and dealing with issues without him...?

A potential US Grand Prix boycott was averted by the intervention of the man who runs Formula 1, Eddie Jordan says.

Lotus, Sauber and Force India considered skipping the race in protest at what they see as an inequitable split in the sport's revenues and had organised a news conference on Sunday. Jordan, BBC F1's chief analyst, says Donald MacKenzie, co-chairman of F1's largest shareholder, CVC Capital Partners, phoned Lotus boss Gerard Lopez and promised to address their concerns. MacKenzie said he would do this irrespective of Bernie Ecclestone's position.

As co-chairman and co-founder of CVC Capital Partners, the main shareholder of the group of companies that own F1's commercial rights, MacKenzie employs Ecclestone to run the sport. He persuaded Lopez to call off the news conference ahead of the race, Jordan says, promising that he would do something to ensure the smaller teams earned more money from the sport.

The intervention raised questions about whether Ecclestone's once iron grip on F1 was loosening, Jordan said. Ecclestone had said he was to blame for the financial problems afflicting some of the smaller teams. Talks are planned this week, aimed at trying to solve what has so far been an intractable problem.

The smaller teams are caught between having a relatively small amount of income from F1's commercial rights holders, declining sponsorship figures as a result of the global financial slowdown, declining overall worldwide television audiences and rising costs. The sport's two smallest teams, Marussia and Caterham, went into administration last month and missed the US race.

But Christian Horner, boss of the Red Bull team that won four consecutive championships from 2010-13, said it was not for the bigger teams to reduce their incomes.

"Teams are here to compete and not sponsor each other," Horner said, adding: "If the commercial rights holder wants to put more money into smaller teams that's their choice and responsibility."

But Mercedes F1 boss Toto Wolff said he believed the leading teams should discuss a redistribution of income. "We know why we ended up here, it was important for Bernie to re-sign the big teams," he said. "Today we find ourselves in a situation which is not good. Two of the smaller teams left and some of the others are struggling. It is a matter for the teams to discuss with Bernie what can be done. If the bigger teams can do something, we should discuss that. Let's see what Bernie comes up with but I guess it's a relationship between the commercial rights holder and the smaller teams."

Lopez told the German magazine Auto Motor Und Sport that the smaller teams expected concrete proposals before this weekend's Brazilian race or they would consider staging a boycott at the final race of the season in Abu Dhabi on 23 November.

[Jabberwocky]