FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[CookinFlat6]

Couldn't see a thread about this and with Lotus for one unlikely to make the grid in 2014 (they haven't paid for their engines, drivers or staff for 2013 according to reports, and even pdvsa is reportedly shying away from the Maldo deal) this could become the hot topic going forward

The independent have some suggestions,

1) Introduce a budget cap
Red Bull, for whom Sebastian Vettel cruised to the title with three races to spare, and the other top teams spend close to $300m annually on creating cars. The back-of-the-field teams spend $100m to $120m.
There are probably only four teams that are not seriously hurting financially, and some are running close to bankruptcy at times. This made for an uneven playing field this season and a Vettel cakewalk.
Via the Formula One Teams Association, some have tried to observe a resource restriction agreement to limit spending. Things such as track testing, aerodynamic research and race team staffing levels have been curbed, but unless all of the teams sign up to such plans, nothing will really change in the sport. The rich teams will inevitably spend their way to more success, leaving the poor teams struggling to survive.
Forensic accountancy is so advanced that a mandatory budget cap is feasible and would help to close up the field. At a time when teams are used to everything else being regulated to the nth degree, expenditure is the last bastion of the old days and this has to change.

[1Lemon]

That doesn't make any sense, they say forensic accountancy is so advanced they could put in a mandatory budget cap, but so is creative accounting; and how do you deal with Ferrari and Merc, Ferrari especially as they are less separated from their car company; where they can shove resources to other parts of the business.

Firstly get rid of the ridiculous extra 2% of all revenue earned by F1 that Ferrari just get given for no reason at all, which really pisses me off. This year that's $17.5M, ON TOP of their championship earnings....

Secondly they need to look at the financial distribution in the sport, and stopping the greedy, corrupt money hogging individuals at the top of the FIA and FOM, and distribute that to the struggling teams.

Finally more stock parts, for stuff that is built by all teams but are basically the same e.g. seats, radios, steering wheels even (Just ship the standard wheel to the teams then they can decide what functions do what).

[What's Burning?]

Here's an idea, teams can spend whatever they like, but every dollar spent over 100 million they'd have to provide the equivalent amount spread over the bottom four teams. That would help both ends of the grid.

[1Lemon]

Here's an idea, teams can spend whatever they like, but every dollar spent over 100 million they'd have to provide the equivalent amount spread over the bottom four teams. That would help both ends of the grid.

So a team like McLaren spend $300M and then have to give $200M to the lower teams? I think that would bankrupt even the high end teams.

[NHcheese]

Or just spread the prise money a bit more generously.

[What's Burning?]

Here's an idea, teams can spend whatever they like, but every dollar spent over 100 million they'd have to provide the equivalent amount spread over the bottom four teams. That would help both ends of the grid.

So a team like McLaren spend $300M and then have to give $200M to the lower teams? I think that would bankrupt even the high end teams.

The number is arbitrary so don't pay too much attention to it, it's the idea that would sell. Anyway, no one is telling them to spend that much. Plus imagine the boost downgrid!

[CookinFlat6]

I think there should be performance concessions attached to proof of capped spending. So a team gets an extra boost if they spend less - almost like a carbon permit system

More spec parts to limit and control costs. Anyone can use there own parts but they pay a tax going to the 'spec' teams

Performance concessions for voluntary budget capping. So if a team can prove they spent less than a threshold they get smaller rear wings or drs on tap (not sure what the best formula would be but along these lines)

Spending permits - So teams spending over a threshold would be taxed, with the tax spread out amongst the teams that stick to the cap. Say you spend an extra 10 mill, you get taxed another 5 or 10

I am not sur about the forensic accounting the Independent mention, because that would be like asking a team to give away all its secrets. You couldnt kep and technology secrets if everyone knows what and how much you are spending with whom.

If a couple of teams disappear, the top teams get an extra car each, that car should be driven buy a rookie each year - that could be good

[1Lemon]

Here's an idea, teams can spend whatever they like, but every dollar spent over 100 million they'd have to provide the equivalent amount spread over the bottom four teams. That would help both ends of the grid.

So a team like McLaren spend $300M and then have to give $200M to the lower teams? I think that would bankrupt even the high end teams.

The number is arbitrary so don't pay too much attention to it, it's the idea that would sell. Anyway, no one is telling them to spend that much. Plus imagine the boost downgrid!

But it doesn't get around the issue of manufacturers just spending stuff on the other side of the business and not claiming it for F1.

[1Lemon]

Performance concessions for voluntary budget capping. So if a team can prove they spent less than a threshold they get smaller rear wings or drs on tap (not sure what the best formula would be but along these lines)

Seems a bit dangerous

If a couple of teams disappear, the top teams get an extra car each, that car should be driven buy a rookie each year - that could be good

This would encourage the one season pay drivers in the sport, which is the last thing we need.

[operaman]

Here's an idea, teams can spend whatever they like, but every dollar spent over 100 million they'd have to provide the equivalent amount spread over the bottom four teams. That would help both ends of the grid.

It is a concept that has worked well in MLB, maybe the NBA to a certain extent as well. I think they call it a luxury tax.

[CookinFlat6]

Performance concessions for voluntary budget capping. So if a team can prove they spent less than a threshold they get smaller rear wings or drs on tap (not sure what the best formula would be but along these lines)

Seems a bit dangerous

Wouldnt be dangerous if it were planned properly, Doesnt have to be what I said, just the idea of extra performance for less spending

If a couple of teams disappear, the top teams get an extra car each, that car should be driven buy a rookie each year - that could be good

This would encourage the one season pay drivers in the sport, which is the last thing we need.

It would encourage more rookies and allow more to break through. The top teams dont use pay drivers the poor ones do

[spankyham]

I think all those that want to watch production-car based, creativity-capped and spending-restricted motor racing should go watch any of the plethora of that racing that already exist. Feck-off and leave F1 for:-
- the big boys to compete and
- the fans that want true leading edge racing to watch.

[CookinFlat6]

I think all those that want to watch production-car based, creativity-capped and spending-restricted motor racing should go watch any of the plethora of that racing that already exist. Feck-off and leave F1 for:-
- the big boys to compete and
- the fans that want true leading edge racing to watch.

Because it would end up as the Ferrari Formula, (Merc wont hang around for a 2 team series) watched only by tifosi. Anyway it seems even Ferrari are getting a bit sensitive about the amount they actually spend. They have called Autosport filthy for claiming they spend the most

[1Lemon]

I think all those that want to watch production-car based, creativity-capped and spending-restricted motor racing should go watch any of the plethora of that racing that already exist. Feck-off and leave F1 for:-
- the big boys to compete and
- the fans that want true leading edge racing to watch.

As much asi want the regulations to go down and just let the engineers go mad, the costs would be extraordinary; and we'd end up with one maybe 2 teams in F1 which is something even the tifosi wouldn't want to see.

[What's Burning?]

I think all those that want to watch production-car based, creativity-capped and spending-restricted motor racing should go watch any of the plethora of that racing that already exist. Feck-off and leave F1 for:-
- the big boys to compete and
- the fans that want true leading edge racing to watch.

So instead we're watching Pirelli, and DRS and ridiculously implemented regulation? Given the choice, I'd rather watch a cost controlled yet engineering and testing unregulated sport than what we've got today.