[Rumours] Budget cap revival

[Marbot]

The teams are open to the suggestion of a budget cap. Which would mean freer (but not ridiculously freer) technical regulations. F1 would be more about thinking than spending. There are apparently three options open to the teams. One is tighter technical regulations (Red Bull have championed that particular route), a budget cap (Sauber and probably most other teams of that ilk), a resource restriction (said to be favoured by most top teams).

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/102627

Your thoughts.

[Bononi]

Here we go again !

[ECW Dan Selby]

Budget cap, open regs, please.

Simple as that.

Selby

[chillibowl]

i would like to see a combination of an overall budget cap and a RRA for certain key components.

i would also think a mechanism is required to discourage overspending short of changing championship standings after the accountants have figured out who spent what. the NBA has done some interesting things with a soft salary cap and the application of a luxury tax to penalize those who go over. no one losses their title but the owners get penalized financially with the proceeds being distributed to those that dont violate the rules.

[Bononi]

F1 needs a budget cap, period. How to make it happen and how to control it, can be done, it's up to the teams, really.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Bononi

Here we go again !

Don't blame me. This should have been sorted out ages ago.

Originally Posted by ECW Dan Selby

Budget cap, open regs, please.

Simple as that.

Selby

I rather think that a budget cap will preclude vast amounts of R&D, so it may be wise to stick to what you know works, rather than go out on a limb with anything too risky that can't be turned around within your budget.

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i would like to see a combination of an overall budget cap and a RRA for certain key components.

i would also think a mechanism is required to discourage overspending short of changing championship standings after the accountants have figured out who spent what. the NBA has done some interesting things with a soft salary cap and the application of a luxury tax to penalize those who go over. no one losses their title but the owners get penalized financially with the proceeds being distributed to those that dont violate the rules.

Yes. That could work.

Originally Posted by Bononi

F1 needs a budget cap, period. How to make it happen and how to control it, can be done, it's up to the teams, really.

Indeed it can be done. Once they sort out what can and can't be included within a fixed budget. Some teams don't even own a wind tunnel, never mind have the backing of a car manufacturers spending and technological input.

[schead]

Originally Posted by Bononi

F1 needs a budget cap, period. How to make it happen and how to control it, can be done, it's up to the teams, really.

I disagree. F1 is the pinacle of motorsport. If you can't afford it, try GP2, F3, or FF.

The sooner we can get rid of Marussia, HRT and Caterham, the better. All they do is get in the way of real competitors. I would much prefer an 18 car lineup than a 24 car lineup consisting of 18 F1 cars and 6 moving chicanes.

[werner]

Originally Posted by schead

I disagree. F1 is the pinacle of motorsport. If you can't afford it, try GP2, F3, or FF.

The sooner we can get rid of Marussia, HRT and Caterham, the better. All they do is get in the way of real competitors. I would much prefer an 18 car lineup than a 24 car lineup consisting of 18 F1 cars and 6 moving chicanes.

I remember times when drivers finisched in pointscoring positions 1 or more laps down. backmarkers used to finisch 3, 4 sometimes 5 laps down. Today the 3 backmarker teams usually finish 1 lap behind when they don't hit to much trouble, but with such a disadvantage you have almost zero chance on point.
Ergo: the differences are very small these days, and I would not call the 3 last teams moving chicanes. Caterham is close to bridging the gap to the Toro Rosso's.

[Bononi]

Originally Posted by schead

I disagree. F1 is the pinacle of motorsport. If you can't afford it, try GP2, F3, or FF.

The sooner we can get rid of Marussia, HRT and Caterham, the better. All they do is get in the way of real competitors. I would much prefer an 18 car lineup than a 24 car lineup consisting of 18 F1 cars and 6 moving chicanes.

It all depends on how it will be that budget cap. I do agree to get rid of those "sub" teams and maybe a programmed budget cap will make it work both ways.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Bononi

It all depends on how it will be that budget cap. I do agree to get rid of those "sub" teams and maybe a programmed budget cap will make it work both ways.

It's precisely because F1 wants to keep these "sub" teams, that a budget cap seems necessary. It would certainly be that a budget cap would be set at well under the figure that Sauber are now throwing at the sport, and believe me, that's not a lot!

[JeremySmith]

[QUOTE=Marbot;3137856]Don't blame me. This should have been sorted out ages ago.

Your special, we love to blame you...

[schead]

Originally Posted by Marbot

It's precisely because F1 wants to keep these "sub" teams, that a budget cap seems necessary. It would certainly be that a budget cap would be set at well under the figure that Sauber are now throwing at the sport, and believe me, that's not a lot!

Really, what are these sub teams contributing to the sport, other than getting in the way? Sauber has always been a valued member of the F1 grid, but these teams are just a joke. HRT and Marrussia inparticular are just modern day Andrea Moda teams. Caterham are more like Arrows. Either way, they left the grid because they couldn't afford to participate in F1, and good riddance to them. Rather than introduce budget caps, F1 should reintroduce the huge entrance fee to stop the likes of smiley Branson from bringing in teams on the same sort of budget as the local soapbox karting team, as a means of cheap advertising.

Limit the grid to 20 cars, and only allow teams to participate in any GP if they first post pre season testing lap times for both cars within 107%.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by schead

Limit the grid to 20 cars, and only allow teams to participate in any GP if they first post pre season testing lap times for both cars within 107%.

If you allow the spending to carry on, it will self-limit itself to much less than 20 cars. And all HRT need do to participate in any GP is precisely what they did do in pre-season testing and that was to get easily within 107% of the cars that very rarely did low fuel runs. And what if one of the top teams builds a 'Lemon'?
Are we to be cheated of seeing that team develop its car through the season?

[Flavio Galtieri]

Originally Posted by schead

Really, what are these sub teams contributing to the sport, other than getting in the way? Sauber has always been a valued member of the F1 grid, but these teams are just a joke. HRT and Marrussia inparticular are just modern day Andrea Moda teams. Caterham are more like Arrows. Either way, they left the grid because they couldn't afford to participate in F1, and good riddance to them. Rather than introduce budget caps, F1 should reintroduce the huge entrance fee to stop the likes of smiley Branson from bringing in teams on the same sort of budget as the local soapbox karting team, as a means of cheap advertising.

Limit the grid to 20 cars, and only allow teams to participate in any GP if they first post pre season testing lap times for both cars within 107%.

Hang on a minute! That's rather a lot of jobs and people you are throwing on the scrapheap there!

"Smiley Branson" teams and others may well have less budget but they perform a very necessary function, bringing on and providing an opportunity for other drivers and engineers to develop their skills without maybe the spotlight and pressure a job at Lotus or Ferrari would bring.

With your reasoning the Premier League would consist of 10 football clubs, if that!

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Your special, we love to blame you...

Blame is better to give than receive.

[Bononi]

Originally Posted by Flavio Galtieri

Hang on a minute! That's rather a lot of jobs and people you are throwing on the scrapheap there!

"Smiley Branson" teams and others may well have less budget but they perform a very necessary function, bringing on and providing an opportunity for other drivers and engineers to develop their skills without maybe the spotlight and pressure a job at Lotus or Ferrari would bring.

With your reasoning the Premier League would consist of 10 football clubs, if that!

That's why Montezomolo think it's better to have three cars instead of two.

[schead]

Originally Posted by Bononi

That's why Montezomolo think it's better to have three cars instead of two.

And that is why di Montezemolo is right. The likes of Virgin/HRT/Caterham just hold up real F1 cars. They don't bring in new and exciting talent, because they just go for whatever driver pays the most money. That is why HRT have NK, and Caterham ousted a race winner in favour of Paytrov. The also rans will run any crap driver if he has a big enough sponsor.

The obvious solution is to allow top teams to run new and exciting talent in third cars, where the size of the drivers wallet isn't the main consideration. We then have a situation where new drivers can show their talent in real F1 cars, rather than pay drivers tooling around at the back, holding everyone up whilst throwing cash at the underclass teams.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by schead

And that is why di Montezemolo is right. The likes of Virgin/HRT/Caterham just hold up real F1 cars. They don't bring in new and exciting talent, because they just go for whatever driver pays the most money. That is why HRT have NK, and Caterham ousted a race winner in favour of Paytrov. The also rans will run any crap driver if he has a big enough sponsor.

The obvious solution is to allow top teams to run new and exciting talent in third cars, where the size of the drivers wallet isn't the main consideration. We then have a situation where new drivers can show their talent in real F1 cars, rather than pay drivers tooling around at the back, holding everyone up whilst throwing cash at the underclass teams.

Ahem. Maldonado & Perez. Both very quick, both bringing $$$… Not at the back, agreed, but neither are they consistently at the front and I would surmise each bring a *lot* more money than the combined pay drivers down the grid.

Perhaps we need a Concord definition of "crap"?

[schead]

Originally Posted by Greem

Ahem. Maldonado & Perez. Both very quick, both bringing $$$… Not at the back, agreed, but neither are they consistently at the front and I would surmise each bring a *lot* more money than the combined pay drivers down the grid.

Perhaps we need a Concord definition of "crap"?

Well Maldonado spends most of his time crashing into other drivers, so the dollars he brings in is reduced considerably. But he is an ideal example. He is a pay driver, and if it weren't for his cash, he would be sacked already. He has won a race, (in a year that has seen more race winners because of Tyre differences), but other than that has done nothing but crash into people. Single race win or not, if he didn't have cash he would be shown the exit. Perez, on the other hand, is a Ferrari academy driver. He has shown class, and doesn't crash into people all the time. He is not a pay driver because he already proved himself to Ferrari without the cash.

Give the top teams third drivers, and they will bring the top drivers to F1. Allow also ran teams in F1, and it will be littered with pay drivers either holding up, or crashing into real drivers.

BTW, I would love to own an F1 team, but I can't afford it. I don't demand that F1 lowers it's entry fee to a couple of hundred pounds, I just accept it. That is what the likes of Virgin should do.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by schead

Give the top teams third drivers, and they will bring the top drivers to F1. Allow also ran teams in F1, and it will be littered with pay drivers either holding up, or crashing into real drivers.

Hrm... weren't McLaren, Williams, Red Bull and Sauber all "also ran" teams at some point in their early careers? There's no telling what an upstart entrant with access to lots of cash could achieve, even now.

If do Montezemelo is seriously suggesting 3 car efforts then it will be the start of F1 franchising. That way madness (and reduced grids) lies.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Greem

Hrm... weren't McLaren, Williams, Red Bull and Sauber all "also ran" teams at some point in their early careers?

Indeed they were, and then some! Ferrari were completely hilarious at times. And they had more experience.

Originally Posted by Greem

There's no telling what an upstart entrant with access to lots of cash could achieve, even now.

True.

Originally Posted by Greem

If do Montezemelo is seriously suggesting 3 car efforts then it will be the start of F1 franchising. That way madness (and reduced grids) lies.

Correct. Monty, as usual, is thinking of himself. How ironic that he's not (yet) spoken out against the suggestion of a 'budget cap'.

[gregtummer]

I would be fine with this:

"If you put constraints on all those [technical] things then we are in danger of spoiling the sport, and I would certainly advocate a restraint on resources. You cannot spend more than this; you cannot have more people than this and you have to do the best job you can with what you have got. Then you still allow innovation and you still allow the spirit of F1. For me it is definitely the way to go."

The question then becomes how do you control costs for manufacturers who can hide costs in their huge companies with all their subsidiaries? I mean, wouldn't you need to hire tons of accountants to scour all the worldwide books of Ferrari?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by gregtummer

The question then becomes how do you control costs for manufacturers who can hide costs in their huge companies with all their subsidiaries? I mean, wouldn't you need to hire tons of accountants to scour all the worldwide books of Ferrari?

You're right. That is the question. But the FIA have said time and again that it's completely doable. You just and out huge penalties i.e. disqualification from championship for any transgressions. A car company that is demonstrated to be fraudulent can lose a lot of business in no time at all.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by gregtummer

I would be fine with this:

"If you put constraints on all those [technical] things then we are in danger of spoiling the sport, and I would certainly advocate a restraint on resources. You cannot spend more than this; you cannot have more people than this and you have to do the best job you can with what you have got. Then you still allow innovation and you still allow the spirit of F1. For me it is definitely the way to go."

The question then becomes how do you control costs for manufacturers who can hide costs in their huge companies with all their subsidiaries? I mean, wouldn't you need to hire tons of accountants to scour all the worldwide books of Ferrari?

Even with hundreds of accountants every entry is subject to interpretation, seemingly completely unrelated entities could easily cover for one another. It is simply not going to happen with companies like Fiat, Renault and Mercedes.

[schead]

Originally Posted by Marbot

You're right. That is the question. But the FIA have said time and again that it's completely doable. You just and out huge penalties i.e. disqualification from championship for any transgressions. A car company that is demonstrated to be fraudulent can lose a lot of business in no time at all.

A car company also has a lot more financial clout to legally make the FIA eat it's words. Lets say that Mercedes and Ferrari are using clever accounting to overcome the limit. Who do you honestly think would win in a legal battle with the FIA vs Merc or Fiat in a corporate slander case? Also, who really thinks that the FIA would even consider ****ing off Ferrari, Mercedes or Renault given the engine situation in F1?

Budget caps are unworkable, as well as being totally against what F1 is about. Keep the poor people out of F1 IMHO. If you can't afford F1, there is always GP2, GP3, FR, FF etc.

F1 is the best of the best, not the people who need drivers to provide funding for an also ran ****ty car to so much as pay for tyres.

If you need a budget cap to be in F1, don't be in F1. End of...