Prospective new teams for the FIA F1 World Championship.

[Alan52]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

admitmittely this reason resonates with me as a reason for more entries....but

undoubtedly though, any new entry will have to rely of pay drivers in the beginning at least. and while there is a huge range of talent among the pay drivers are more pay drivers on the grid really the best thing for the sport?

how many sessions have been stopped early or SC deployed because either Latifi this season or Mazepan last season spin out pretty much every time they are on track?

more teams just means more rich kids with questionable skill and that just means more disruption to the racing.

personal preference would be to continue enabling the existing teams to move away from the necessity of prioritizing money over talent...to me thats professional sports.

I doubt Andretti or any other team cashed up enough to pay dilution fee plus start up costs is going to need pay drivers.Particularly as that locks them to the back of the grid.
I can’t see a single driver on 2023 grid that fits your pay driver definition.The last of that breed departed with Latifi.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by BTCC frog

I'm sure this could be figured out.

probably can be figured out but not without a lot of acrimony and a major rewrite of the current rule set and that is not a particularly enticing pathway forward imo.

Originally Posted by Alan52

I can’t see a single driver on 2023 grid that fits your pay driver definition.The last of that breed departed with Latifi.

and thats my point!

we finally seem to be getting to a formula where the teams (including the weakest) have been offered commercial and technical terms favourable enough to allow them to go back to focusing on talent over money.

why blow this up just so a former driver with minimum manu backing, no IP, no factory, and a Renault engine can maybe join up?

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by Alan52

I can’t see a single driver on 2023 grid that fits your pay driver definition.The last of that breed departed with Latifi.

Probably Zhou if anyone, but even he has earned his spot.

[Alan52]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

probably can be figured out but not without a lot of acrimony and a major rewrite of the current rule set and that is not a particularly enticing pathway forward imo.



and thats my point!

we finally seem to be getting to a formula where the teams (including the weakest) have been offered commercial and technical terms favourable enough to allow them to go back to focusing on talent over money.

why blow this up just so a former driver with minimum manu backing, no IP, no factory, and a Renault engine can maybe join up?

Andretti will be better resourced than Williams or Haas from day one.There is zero chance of any team who can jump through the hoops to join being able to “blow this up”.
On the other hand this will open up spots for 2 more drivers who deserve a shot at F1.Also increasing the size of a grid will just about always improve the racing through the field.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

As a very broad estimate (based on extracts from books / public account records) the following shows the history of F1 budgets (all estimates in USD):

The budget or inflation factor for the 1968 Tyrrell team doesn't seem correct. You can't even run a F2 car mostly in Europe for the season for 789K USD now (more like 2M USD per car, or 4M USD for both cars)... and they were already flying all around the world to race F1 in 1968.

I found a figure of 600k GBP for Tyrrell's budget for the 1973 season, or 6m GBP in 2022, which seems more realistic.

Note: Full Tyrrell/BAR/Honda/Brawn/Mercedes account filings from 1984 to the present day are available are: https://find-and-update.company-info...history?page=1

Sadly there are no accounts for 1968 listed.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

The budget or inflation factor for the 1968 Tyrrell team doesn't seem correct.

https://www.grandprixengines.co.uk/Note_113.pdf

The BRM budget for 1969 is reported as £0.1M, RPI adjusted to £1M for 2002.
The Tyrrell figure seems to be in the right ball-park.


'Although the precise ratio of fund escalation cannot be certain it is clear that – in constant money value terms - the increase in the money available for Grand Prix technology improvement from 1968 to 2002 was truly remarkable.'

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by peebee2

Yes, it’s exactly as I said thanks. The (self-appointed) regulation comes under Swiss law. No accident.

Anyway, lighten up, you’ll give yourself a connery.

Do you mean that Mike is going to gift himself a British actor famous for playing James Bond and also for pronouncing his 's's shlightly differently to mosht people?*

*Question asked also in an aim of lightening things up

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

imo its 100% bad for fans.

not hard to imagine a scenario where Ferrari, or Ham, or Max or one of the actual main features get knocked out of pre qualifying because of a change in the weather or some minor infraction to the pre qualifying rules or somepay driver spins out or because several of the new tracks cant even accommodate 20 cars on track at the same time during quali.

and while that may make for great television it would certainly leave a lot of people who paid a lot of money to be there to see their favorites in action and in person.

honestly dont even want to get into the engine and part use rules for those that dont compete in every race...or those that just show up explicitly for one race with no concern about lifetime usage of that PU.

Although things were done differently back then this happened to McLaren at Monaco in 1983. They messed up in the first (dry) qualifying and then it rained meaning they couldn't go any quicker so went home (I think) on the Friday!

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Alan52

-There are no teams for sale and there won’t be in the foreseeable future.

WILLIAMS UP FOR SALE?

"With Porsche allegedly looking for a way into Formula One and Andretti knocking on the door repeatedly, it may be Dorilton are negotiating their exit and leaving there management appointments in the hands of the new owners.

Given the current rumblings from the F1 teams who want to increase the entry fee from $200m to $600m, Dorilton Capital may own a valuable asset even though its performance potential at present is not good."

Originally Posted by Alan52

Andretti will be better resourced than Williams or Haas from day one.There is zero chance of any team who can jump through the hoops to join being able to “blow this up”.

Existing teams don't think so (I know this is the teams' view):

"Andretti is said to have told people his aim is to enter F1 in 2025, but a number of existing teams don't think that is even close to realistic.

They point out that they already have the basics of 2025 cars sketched out, while Andretti also has to scale up a factory, and employ 600 or so people by then."

[P38 in workshop]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

The budget or inflation factor for the 1968 Tyrrell team doesn't seem correct. You can't even run a F2 car mostly in Europe for the season for 789K USD now (more like 2M USD per car, or 4M USD for both cars)... and they were already flying all around the world to race F1 in 1968.

I found a figure of 600k GBP for Tyrrell's budget for the 1973 season, or 6m GBP in 2022, which seems more realistic.

Note: Full Tyrrell/BAR/Honda/Brawn/Mercedes account filings from 1984 to the present day are available are: https://find-and-update.company-info...history?page=1

Sadly there are no accounts for 1968 listed.

I wouldn't think the estimate of Tyrrell's sixties budget is too far off.I doubt that their workforce at the time exceeded fifteen people with perhaps seven attending races.With most of the races being in Europe,it was quite feasible to send them off in a minibus.At the time an individual earning £2K per annum was doing very nicely indeed.For comparative purposes it is well known that the development programme for the DFV cost Ford £150K.To gain a good idea of the way it was I would recommend reading the interesting book "Tales From the Toolbox" which also makes a contribution to the Grand Prix Mechanics charitable fund when a copy is purchased.One illuminating photograph shows all the mechanics of all the teams together and it takes more people to run a single car these days.


I see that the Porsche name crops up yet again and I have never had the feeling that their hearts were in it.Audi seem to have got the nod and I don't know how well it would play with the German green movement if there was too heavy a German involvement in F1.It would be much easier to visualise a scenario where Porsche stick with their WEC programme and build on their reputation.Couple this with the ownership structure of the VAG group, which has considerable shareholdings from the bank of Lower Saxony and other local institutions, and the sentiment might be that investment income for the shareholders is more important than throwing excessive amounts of money at racing.


I do wonder what might happen if perhaps Geely wanted to revive the Lotus entry.They already own the name and as the largest shareholder in Daimler-Benz,they could wangle an engine deal.Finding a driver that their home crowd could support needn't be insurmountable either.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

"Andretti is said to have told people his aim is to enter F1 in 2025, but a number of existing teams don't think that is even close to realistic.

They point out that they already have the basics of 2025 cars sketched out, while Andretti also has to scale up a factory, and employ 600 or so people by then."

given that the major rule change is set for 2026, how much in resources do you spend on developing a 2025 car or do you take an extra year and enter for 2026?

spend that extra year running a test car outside the testing and budget limitations/run a Renault/Alpine/new engine mule no? run a new driver program at the same time? unlimited time in a wind tunnel?

rather, if this bid really had sufficient money behind it, this is what they would be doing right?

[Mike Harte]

Not about a new team, but has anyone else read that there have been rumours that the Saudi sovereign wealth fund is alleged to have made an unsolicited bid for FOM for a sum of $20 billion, but the proposal was rejected.

If correct, that puts into the shade the deal that Mr E made with Mosley which was for only $300 million for the 100 year lease, which he then sold on to Liberty for $4.7 billion.

What I wonder is what the FIA did with that $300 million as they are a non-profit organisation?

See: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/b...r-f1/10423878/

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Not about a new team, but has anyone else read that there have been rumours that the Saudi sovereign wealth fund is alleged to have made an unsolicited bid for FOM for a sum of $20 billion, but the proposal was rejected.

If correct, that puts into the shade the deal that Mr E made with Mosley which was for only $300 million for the 100 year lease, which he then sold on to Liberty for $4.7 billion.

What I wonder is what the FIA did with that $300 million as they are a non-profit organisation?

See: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/b...r-f1/10423878/

I have seen other versions of that story in which the plan was to also try to "entice" F1 teams to relocate to Neom city. And that BE was part of it somehow (probably floated by those with the money as putting him back in control). All of that sounds like a really bad idea on all points.

Richard

[P38 in workshop]

I seriously doubt that trying to relocate the teams to move their operating bases will get very far.I could visualise a situation in which they moved their registered offices to a country with a fairly benign level of business taxation.......


I suppose it is a side effect of the spending cap and the greater level of income,and thus profit,which have encompassed all participants in the championship.Back in the days when a lot of the team principals were used car dealers whose idea of success was selling last year's Mercedes for more than they needed to pay for this year's (with their "special" discount) , things were on a different scale.

[Greem]

Well now.

Monday: FIA President tweets about the alleged bid for F1 from Saudi, and how he disagrees with it, and that it overstates the value of the organisation.

Tuesday: F1 and Liberty legal reps write to the FIA stating their profound disagreement with the statements - basically a legally worded slap, with the threat that if F1's value is damaged the FIA could be liable.

Originally Posted by Letter from F1 to FIA

[it is hoped that] it will not be necessary to address this issue again

Oof.

[chillibowl]

cant say i have had any reason to see things from Ben Sulayem's pov, but must agree with his warning that any purchase price will need to be recouped by the new buyers and that translates to raising prices on to us consumers/fans.

so much the worse if its an inflated purchase price...LIV proving this to be true?

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

cant say i have had any reason to see things from Ben Sulayem's pov, but must agree with his warning that any purchase price will need to be recouped by the new buyers and that translates to raising prices on to us consumers/fans.

so much the worse if its an inflated purchase price...LIV proving this to be true?

Liberty is stretching things a little.
They don't own the F1 championship.
Effectively they lease it.
The actual F1 category belongs to the FIA, Liberty leases the commercial rights which were 'leased' at a price for a fixed number of years.
At the end of that period the commercial rights return to the FIA.

If their exercising of the commercial rights in some way causes the meaning and value of the F1 championship to lose its public value and prestige they could be accused of mismanaging/mishandling the championship.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Liberty is stretching things a little.
They don't own the F1 championship.
Effectively they lease it.
The actual F1 category belongs to the FIA, Liberty leases the commercial rights which were 'leased' at a price for a fixed number of years.
At the end of that period the commercial rights return to the FIA.

If their exercising of the commercial rights in some way causes the meaning and value of the F1 championship to lose its public value and prestige they could be accused of mismanaging/mishandling the championship.

I don't know whether you have read this: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/w...ayem/10424345/

Also, mention has been made in the media that several parties have expressed bringing new teams into F1, but MBS seems to be pouring cold water on that version of events. See: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/a...grid/10424627/

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I don't know whether you have read this: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/w...ayem/10424345/

Also, mention has been made in the media that several parties have expressed bringing new teams into F1, but MBS seems to be pouring cold water on that version of events. See: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/a...grid/10424627/

Thank you Mike.
I had not seen the first article so it was initially an interesting lead.
However I think much of it is muddy and consistent with the very thing it mentions, that much of the 'split' talk is actually journalistic liberty stirring the pool.
I don't think (my opinion) the president's comments are directly interfering with the commercial matters.
The regulator has an interest in the championship beyond just regulation. The value of the championship is a part of that interest and the idea mentioned in the article that the UE made the separation 'crystal clear' is not completely true. It is not crystal clear and if it was there wouldn't be this contention that the FIA president was interfering in the commercial aspects.

The lawyers may have fired off a note but we are not privy to that note and I doubt the writer is privy to it either, nor any discussion between either parties that followed.

It will be interesting to see how the Liberty management of the commercial matters plays out and how it affects the shape of F1.
We have had others here comment from time to time about how F1 is changing shape and that is in the interest of the regulator.

Liberty is the commercial rights holder of the FIA F1 World Championship.
But,
The FIA is NOT simply the regulator of Liberty's F1 World Championship.

And some journalists are playing games with reality in the quest to build sensationalist headlines and stories.
There may be some tension over some issues but we are not at the point of F1 inverting itself like Carlsson's Saab or collapsing in on itself like a black hole.

The other article about Andretti being the only one interested in entering the sport.
Andretti is the one MBS has been formally approached regarding an entrant's license for a new entity.
His remarks should be read in that context.
Others contenders may have speculated about entering but who are they and at what stage is their preparation

[S griffin]

It's interesting Andretti are the only team interested in coming in. Guess we have to keep our fingers crossed for them if no one else is making a noise about entering

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

It's interesting Andretti are the only team interested in coming in.

Panthera Asia F1

Porsche

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by S griffin

It's interesting Andretti are the only team interested in coming in.

That's not whats been claimed at all. What has been said is that they are the only entity to speak to MBS.

[P38 in workshop]

It looks like Cadillac have caused their near neighbours to take a bit of notice https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f...tion/10425211/ .Although it is quite a while since they were the top two car companies in the world,they still have quite a bit of relevance and global exposure reminds people of their continued presence in the showrooms of the world.

[chillibowl]

Ford coming back to supply the team it sold to RB would be a cool story.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

It looks like Cadillac have caused their near neighbours to take a bit of notice https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f...tion/10425211/ .Although it is quite a while since they were the top two car companies in the world,they still have quite a bit of relevance and global exposure reminds people of their continued presence in the showrooms of the world.

Certainly!

Though it remains curious the General Motors felt unable to compete on quality and reputation in Europe with their SAAB (Audi competitor?), Opel/Vauxhall (VW competitor?) and budget Chevrolet (Skoda competitor?) brands.

So much so that GM would give up on SAAB and concentrate on Cadillac only, just as Ford did with dropping Jaguar Land Rover and concentrating on Lincoln as their premium car and SUV brand.