Interesting developments

[Marbot]

Seems like things are changing faster than we thought,read "the game begins" at.www.grandprix.com

[touringlegend]

Interesting indeed. But they've yet to all agree. This is what I hate about F1, 1 can hold the rest back and this is what has happened repeatedly over the past few years.


With the rule changes for 2006 though, I think we honestly are entering a revolution in F1, with the talk of two new teams and manufacturers pulling out we are heading to a period crowded with private teams IMO.

[Sodemo]

If they are changing the regs, why aren't they doing more about the areo problem.
Why only cut back by 25% as they are supposedly doing?

Why not 80%?

Surely this is a problem that is just going to get worse and worse, why not drastically cut back downforce now?

[Knowlesy]

And you can guarantee that 25% will be clawed back by the end of next season.

[Gt_R]

I hope Ferrari refuses to budge.

It's unfortunate that the big teams are using this opportunity to wipe away one of Ferrari's biggest assets of having test-tracks.

For years, the big teams such as Williams and Mclaren are envious and jealous of Ferrari's luxury of test track, and have tried to rid of this advantage, as well as trying to get their own test tracks. Both failed. And that now, they are using the pressure of British GP and French GP to force their way through.

It may seem that if British GP and French GP are not approved next year, Ferrari would get alot of blame for it. But it won't be. Ferrari could still support additional races without cutting the testings...

Furthermore, Ferrari have been one of those who agreed to cost-cutting, and is open enough to voice it. And they have been supplying old-engines to many privateer teams in the past. They've done their bit to support the survival of smaller teams.

And now, what the other teams call for is to "cut-cost" by hitting Ferrari where it hurts most, while other teams would barely be affected as much. Smart move...not.

[Gt_R]

It may seem that if British GP and French GP are not approved next year, Ferrari would get alot of blame for it. But it won't be. Ferrari could still support additional races without cutting the testings...

Furthermore, Ferrari have been one of those who agreed to cost-cutting, and is open enough to voice it. And they have been supplying old-engines to many privateer teams in the past. They've done their bit to support the survival of smaller teams. It's just that cutting testing by removing the use of test-tracks is not the way...and if any other teams have such privilge, the reaction would be very much the same.

And now, what the other teams call for is to "cut-cost" by hitting Ferrari where it hurts most, while other teams would barely be affected as much. Smart move...not.

British GP meant a lot for teams such as Williams, Mclaren and Jordan. And they could easily have contributed some money to grow it. But nope

So why should Ferrari be overly concerned with British GP at their own expense?

Sure, F1 may be killing Silverstone, but some teams are trying to kill Ferrari. Tsk...hrug:

*edited*

[npperk]

Originally posted by Gt_R
I hope Ferrari refuses to budge.

It's unfortunate that the big teams are using this opportunity to wipe away one of Ferrari's biggest assets of having test-tracks.

Well well well, I hope Ferrari do budge.

Cost cutting by limiting testing is a great idea. The cost of testing increases season by season. The fact that Ferrari own a test track is irrelevant - the cost savings from extra parts, engines, fuel, tyres etc etc is one good reason.

You could also assume that with less development time on their hands, it would take a little (but not much) longer to regain the ground lost with the aero/tyres/engine changes.

Ferrari don't want to loose their testing advantage, and their advantage of (supposed) favourable treatment from Bridgestone...

Finally, from the perspective where you have test teams and race teams for each car (and sometimes the third), the extra time the personnel will have at home with families must be a good thing. They may be working in the workshop just as much, but at least they are at home base.

[Marbot]

In order to test the new tyres they would have to be tested over a full race distance,very expensive indeed,Ferrari can't test everything at Fiorano they have to use other tracks as well,and this is why the majority of teams want a control tyre it will eliminate at a stroke the endless days of tyre testing thereby drastically reducing costs.Makes sense doesn't it?

[T0MAT01]

Originally posted by Gt_R
I hope Ferrari refuses to budge....


And now, what the other teams call for is to "cut-cost" by hitting Ferrari where it hurts most, while other teams would barely be affected as much. Smart move...not.

Well since Ferrari have the largest budget in F1 then surely any cost cutting would hurt them the most.

What would you like to see - a grid of 20 Ferraris every other weekend?

[BSchneiderFan]

The simple truth is that teams will spend whatever money they have available somehow. Cut actual track testing and they'll spend it on ever-more-sophisticated computer simulations. And why not? They're in F1 to win and will spend as much money as they can lay their hands on in pursuit of that goal.

[Marbot]

And so Jean Todt alone stands in the way of next years French GP,wouldn't want to be in his shoes!

[Knowlesy]

Putting the loss of those two races aside, the actual rule changes are very important and a big step in the right direction. A control tyre would be good news (preferably Michelin) and a reduction in testing is desirable in cost terms.

I hope Ferrari budge for those reasons, but I won't be exactly blaming them if we lose the French GP and British GP. They have to protect their interests I guess, although I don't agree with their opposition to these changes.

But these are revolutionary changes if they are pushed through!

[Knowlesy]

I tell you what, big respect to Peter Sauber for signing this agreement. He's not just going to shadow Ferrari after all!

I was losing a little respect for him because these changes would benefit his team and yet he was acting as Jean Todts yes-man.

Well done Peter!

[touringlegend]

The sport shouldn't be held back on cutting costs just so as Ferrari can keep their beloved test-track.

It's time they woke up and smelt the coffee, not everyone who wants to be in F1 is as rich as them.

[1200Datto27]

What will happen to the test teams staff? and the staff at the tracks/hotels/etc that possibly rely on the income generated by the testing done? surely there will be follow on effects such as these.

[KevinS]

Why blame Todt and/or Ferrari if there's no British or French GP next year? Who put them in this position anyway?

(Hint: it starts with a "B" and ends with "ernie Ecclestone and the FIA")

Latest news is that the 9 teams singed the agreement at a meeting where they conveniently forgot to invite Ferrari. There will be a press converence by Jean Todt after todays race, hopefully he will clarify this.

[cos]

Originally posted by KevinS
Latest news is that the 9 teams singed the agreement at a meeting where they conveniently forgot to invite Ferrari. There will be a press converence by Jean Todt after todays race, hopefully he will clarify this.

From f1-live.com:

The nine teams met without Ferrari on Saturday morning, having failed to get the support of the world champions for their cost-cutting plans in two meetings on Friday.

Should be an interesting afternoon...

[Gt_R]

Teams like Toyota, Mclaren and William's are not supporting the cost cutting much more than Ferrari. One big incentive for them to vote for this change is that Ferrari would be stripped of their biggest asset.

Teams like Toyota, Williams, Mclaren spend as much money as Ferrari. They could match Ferrari in every department, except for the test track.

If there is no British or French GP, it'd not be Ferrari's fault. Bernie has said it before, as long as everybody wants to, British and French GP could still go ahead.

It's just that the other top teams set this condition of refusing the GPs if they couldn't get the "cost-cutting"

[Knowlesy]

Still, it's an interesting political piece....wonder how long this will run? Much ado about nothing?

[Rich R]

well most of the constructor teams are much bigger companies than ferrari, even mclaren and williams have the backing of bigger companies. it's just that even the modern more pragmatic ferrari races because of the love of it to an extent, and i think the principles of a few other teams may struggle to understand that notion.

[Knowlesy]

Ferrari races for the love of it?

Purleeease....

[touringlegend]

Perhaps phrased badly, but I can understand what Rich R means. Ferrari aren't a mass manufacturer such as Honda or Renault, so obviously they aren't in it for the sales - simply to maintain the image.

[ASCII Man]

Ofcourse they are in it to sell cars!
First they sold cars to fund their racing projects and these days they race to sell cars!

Obviously!

[Knowlesy]

If you can say anybody is in it for the love of it in these modern times it is guys like Jordan, Minardi, McLaren, Williams, Sauber.....OK, some of those have strong links with manufacturers but fundamentally they are pure racing teams. Who remain whilst manufacturers come and go.

I'm not sure about Ferrari....on one side, they are a pure racing team but then on the other hand you see them leading this GPWC business and you wonder, wonder aloud!

[Glen]

Money and power alone would never be anough to build an outfit like Ferrari. Passion and love for what they do is apparent in abundance - the brand virtually represents the idea of deep, mad, passion for motosport. You might not like the way they go about business, but to say they have no love for the sport is a nonsense and clouds anything else you might have to say, frankly.