Has F1 reached a new low?

[MikeyC]

Walford said:

Merc have the best engine, they are not letting anyone else use it,
if they gave red bull the Williams Merc lite engine they would moan, were,s the other 30hp
its boring

disappoining indeed

this new power-unit era has made F1 an un-even playing ground, but worse is that there appears no easy fix for others to catch up (and I don't mean Manor!)

in the news, Lewis Hamilton: ' Formula One needs Ferrari to be stronger in 2016'

funny how he said Ferrari and not Red Bull !

hopefully (!) they will see the light and return to what I would call 'F1 Pure'

[Eric Mc]

Back in 1968, the best engine in F1 was the Ford DFV. Lotus had exclusive use of it and were set to dominate F1 for years. Ford and Lotus decided that this was not good for the sport to continue with this exclusive arrangement so mutually agreed that it would be a "good thing" if the engine was made available to other teams to buy.

Different times.

Different attitude.

[London424]

Eric Mc said:

Back in 1968, the best engine in F1 was the Ford DFV. Lotus had exclusive use of it and were set to dominate F1 for years. Ford and Lotus decided that this was not good for the sport to continue with this exclusive arrangement so mutually agreed that it would be a "good thing" if the engine was made available to other teams to buy.

Different times.

Different attitude.

It's funny what some people forget.

It's not about different times, different attitude. It's same old, same old.

What happened in 2009?

[Eric Mc]

London424 said:

Eric Mc said:

Back in 1968, the best engine in F1 was the Ford DFV. Lotus had exclusive use of it and were set to dominate F1 for years. Ford and Lotus decided that this was not good for the sport to continue with this exclusive arrangement so mutually agreed that it would be a "good thing" if the engine was made available to other teams to buy.

Different times.

Different attitude.

It's funny what some people forget.

It's not about different times, different attitude. It's same old, same old.

What happened in 2009?

Tell me. I've forgotten.

[London424]

Eric Mc said:

London424 said:

Eric Mc said:

Back in 1968, the best engine in F1 was the Ford DFV. Lotus had exclusive use of it and were set to dominate F1 for years. Ford and Lotus decided that this was not good for the sport to continue with this exclusive arrangement so mutually agreed that it would be a "good thing" if the engine was made available to other teams to buy.

Different times.

Different attitude.

It's funny what some people forget.

It's not about different times, different attitude. It's same old, same old.

What happened in 2009?

Tell me. I've forgotten.

http://patronisef1.com/wordpress/f1news/fia-approve-engine-re-equalisation/

[London424]

And look what happened 2014 to 2015.

The intention was engines to be frozen with no development in-season. However Ferrari and Renault (Redbull really) had a moan up and pointed out there was no homologation date so here we are with in-season development within the token framework.

[dr_gn]

Eric Mc said:

Back in 1968, the best engine in F1 was the Ford DFV. Lotus had exclusive use of it and were set to dominate F1 for years. Ford and Lotus decided that this was not good for the sport to continue with this exclusive arrangement so mutually agreed that it would be a "good thing" if the engine was made available to other teams to buy.

Different times.

Different attitude.

Ford weren't running their own team; if a DFV won in any chassis, it was still a victory for a Ford engine. With Mercedes, it's different because they've invested millions in their own team.

[Walford]

dr_gn said:

Eric Mc said:

Back in 1968, the best engine in F1 was the Ford DFV. Lotus had exclusive use of it and were set to dominate F1 for years. Ford and Lotus decided that this was not good for the sport to continue with this exclusive arrangement so mutually agreed that it would be a "good thing" if the engine was made available to other teams to buy.

Different times.

Different attitude.

Ford weren't running their own team; if a DFV won in any chassis, it was still a victory for a Ford engine. With Mercedes, it's different because they've invested millions in BUYING their own team.

FTFY

[dr_gn]

Walford said:

dr_gn said:

Eric Mc said:

Back in 1968, the best engine in F1 was the Ford DFV. Lotus had exclusive use of it and were set to dominate F1 for years. Ford and Lotus decided that this was not good for the sport to continue with this exclusive arrangement so mutually agreed that it would be a "good thing" if the engine was made available to other teams to buy.

Different times.

Different attitude.

Ford weren't running their own team; if a DFV won in any chassis, it was still a victory for a Ford engine. With Mercedes, it's different because they've invested millions in BUYING their own team.

FTFY

Whether they bought it or not, it's their own team, and they've invested millions in it since it was bought.

[Eric Mc]

dr_gn said:

Ford weren't running their own team; if a DFV won in any chassis, it was still a victory for a Ford engine. With Mercedes, it's different because they've invested millions in their own team.

The important thing is that Lotus had an exclusive contract. They could have held Ford to that contract. They didn't - for the good of the sport.

[London424]

Eric Mc said:

dr_gn said:

Ford weren't running their own team; if a DFV won in any chassis, it was still a victory for a Ford engine. With Mercedes, it's different because they've invested millions in their own team.

The important thing is that Lotus had an exclusive contract. They could have held Ford to that contract. They didn't - for the good of the sport.

And as if by magic... http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/34548368

[andyps]

London424 said:

And as if by magic... http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/34548368

It depends upon the direction the wand of Mr Mateschitz ends up pointing as to whether this works out of course.

[Leroy902]

Hope red bull go back to Renault with their tails between their legs, and Renault tell them to fk off.

andyps said:

London424 said:

And as if by magic... http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/34548368

It depends upon the direction the wand of Mr Mateschitz ends up pointing as to whether this works out of course.

[London424]

andyps said:

London424 said:

And as if by magic... http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/34548368

It depends upon the direction the wand of Mr Mateschitz ends up pointing as to whether this works out of course.

I don't think so. He's in pretty much no position to bargain for anything.

Yes he can block the proposal but that doesn't help him at all. Ferrari and Merc won't be supplying RB with a current spec engine, and they can stamp their feet as much as they like.

I doubt he's not going to pull out and pay 500 million for the privelege. He can't say RB were forced out as he had a contract in place with Renault for 2016.

As always, when push comes to shove things get sorted out in F1.

[andyps]

The way I see it is that if he decides to leave because he can't get a 2016 engine and is only offered the 2015 one he may, either out of spite, or in the hopes of getting a last minute change of heart, vote against the proposal. I hope that isn't the case, but it could happen.

[London424]

andyps said:

The way I see it is that if he decides to leave because he can't get a 2016 engine and is only offered the 2015 one he may, either out of spite, or in the hopes of getting a last minute change of heart, vote against the proposal. I hope that isn't the case, but it could happen.

And if they are out of the sport they'll just re-vote in a couple of months time. They really don't have a leg to stand on.

[entropy]

Gaz. said:

entropy said:

I agree its a complex problem.

Viewing figures and attendances figures for NASCAR have drastically been down for a a number of years when it peaked in the 2000s.

A common theme regularly mentioned in Motorsport magazine's blogs is that Millennials aren't interested in things automotive. In the UK turning 17 and getting a driving license isn't so much of a rites of passage, sports bikes sales have been in decline; cost of insurance, particularly for young 'uns is expensive. Kids don't to show off their new rides but want smartphones, tablets, social media and whatnot.

Viewing figures for everything is in decline as more channels chase the same number of households. Look at soaps, Eastenders biggest audience was 30m in 1988 and was regularly above 20m in the 1980s and early 1990s. Their typical audience now is 6m with the odd peak of 10-12m every four years. Saturday evening entertainment shows like Blind Date, Strike It Lucky, Noel's House Party would piss 20m viewers each week while in May Cowell was over the moon that 12m watched the X-Factor as it was one of the biggest audiences for years especially when 8m was considered a jack pot.

If anyone thinks they can get 20m people to tune in regularly for a Grand Prix, East Enders or X Factor you'd better get your C.Vs in and you'll be naming your price too.

Last year the strongest TV markets was the US and UK even though UK TV figures have been going downhill since the SKY deal; British GP attendance is one of if not the best attended GPs over a weekend even though its been bloody expensive for years. Cf. Germany falling TV figures, falling GP attendance and they don't seem to warm to Vettel as they did with Schumi.

Eric Mc said:

dr_gn said:

Ford weren't running their own team; if a DFV won in any chassis, it was still a victory for a Ford engine. With Mercedes, it's different because they've invested millions in their own team.

The important thing is that Lotus had an exclusive contract. They could have held Ford to that contract. They didn't - for the good of the sport.

I'm more inclined to agree with dr_gn. In 1993 McLaren pressured Ford in to getting equal top spec engines even though Benetton were the factory team. Would've been a different story if it was a full on factory outfit making chassis and engine.

[Eric Mc]

I'm not sure of your point. Are you disputing that Lotus didn't agree to the engines they had exclusive use of being made available to others?

[entropy]

Eric Mc said:

I'm not sure of your point. Are you disputing that Lotus didn't agree to the engines they had exclusive use of being made available to others?

No, just highlighting different times, different eras. Self interest is far too prevalent due to money. F1 World Championship didn't pay out much pre-Bernie whereas the WCC has become more and more important over the years.

[andyps]

entropy said:

Eric Mc said:

I'm not sure of your point. Are you disputing that Lotus didn't agree to the engines they had exclusive use of being made available to others?

No, just highlighting different times, different eras. Self interest is far too prevalent due to money. F1 World Championship didn't pay out much pre-Bernie whereas the WCC has become more and more important over the years.

As there wasn't the collective bargaining that Bernie brought in (he bargains collectively, but doesn't distribute on the same basis) the rewards for Lotus would effectively have been greater then than an equivalent now. Money was very important then, and Chapman was probably a smarter operator in terms of money than most but still recognised the long term bigger picture of healthy competition bringing more money in the long term.