F1 returning to Paul Ricard, alternating with Spa
Discussion
JonRB said:
We're getting to the point where the teams are already talking about having two entire sets of equipment so one can be in transit whilst the other is being used. If we have any more dates then not only will this happen but the personnel and drivers will get burned out. I really can't see how we can have more than 20 races a year.
I can see that the teams will have to have two different sets of personnel as well. A brilliant economy measure there. Or perhaps replacesments where each team is allowed to bring on a replacement during the season but only up to a limit and then they have to run one ore more light. Perhaps blood replacements would be allowed. How about a sort of KERS system where the crew are allowed to take amphetamines but only at certain times of the day. The Yanks have lots more, don't they, but they are all within spitting distance of one-another and the guys can go home between races.
I have to say that I was feeling burnt out over the last couple of years. Trying to work so many weekends around the GP proved almost impossible. I liked it best when there were a dozen or so. Each one was an event. I don't reckon it is just because I am approaching my dotage that I often could not remember what race was next. Or come to that what race had just happened.
Isn't there a three-month break in the concord agreement somewhere?
Derek Smith said:
I can see that the teams will have to have two different sets of personnel as well. A brilliant economy measure there. Or perhaps replacesments where each team is allowed to bring on a replacement during the season but only up to a limit and then they have to run one ore more light. Perhaps blood replacements would be allowed. How about a sort of KERS system where the crew are allowed to take amphetamines but only at certain times of the day.
... Isn't there a three-month break in the concord agreement somewhere?
I thought it was a 3 week break mid season, and a ban on "work" after the last race of the year.... Isn't there a three-month break in the concord agreement somewhere?
As for the 2 squads you mention, the simplest for this would be 2 sets of garage equipment/boardings etc, that while one is being used the other is transported and set up. Then only the race personnel and cars have a few days to get there. Which I believe is what quite a few of the teams have (or had - race and test squads)
as for going back to Le Castellet, nice plan, but if the access to the Aida circuit was not good enough (everyone effectively bussed in up a single track road) why would it be acceptable now? Surely Bernie could swing some payments to the Department and get the roads updated. It would also assist the sportscar races and testing thats held there.
Paul Ricard is owned by Bernie so the deal to race there was probably very easy!
It is a beautiful circuit but totally unsuitable for hosting a Grand Prix. Nowhere to stay, nowhere to watch, no way to get there as the circuit sits on top of hill on a lovely twisting single carriageway road.
Watch it on TV and you will be fine.
At least the weather should be better than Spa.
It is a beautiful circuit but totally unsuitable for hosting a Grand Prix. Nowhere to stay, nowhere to watch, no way to get there as the circuit sits on top of hill on a lovely twisting single carriageway road.
Watch it on TV and you will be fine.
At least the weather should be better than Spa.
Panclan said:
Doesn't Bernie own Paul Ricard?
JonRB said:
Well, at least Bernie isn't going to be constantly moaning about the circuit and dissing the owners since he owns the circuit.
Not that this is a conflict of interest or anything.
Not that this is a conflict of interest or anything.
Affalterbach said:
You know who owns Paul Ricard circuit don't you? Mr. B Ecclestone. No point in it not earning money is there.
vetteheadracer said:
Paul Ricard is owned by Bernie so the deal to race there was probably very easy!
Ok, I think that this nugget of information has been well and truly imparted now. 
.Adam. said:
No, you're correct. Let me re-phrase my post:
As Ferrari get extra money from Bernie for being historically important to the sport, do some of the historically important GP venues such as Spa get a discount?
I thought they did - I'm fairly sure Silverstone was paying less than the going rate as it was of some sort of historical significance. Either that or BE felt a GP in Britain was a must. As Ferrari get extra money from Bernie for being historically important to the sport, do some of the historically important GP venues such as Spa get a discount?
A quick search found this which may or may not be accurate, but makes interesting reading.
At the end of the day B.E, is a sad dweeb, he does not like Motor Racing that has to be evident over the Bahrain farce If last year was cancelled - what had changed in a year ....NOTHING.
Would we race in a dump like Sao Paulo yet miss Imola and the San Marino
In the year 2020 there will be 20 motor races all on circuits owned by B.E.
F1 coverage on sky , well that is two real charmers together Murdoch and Ecclestone ......I wonder what the children will turn out like ?
Would we race in a dump like Sao Paulo yet miss Imola and the San Marino
In the year 2020 there will be 20 motor races all on circuits owned by B.E.
F1 coverage on sky , well that is two real charmers together Murdoch and Ecclestone ......I wonder what the children will turn out like ?
Eric Mc said:
Aha - a sensible person at last.
Spa, as a racing circuit, was "built" almost 80 years ago and has had capital expenditure incurred on various changes over its long life. Capital expenditure is never looked on as a simple cost and is instead amortised over the expected useful life of the capital items purchased. Therefore, capital costs are "depreciated" over time and it is these annual depreciation costs which are offset against annual income - not the full capital costs.
The single biggest expense item which is outside the control of any circuit is the fee CVC choses to charge the venue.
So, when Bernie claims that a circuit canot afford to host a race, that is due to decisions HE has made as to how much he is going to charge them for the privilege of hosting that race.
THAT is the reason why we are seeing a shift to countries where the state is prepared to pay CVC's costs.
And why does CVC need to charge so much? Because it was funded by a reckless loan arrangement which they are struggling to satisfy and have been hovering on the verge of bankruptcy gfor a number of years.
The recent anouncement that F1 was being "floated" is an attempt by CVC to escape from the onerous finacial obligations they are struggling to meet.
Thanks Eric. Spa, as a racing circuit, was "built" almost 80 years ago and has had capital expenditure incurred on various changes over its long life. Capital expenditure is never looked on as a simple cost and is instead amortised over the expected useful life of the capital items purchased. Therefore, capital costs are "depreciated" over time and it is these annual depreciation costs which are offset against annual income - not the full capital costs.
The single biggest expense item which is outside the control of any circuit is the fee CVC choses to charge the venue.
So, when Bernie claims that a circuit canot afford to host a race, that is due to decisions HE has made as to how much he is going to charge them for the privilege of hosting that race.
THAT is the reason why we are seeing a shift to countries where the state is prepared to pay CVC's costs.
And why does CVC need to charge so much? Because it was funded by a reckless loan arrangement which they are struggling to satisfy and have been hovering on the verge of bankruptcy gfor a number of years.
The recent anouncement that F1 was being "floated" is an attempt by CVC to escape from the onerous finacial obligations they are struggling to meet.
JonRB said:
I'm sure he lies awake at night fretting that you think that of him. Not even his billions of pounds and immense power can console him after censure like that. 
Nor the enormous car collection.I bet that's scant reward when balanced against people on the internet not liking him very much.
Mutley said:
Derek Smith said:
I can see that the teams will have to have two different sets of personnel as well. A brilliant economy measure there. Or perhaps replacesments where each team is allowed to bring on a replacement during the season but only up to a limit and then they have to run one ore more light. Perhaps blood replacements would be allowed. How about a sort of KERS system where the crew are allowed to take amphetamines but only at certain times of the day.
... Isn't there a three-month break in the concord agreement somewhere?
I thought it was a 3 week break mid season, and a ban on "work" after the last race of the year.... Isn't there a three-month break in the concord agreement somewhere?
As for the 2 squads you mention, the simplest for this would be 2 sets of garage equipment/boardings etc, that while one is being used the other is transported and set up. Then only the race personnel and cars have a few days to get there. Which I believe is what quite a few of the teams have (or had - race and test squads)
as for going back to Le Castellet, nice plan, but if the access to the Aida circuit was not good enough (everyone effectively bussed in up a single track road) why would it be acceptable now? Surely Bernie could swing some payments to the Department and get the roads updated. It would also assist the sportscar races and testing thats held there.
I see you have thought it all out over equipment. But I think the mechanics might want a bit more rest. I spoke with the partner of a mechanic when they had 16 races per season and she said that once she went for all but four weeks without seeing him. She was quite anti F1. Went once and never again.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff