Would you pay £12,262 to race in Formula 1?

[williamp]

Article on the BBC website:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula...

States that the cost for the licence has increased by £368, and drivers are not signing it because they are unhappy. Drivers who scored points in last years championship have to pay £1,978 per point scored.

Anyhow, this is an open letter to all f1 team owners: I'll pat £12,262 for a full season in f1. If you pay for the travel expenses, naturally...

[Derek Smith]

This season they cost £7750 per driver plus £1565 (figures approximate) per point. There is an additional charge for something that Mosley reckons should be paid for of £2564. By my wak of working out that means Hamilton will have to fork out about £200,000 in order for the FiA staff to process his aplication for a super licence. I don't know how much they are paying their staff at the FiA but I'd suggest it is too much.

In 2007 the fees were £1285 per driver plus £340 per point. That's inflation for you. Although I think it is more to do with the inflation of Mosley's ego.

There is another thread on this: Mosley's cost savings

[A911DOM]

Yes yes, costs must be cut... (AS LONG AS OUR WALLETS ARE BRIMMING FULL OF ILL GOTTEN GAINS AS PART OF THE DEAL :MAD: )

Which way do these donkeys want it - cost savings, or continued massive expenditure mostly directed at the politics side of the sport.

There's race circuits and race teams dieing on their @rses out there and these greedy barstewards just want to keep bleeding the sport dry!

I cant blame the drivers for taking a stand on this - it is utterly outrageous. (Not that these guys cant afford a few quid here and there I know).

Blatant extortion imho.

[10 Pence Short]

Mosley's take on the argument was typical of the man:

"If you want to complain about the cost of the Super Licence, show me your earnings and I'll decide if it's reasonable"

Answer a valid question with a not-so-veiled threat. How apt.

[Graham]

IIRC they try to justify it on the basis that the income from the super licences goes towards the cost of providing medical cover and emergency services at the races.

If thats true its probably reasonably fair... and whilst hamiltons 200k is a lot, it doesnt exactly leave him destitute... and as a percentage of his earnings is probably quite low..

[Derek Smith]

Graham said:

IIRC they try to justify it on the basis that the income from the super licences goes towards the cost of providing medical cover and emergency services at the races.

The licence is just that, a licence. An authority to drive. The safety features are nothing to do with it. The circuits are obliged to provide such services. The bill should come out of Bernie's take. This is just Mosley putting up prices again. The suggestion of links to wages in disingenuous. By taking money from those who earn the most means of course that it is a tax. What really has raised the safety bar is the structure of the cars. Should the drivers be expected to pay for that?

The cost for LH to compete in F1 went up from £1250 or so to around £200,000 in two years.

[speedfreaky]

Do you get Air Miles?

[hondafanatic]

speedfreaky said:

Do you get Air Miles?

No, you get the whole plane.

[Graham]

Derek Smith said:

Graham said:

IIRC they try to justify it on the basis that the income from the super licences goes towards the cost of providing medical cover and emergency services at the races.

The licence is just that, a licence. An authority to drive. The safety features are nothing to do with it. The circuits are obliged to provide such services. The bill should come out of Bernie's take. This is just Mosley putting up prices again. The suggestion of links to wages in disingenuous. By taking money from those who earn the most means of course that it is a tax. What really has raised the safety bar is the structure of the cars. Should the drivers be expected to pay for that?

The cost for LH to compete in F1 went up from £1250 or so to around £200,000 in two years.

[snip from autosport]

Mosley said at the start of last year that the licence fee had increased so much because of the rising costs of safety.

"We spend a fortune on safety and most of it is for the benefit of the drivers," Mosley explained. "A lot of the people who have otherwise been meeting the bill said 'Hang on a minute, these drivers are all earning megabucks and we are spending a fortune to try and make sure they are safe. So hence the increase."

[/snip]

[Derek Smith]

Graham said:

Derek Smith said:

Graham said:

IIRC they try to justify it on the basis that the income from the super licences goes towards the cost of providing medical cover and emergency services at the races.

The licence is just that, a licence. An authority to drive. The safety features are nothing to do with it. The circuits are obliged to provide such services. The bill should come out of Bernie's take. This is just Mosley putting up prices again. The suggestion of links to wages in disingenuous. By taking money from those who earn the most means of course that it is a tax. What really has raised the safety bar is the structure of the cars. Should the drivers be expected to pay for that?

The cost for LH to compete in F1 went up from £1250 or so to around £200,000 in two years.

[snip from autosport]

Mosley said at the start of last year that the licence fee had increased so much because of the rising costs of safety.

"We spend a fortune on safety and most of it is for the benefit of the drivers," Mosley explained. "A lot of the people who have otherwise been meeting the bill said 'Hang on a minute, these drivers are all earning megabucks and we are spending a fortune to try and make sure they are safe. So hence the increase."

[/snip]

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that quote.

Neither am I sure what Mosley means by 'we'. What do the FiA pay towards safety?

He could, of course, mean the teams, ie the cost of developing the tremendous leaps in technology that have, in the main, been the means of keeping the drivers alive in accidents. If that's so, then are we suggesting that the money goes back to the teams? Probably not.

He could, of course, mean the circuits in providing the medical facilities. But that would be like charging police officer for the bullet proof vests the firearms units have to wear. The drivers are entitled to such protection. They are the ones risking their lives. Eccs should pay for this. Let's face it, precious little goes anywhere but to him. So why didn't Mosley charge Eccs?

I cannot see the logic, nor the justification, in charging drivers for something which, under present standards, they are entitled to, both morally and legally.

There may or may not be a justification for the swinging increase in licence fees. The only certain thing is that we haven't been told it.

The bottom line is that motor sport is dangerous. It is up to the organisers to make the circuits as safe as possible. The drivers are not the 'beneficiaries'. The drivers are the ones who drive the cars. They are the ones who are putting their lives on the line. To suggest they pay for what they are entitled to is, to my way of thinking, the logic of the asylum.

[RacingPete]

I currently hold an RACMSA licence and have to pay 90 (or whatever it was) pounds for the licence. I always thought that the licence went towards indemnity for me if I cause injury and also towards the motor sport safety foundation who fund training and equipment for marshals - though I have been known to be wrong

Surely if I am racing in the UK and have an accident, get treated by marshals, transported to the circuit medical centre, airlifted to hospital and treated I would think that was quite expensive and hope that this is the reason I have a licence. You may argue that the NHS cover this in this country, but if I am racing at Spa, who covers it then? I am after all putting myself at this risk.

Also if it is sole responsibility of the circuit owners to fund safety then this isn't going to help tracks survive financially and also not help us who race with our entry fees.

I think that as long as the money to the FIA is being filtered down to the regional authorities to help with safety then it would be good for the big earners to be helping the grass roots. (Obviously if this is where the money is going)

[dpbird90]

All Max wants is more hookers(Non-Nazi, of course) to whip his bacon rasher arse. That's the only reason why the cost is going up.

[Derek Smith]

RacingPete said:

I currently hold an RACMSA licence and have to pay 90 (or whatever it was) pounds for the licence.

I take your point. But - and no offence meant of course - you go on a circuit for your own entertainment, F1 drivers risk their neck to bring in big bucks to the circuit. We pay a considerable, but it must be reasonable otherwise we wouldn't pay it, sum to see the real galdiators fight it out on the circuit. They are the reason we go. The drivers are serving the circuits, not the other way around. For all Mosley's posturing, the driving force for safety has not been him but the law. Look what was threatened after Senna's death. Teams and circuits can't afford to cut corners (nor can LH I know) with regards to safety provisions as they too would be slaughtered.

What that means is that safety provisions are a right. The circuits must provide them. So must the teams provide adequate safety shells and such.

The cost of running a GP to the circuit owners is one price fits all: how much they can afford. All they can get money back on are the ticket sales and concessions. Eccs fixes the price. If circuits can't provide the correct level of safety at the price then there are two options: drop the price or drop the circuit.

But the argument that Mosley puts forward is disingenuous. The hike in licence fees has nothing to do with additional costs. It's a way of taking money out of the sport, hence his quite objectionable comment about the wages of the drivers. I'd like to see him disclose his sources of income.

[stockhatcher]

dead easy one to solve this, the drivers should agree to the increase so long as they are allowed to openly criticise the fia whenever they see reason too.

seot.

[RacingPete]

Derek Smith said:

I'd like to see him disclose his sources of income.

That I would like to see too.

[lewis1]

mosely really knows how to crack the whip when he wants!

[andyps]

RacingPete said:

I currently hold an RACMSA licence and have to pay 90 (or whatever it was) pounds for the licence. I always thought that the licence went towards indemnity for me if I cause injury and also towards the motor sport safety foundation who fund training and equipment for marshals - though I have been known to be wrong

Surely if I am racing in the UK and have an accident, get treated by marshals, transported to the circuit medical centre, airlifted to hospital and treated I would think that was quite expensive and hope that this is the reason I have a licence. You may argue that the NHS cover this in this country, but if I am racing at Spa, who covers it then? I am after all putting myself at this risk.

Also if it is sole responsibility of the circuit owners to fund safety then this isn't going to help tracks survive financially and also not help us who race with our entry fees.

I think that as long as the money to the FIA is being filtered down to the regional authorities to help with safety then it would be good for the big earners to be helping the grass roots. (Obviously if this is where the money is going)

I don't know about the financing of safety at circuits but do have some insight into how it operates at Harewood Hillclimb. Basically for active safety there is always an ambulance crew on hand, and that is paid for by the organisers - the circuit if you like. The cost for that effectively comes from the entry fees drivers pay, although we are trying hard to increase spectator numbers which would also help on this through gate fees. In addition to this there is the more passive safety, improvements made to the track and barriers etc. Again this is paid for by the organisers. To the best of my knowledge there is no payment made by the MSA towards the safety precautions, if anything they probably charge to inspect the provisions to ensure they meet their requirements. I doubt it is any different with the FIA and the circuits used for F1 - indeed I am pretty sure the FIA have safety inspections and dictate the requirements for an F1 circuit. Hopefully the drivers will ask MM where exactly the FIA spend their money.

Remember this is the guy who says that ex drivers are not qualified to make judgements about incidents on the track, and that his mates who only have to have been to one previous grand prix are better qualified. He is seemingly of the impression they aren't smart enough to know how things work and therefore ask him the question above. I hope they do.

[motormania]

Putting all the max 'the spank' moseley comments to one side. Let's look at the bigger picture...

These drivers earn well in excess of £1,000,000 per year through salary and endoresments. many live in tax exile meaning, unlike the normal working folk like us, they get to keep even more of their millions. And it's well know that the more you earn, the less you pay for things as gifts are freely supplied to such people to encourage the masses to follow in their hero's footsteps.

So taking that all into account, is paying £12K an issue.

NO FECKING WAY. Pay up and shut up drivers - you earn more in 1 year than most could dream of earning in a lifetime. Look around you and you'll see 100,000's loosing their jobs worldwide...

[IainT]

motormania said:

Putting all the max 'the spank' moseley comments to one side. Let's look at the bigger picture...

These drivers earn well in excess of £1,000,000 per year through salary and endoresments. many live in tax exile meaning, unlike the normal working folk like us, they get to keep even more of their millions. And it's well know that the more you earn, the less you pay for things as gifts are freely supplied to such people to encourage the masses to follow in their hero's footsteps.

So taking that all into account, is paying £12K an issue.

NO FECKING WAY. Pay up and shut up drivers - you earn more in 1 year than most could dream of earning in a lifetime. Look around you and you'll see 100,000's loosing their jobs worldwide...

£12k is one thing... what about £200k for a successful driver?

[Pvapour]

no, not when you can do this for £2 or 3k & 1/2 hour up the road. V10s at paul ricard circuit 700bhp no restriction

http://www.agsformule1.com/en/video/video-formula1...