Bernie Ecclestone, Singapore, 2014

Ecclestone: Crisis? What crisis?

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Bernie Ecclestone, Singapore, 2014In the round-up: Bernie Ecclestone denies F1 faces a crisis as the loss of two entrants within days of each other leaves just nine teams contesting the final races.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

F1 not in crisis – Ecclestone (BBC)

“People say F1 is in crisis. Absolute nonsense. We’ve had a couple of teams in crisis.”

Ecclestone to discuss crisis with CVC (Autosport)

Vijay Mallya: “He recognises that the three smallest teams need to get more money in one form or another. We presented our case, he said he’d talk to Donald and get back to us.”

Mallya denies Force India ever considered boycott (Reuters)

“Force India principal and co-owner Vijay Mallya has silenced any further talk of a Formula One boycott, saying his team never intended to do anything other than race.”

Ecclestone rues Caterham appeal (Cporting Life)

“I think it’s a disaster. We don’t want begging bowls. If people can’t afford to be in Formula One they have to find something else to do.”

Williams: A missed opportunity (Sky)

Claire Williams: “We really thought he could have separated the Mercedes cars today.”

Lewis Hamilton: “I’m going to work as hard as I can tomorrow…” (Adam Cooper’s F1 Blog)

“There should be several, two or stops, so lots can go on during the race. So I’m generally excited and it’s not the only opportunity off the start.”

F1 engine freeze talks collapse (Autosport)

“The matter means that for now the engine freeze rules are staying in place for 2015, and there is now only limited time to find a deal before an F1 Commission meeting takes place later this month.”

Emmo on the boys from Brazil (McLaren)

“As I crossed the line to finish second, and drove around the slow-down lap with one arm aloft, saluting my fellow countrymen, I suddenly felt profoundly exhausted.”

Tweets

Comment of the day

Why are the cars so much quicker in Brazil this year?

Apart from the resurfacing and the teams improving their cars I think the fact that we have turbos at this altitude for the first time for a long period of time is playing a role.

And this track is optimal for the recovery systems due to the layout and short length. Because the regulations limit the amount of energy that can be deployed or recovered per lap, not per a set distance. (which is quite silly I think, though grand prix tracks are overall quite similar in length, there is a lot of variation for the margins F1 operates at.
@Mateuss

From the forum

Happy birthday!

No F1 Fanatic birthdays today

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Happy birthday to McLaren team principal Eric Boullier who is 41 today!

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 63 comments on “Ecclestone: Crisis? What crisis?”

    1. Turbos hate altitude, not so much on performance but reliability, there’s electronics and fuel mixtures to amend the issues of altitude but I wouldn’t be surprised to see many DNF’s in dry conditions, in particular FP2 Alonso like stoppages.

      1. @peartree don’t N/A engines hate altitude even more? JB said that these were the most powerful engines he’s ever had at Interlagos.

        1. @fer-no65 As @peartree said, the turbos hate it for the reliability aspect, but as you say N/A engines are punished on performance, so you’re both correct on that.

          1. @hunocsi @peartree mind explaining why they lose reliability? curious !

            1. @fer-no65 They spin faster to achieve the same pressure to feed the engine, that puts more mechanical stresses on the turbo.

              You can understand it better if you imagine the opposite, what happens when you take a spinning blade in the air and put in water.

            2. @mateuss uhm, don’t get it. Don’t compressors spin as fast as the exhaust gasses spin the turbine? are exhaust gasses coming at more speed at higher altitudes because of the lower ambient temperature?

            3. @fer-no65
              It’s more easy to think about pressure rather than fluid speed.

              There is less air pressure, less resistance to slow down the intake turbine and bigger pressure differential at the exhaust turbine, going from positive engine pressure to a lower than usual air pressure.

              Have you never played with some kind of rotors in water?:P

              There are many different ways to think about this. Lets just think about the intake turbine. It reaches it’s terminal speed, when the force that is spinning it has equalized with the force, that is coming from the air pressure, that turbine has scooped up from the atmosphere inside it. Because there is less air molecules per given volume, the turbine has to spin faster to scoop up bigger volume of air to have the same amount of air inside it, to equalize the forces.

              Why does the same object with a parachute fall faster on Mars?

      2. @peartree Now is this really true or you’re just guessing? I remember asking the same last year and never got a definitive answer :(
        But if you’re correct then these engines will have a real hard time next year in Mexico city’s 2,300m altitude!

        1. @mantresx Read the comment below for more facts. I don’t think fern 65 also understood the effect of the added friction, wear and heat.

      3. Altitude is not a problem for turbos.
        They will spool faster and reach the surge line faster, so you have to make sure to have a working overspeed control but other then that altitude is not a real problem.

        1. I gave the facts and @mateuss gave me help defending it. In the end you you can’t see it still @fer-no65 and RenM just look at 3 turbo failures at the end of the weekend. With Alonso and Romain ending in smokes and Sutil opting to get a new one before hand, not to mention the drivers that may have chosen turbos with less mileage.

          1. @peartree I’m trying to understand it, man… we’re not all geniouses…

      4. Indeed, I remember reading those stories from back in the day, in the 1980s, of the turbos getting a pounding in the high altitudes of the Österreichring, Kyalami and those kind of high-speed, high-altitude tracks.

      5. Why do you say that turbos don’t like altitude?
        Why did Guy Martin put a turbo into his motorcycle when driving Pikes Peak?

        If you increase the speed of the turbo, then surely there would be no troubles with the turbo nor the engine itself

      6. I suspect that the TERS system will prevent them from over-reving in the thin air, which must be what you are alluding to I think, many aeroplane engines are turbo-charged also.

    2. People forget what Ecclestone’s definition of crisis is : is ecclestone getting paid? If so, there is no crisis.

      Remember to apply this logic to everything and you’ve no confusion. Bahrain, double points, falling viewership, empty stands, double points, failing teams, 5 car grids, the answer is always the same.

      1. Comment of the day or even the year!

      2. Don’t forget: double points.

      3. Is mentioning double points only once an offence now? If so…arrest strontium! :D

        P.S. Double Points :P

    3. GOOD to see the Williams in full Rothmans livery and not those lame non-tobbacco “Racing” liveries

    4. Just to clarify, with regard to the Caterham crowdfunding, am I right in thinking that what they are asking is for either one of two things:

      1. Just pay them enough to make the last race and then collapse

      2. Pay them enough so that they can recover and become a profitable business which makes money for itself. So essentially what fans are paying for is to allow a business to survive so it can keep / start making money. It is just ridiculous.

      1. As I read it it’s just 1.

        Either way, it’s absolutely ridiculous.

      2. Todd (@braketurnaccelerate)
        9th November 2014, 4:07

        Caterham’s administrators are simply wanting to get on the grid in Abu Dhabi so that they can claim 10th place, and collect an extra $40M or whatever the prize is. They will never field a car in 2015, this I can guarantee, and would bet my house on it.

        They are basically trying to scam F1 fans out of $3M so they can claim the prize.

        1. Which will enable them to pay their employees and creditors, of which many are real people with real lifes, children, houses and life savings.

          1. Which is sad, and all, but I fail to see how that is the responsibility of the fans to get them paid, over and above the money they pump in from Sky, TV licence, GP attendance and merchandise.

            The fans owe them nothing, to be frank.

            1. You don’t have to owe someone something to help them out.

              And the fact that it is really Bernie/CVC’s responsibility just makes it even sweeter. It makes CVC and Bernie look absolutely pathetic. If Caterham pulls this off, it’s gonna be such a media disaster for CVC that they will probably never get over it.

            2. It’s not like fans just give away money, don’t they receive products from Caterham? Like front-wing, rear-wing which is pretty cool.

          2. Probably the only reason it makes sense to send some money to them, yes. To help the employees and small business creditors. Although most of the money will probably go to the Malaysian bank and to the administrator anyway.

          3. Sadly there is no guarantee that any of the money in that scenario would ever be seen by the “little people” with families and such. Laws differ from nation to nation, but there may be many hands out that are first in line to any funds Caterham may have.

            Her in the US many people are under the false notion that employees get paid first when a company fails. Speaking from personal experience, that is not always or even usually the case.

            Fans have already paid through ticket sales, tv packages, purchasing F1 merch, sponsor’s products, manufacturer’s cars, etc. Of course a lot of that money was filtered out by Bernie and his pals long before the teams get their “fair” share.

        2. But Bernie said yesterday that even Sauber wont receive those 9th place money, neither will Caterham I quess

        3. I’d think about it if it was an investment, but not as a donation. They need $3M to get their hands on ~$50M, sure i’ll pitch in for my share of that $50M

      3. @strontium 2.35 million pounds (plu the prize money which should be around 15 million?) is never going to be enough to keep the team from dissapearing.

        I get the feeling that this crowfounding is just the way the administrators thought to get some money back and pay debts…

      4. I read it as a gamble: Caterham go to the last race and try to finish 9th, thus meaning they’d take Marussia’s place and prize money in the WCC.

    5. I don’t get it, so is Bernie full on senile now? He just admitted the other day he was the reason that there were teams in a full on or semi financial crisis and the reasons the CVC money was an issue, but that he couldn’t fix it. Now there is no crisis at all, does this guy eat a brand of cereal called enigma in the morning cause that’s what we get from him during the rest of the day or any time he speaks.

      1. This is the Bernie we have known and xxxxxx for 30 odd years, his senility is temporary, sporadic and convenient.

    6. Every time Bernie opens his mouth speak I am reminded of a quote from the book, The Count of Monte Cristo. Edmond Dantes says upon seeing Monsieur De Villefort digging holes in his backyard, “huh, he’s gone mad.”

    7. How can anyone prefer the sound of today’s engines to the amazing Renault V10 in that FW19?

      1. i don’t think no one prefer the new sound, but it’s not a big deal either

        1. We will see nxt year with race attendance.
          Most of my friends are not going back to any races. It’s a bigger deal than F1 is allowing people ot think.

          1. paul sainsbury
            9th November 2014, 10:15

            Spot on. I have been to 32 races, and there is NO WAY I will be going back until we have cars that sound like racing cars again. When I went to the GP in Barcelona this year, people were actually LAUGHING at the sound. They used to be scared……..

          2. I’ve been to the track 2 times this this year (Pre-seaosn testing @ Jerez & The Spanish Gp) & will be going to another race next year.

            I think the new engines sound great, Its true that there quieter but the actual sound they make is so much better than the V8’s which just made a very loud, flat noise which I never found that interesting to listen to.
            Plus you couldn’t really listen to them anyway because they were so damn loud you had to wear ear protection, At least with the quieter engines now you can properly listen to & enjoy the sound.

            Going back to the V10’s, Yes they sounded better but were never going back to the V10’s (Or V12’s) so its pointless to keep going on about it. The engine manufacturer’s want the sort of smaller capacity turbo’s with energy recover which we have now, They don’t want V10/V12 or even V8’s, They had input in this formula & this is the sort of formula they asked for, Just as they did when consulted by Indycar (Which also moved to V6 Turbo engines recently).

            V10’s are dead, V12’s are dead & the V8’s in F1 were just horrible in terms of noise & the way they had no torque. At least this years power units are proving to be a challenge for the drivers right foot which is something F1 has been missing for a while now.

            So to end, I love the new V6 turbo’s & will gladly continue attending race tracks to go watch F1 as will my friends/family who have also been to races this year & been fond of the change.

          3. you europeans complain a lot about the tickets price, so if there’s one reason we’ll be seeing less people on track is because of money, not lack of noise.

      2. @jarnooo @matiascasali @s2g-unit And Paul. I Don’t prefer it to the V10, I don’t think there’s a greater sound than the V10.

        But these are easily my second best sounding engines. I love them, and they actually make me want to go to a race for the first time in ages simply because they aren’t stupidly loud. The coverage on TV needs more work, but I love them, all the new sounds we get, hearing the crowd, being able to talk to people to actually make a day out of going to an F1 event instead of getting a headache and getting deafened every time a car comes buy. Some people are intoxicated by this, and I’m genuinely sorry for these people that miss out, but you can’t expect them in this day and age to go back to the ‘dinosaur’ engines of the past. Doesn’t make sense. Times change, things change, some people like, some people don’t.

      3. The sound picked up from the onboard cameras seems to match some elements of F1’s fanbase on the whole engine sound issue – voluminous distorted shrieking.

        I really do find this argument very tiresome – by this sort of logic, the turbocharged cars from the 1980’s are not real racing cars since they were as quiet as the current V6 engines are.

        @s2g-unit, it’s worth noting that the engine noise has had relatively little impact on circuit attendance figures this year. In fact, some circuits, such as Silverstone, have actually reported an increase in attendance figures in comparison to last year.
        Vettel’s utter domination in the latter part of 2013 turned away a lot more people than the engine note has; people are more interested in the Rosberg-Hamilton duel than Vettel cruising to yet another effortless victory.

        1. They were nothing like as quiet as this year’s cars, although still much quieter than the normally aspirated cars of the time.

    8. Much like when Toto offered Ferrari a calculator when debating the engine costs, I think the teams need to offer Bernie a dictionary:

      crisis
      noun
      a time of intense difficulty or danger.
      a time when a difficult or important decision must be made.

      Two teams have gone into administration this year, one has completely folded, the other is going cap in hand to fans. There are 3 other teams sailing very close the the wind financially, two of them resorting to pay drivers to limp along.

      You have four cars funded by a drinks company who could on a whim decide that F1 no longer positively represents their brand and pull out.

      Declining viewing figures, declining attendance, increased criticism by the media and fans of the sport.

      Fits the bill of being in crisis to me.

      1. To me too @philipgb. I listened to that interview with Bernie feeling a mix of sadness and disgust. I really am not able to see anything but a crisis in this.

        1. I go back to mid 2009 and the threatened breakaway/rival series. What would stop the smaller teams from doing that again? Sure you might have Ferrari, Mercedes, Mclaren and Red Bull in F1 but a full grid of budget-capped teams (at a 50-100 million cap) with engines that fans like, at tracks that drivers love rather than Tilkedromes (Austin excepted), with proper racing tyres, rules which limit downforce so no gimmicks like DRS are necessary would get my vote. I’ve always loved underdogs – Jordan, Minardi, Leyton House, Toleman, even how Stewart became Jaguar which then became RBR and fought its way to the top – I not for one minute think that stories like that will ever happen again in the current environment with the rules as they are and with the team funding that currently exists.

          Big sticky tyres, keep the engine manufacturers happy with turbos but simply make the regulations stipulate 1.6 turbos with no hybrid systems to reduce costs (I challenge any F1 fan not to like the sound of Senna’s MP4/4 for example), no refuelling, simple two element front wings and limited ground effect (like GP2) to allow cars to follow one another more easily, and lets say a $75 million budget cap. Tracks like Mugello, Watkins Glen, Phillip Island, the new Wales circuit, Long Beach can join the best of the current tracks – Spa, Suzuka, Silverstone, Monza, Montreal, Monaco (If F1 allow it), Austin, Sepang, Hungaroring, Interlagos – and a couple of lost tracks like Imola, Istanbul and Brands Hatch for an 18 race calendar.

          Proper race cars, proper race teams (as opposed to corporate marketing tools), and proper race tracks for proper drivers and proper race fans.

          I’d watch it.

        2. I don’t feel particularly compelled to defend BE, and I certainly agree F1 needs some tweaks, but I also do not think it is in crisis.

          Lesser teams struggling is far from new in F1. Resorting to pay drivers is not new either. The four cars funded by a ‘drinks company’ are getting a bigger piece of the pie along with some other top teams because they have guaranteed they will be in F1 through 2020.

          Can things be improved? Of course. That is always the case. But I think we will know when F1 is truly in crisis when the bigger teams truly feel the entity they play within is threatened, hence their livelihood, and then they will suddenly be very agreeable to concessions to help the general health of the series.

          As I say I fully understand there’s room for improvement but I also think that whatever the viewership and attendance numbers are, and whatever the reasons for their current state, there are still billions in F1 to play with and many many things they can do with what they have before there is a legitimate crisis.

    9. We are having Regulation changes at every possible times but i really feel its time for sorting FIA to FOM and CVC and every thing at authority stages of F1 to get sensible. We need resurrection at these places first if any ” Real F1 ” need to come out from this ” artificial f1 “

      1. I don’t think they are going down quite yet. They just landed a new package from Perez (or are landing that right now) and will get a decent amount from their finishing position in the championship for the last 2 years @ruliemaulana

        But sure enough FI, Sauber, Lotus and to an extent Williams are far from in a comforable situation, while STR is only still there because Mateschitz will only dump it if someone pays him for taking over the team (and who would currently)

        1. I hear rumours Carlos Sainz Jnr has been asked to bring $20m.

    10. Dear Bernie, Of course F1 is in crisis. Small teams cannot survive because of ridiculous commercial agreements (for the benefit of the sport, not for your daughter’s expensive habits) and even more ridiculous sporting regulations (DRS, Double Points, Tyre Compound Rule, Standing restarts, etc.) We keep going to countries where the people (a) cannot afford to go to the race because of the ticket prices driven up by your greed and (b) don’t care about the race. Empty grandstands does not look good you know. People want to watch and share clips on youtube. Not watch it weeks later on the Formula1 website (which is tragic by the way). Your audience is shrinking and at this rate the golden goose is going to die. Get with the times and embrace technology. Also get a proper haircut.

    11. RB and ferrari should just let merc block partial engine defrost for 2015, then push trough complete unfreeze for 2016 when they don’t need merc’s permission and be done with it. It’s very clear merc is simply stalling the situation in an attempt to further derail ferrari’s and renault’s efforts. I just hope it comes back and bites them in their backside some day in the future.
      Listening to wolf talking about costs after they’ve outspent renault and ferrari 3 to 1 is the single most hilarious thing ever.

    12. Well if it’s not a crisis yet Bernie is working on it. Not agreement on viable funding for teams, the possibility of Rosberg winning on double points, and apparently now the hybrid engines might be thrown out after all the expense and fanfare.

      Just waiting for Red Bull to say it’s not fair and they’re pulling out if they can’t win.

      1. Problem is…define viable funding? How far do you go trying to help lesser teams stay afloat when nobody forced them to be in F1 to begin with and when they presented their case and won their entry into F1 based on their viability and desire to be there.

        Hybrid engines might be thrown out? Says who?

        And, according to BE, the likes of RBR get a bigger piece of the pie because they have guaranteed their presence in F1 through 2020, so you’ll be waiting 5 or 6 more years yet.

        Not saying there aren’t problems nor tons of room for improvement, but crisis? I don’t think so. There’s still too much money in F1 for that to be the case.

    13. Ecclestone? Who?

      Cant wait for this above statement to be a reality

    14. Pretty much Bernie’s normal imitation of Marie Antoinette; would that the end result were (figuratively) the same…

    15. There is a crisis and there isn’t a crisis.

      There is a crisis for fans who believe F1 is about soul and passion.

      Anyone who is only interested in shareholder returns is oblivious to the ‘crisis’.

      Think of the Supertramp album cover. If you are someone who believes F1 is about soul and passion, you aren’t the guy in the deck chair.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
    If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.