Felipe Massa, Williams, Albert Park, 2015

F1 is heading for collapse, warns Mosley

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Felipe Massa, Williams, Albert Park, 2015In the round-up: Former FIA president Max Mosley warns the gulf in spending between the biggest and smallest F1 teams has grown so large it threatens the future of the sport.

Links

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

Max Mosley warns of Formula One 'collapse' (The Telegraph)

"You can sit all the teams down and say ‘Look, collectively we’ve got a massive problem because some of you have enough money, but most of you don’t and if we go on like this Formula One is going to collapse, so I am inviting you all to agree to a change’. "

WEC boss steers away from F1 comparisons (Reuters)

"The angle they (Formula One organisers) have adopted for the public is totally different. We keep the door open, we have a low price, we try to offer different value."

Manor: Ferrari progress bodes well (Autosport)

"Once the 2015 challenger is ready, Ferrari will provide the team with this year's engine, which has also propelled Sauber back into points contention after the Swiss team endured a 2014 season to forget."

Hamilton unsure over new deal (Sky)

"Obviously at the last race I said it would be done within a week, this is my first time negotiating myself and you don’t know how many times I’ve had to read about 80 pages – it is so much reading and it is all in lawyer jargon. So it has been a quite a pain in the backside to be honest."

Mick Schumacher: Expectations must not be 'built too high' (BBC)

"Mick Schumacher was kept away from reporters who had assembled to see his official debut, in which he finished eighth, fifth and 12th out of 33 drivers across three sessions."

Robert De Niro sars Enzo Ferrari. Eastwood forse alla regia (La Repubblica, Italian)

Robert de Nero is tipped to play the role of Enzo Ferrari in a forthcoming film.

Chinese Grand Prix Betting: No Shanghai Surprise If Mercedes Come Back Fighting (Unibet)

My Chinese Grand Prix preview for Unibet.

Tweets

Snapshot

Mick Schumacher, Van Amersfoort Racing, German Formula 4 testing, Oschersleben, 2015

Michael Schumacher’s son Mick had his first public test in a Formula Four car yesterday. He will compete in the German F4 championship with the Van Amersfoort Racing team, who ran Max Verstappen in the European F3 series last year.

Comment of the day

Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Albert Park, 2015Yesterday’s Comment of the Day argued there is little point in attending an F1 race in person – a view many disagreed with:

In 2012 I went to Monaco, Silverstone, Spa and Suzuka. Before each race I got comments from family members such as “motor sport is so boring” or “you only see one part of the race track” and “it is just cars whizzing by”.

How wrong they all were.

Monaco was an amazing experience with the fan zone where you can race other fans in a gaming simulator. Eat panini and crepes and then walk the track (dodging fork lifts) literally minutes after the race is over. I sat in a section in qualifying where you can see directly into the pits and the race was right in front of a big TV screen so you can keep tabs on all the action.

Silverstone was just as amazing for different reasons. Wearing wellington boots and sloshing around the mud. Eating roast pork rolls. Took my phone up to the fence next to Wellington Straight and got amazing footage of the F1 cars screaming past with in five to ten metres. Got a seat in Luffield section right infront of a massive screen and it was the area where Mark Webber made his race-winning pass on Alonso.

The Spa race was super-incredible. Ate waffles all weekend. Got footage of the cars screaming up Eau Rouge, Got tickets in general admittance on the Kemmel Straight in front of big screen and enjoyed the race with people of like mind and socio economic background.

Apart from the city events like Melbourne, Montreal and Monaco… Suzuka is the most fan friendly track in the world. Has a theme park, massive international food fair behind the S-curves. Paths leading to all sections. Crazy fans all dressed up. Stadium stand at the first corner has a huge view of the track.
@Resort2Spa

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Mad Eric, Slr, Dirgegirl, Traverse and Traverse!

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 Jacques Villeneuve who is 44 today.

On this day 20 years ago Damon Hill won the Argentinean Grand Prix, which was held for the first time since 1981.

Here’s the start of the race which saw Mika Hakkinen (McLaren), Bertrand Gachot (Pacific), Karl Wendlinger (Sauber) and Luca Badoer (Minardi) all retire:

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

  • 89 comments on “F1 is heading for collapse, warns Mosley”

    1. it’s a shame for the F1 to have used that booooring track of Argentina. The old stock cars uses a much better layout wich would be a delight for F1! take a look here and look for the 12 layout

      1. @matiascasali Hehe, lets go back to Circuito No.15, last used in 1981 :)

      2. One of the things I enjoyed from the 1995 Argentina video was the drivers running back to the pits to go get the T car in order take the restart. Bit nostalgic, and I know T cars are no more due to extra costs, but it was always fun to see a driver take the restart and do well in a car not set up for him.

      3. The old track was castrated to produce more laps so the spectators could see the cars more often (idea of……….??? ;-))

    2. DK (@seijakessen)
      9th April 2015, 0:18

      Always amusing to hear Max talk about F1’s financial woes, since his illicit deal with Bernie in 2000 is the exact reason why 50% of the grid is broke, and will remain broke for as long as the rights are bounced from one private equity firm to another.

      He’s such a disingenuous snake. All of F1’s current problems are a result of his ineptitude. Well, I suppose his best friend Bernie would disagree since Bernie became a billionaire out of it all, and Max only managed a few hundred million. Yeah those commercial rights sure were worth the equivalent of $3 million a year for 100 years.

      Too bad most of the fans still don’t get CVC will simply strip mine F1 till nothing is left before passing off the carcass to some other entity that thinks they can do a better job.

      Also don’t forget Max’s moronic need to pretend as if he knew something about technical matters and how best to “guide” the sport…when his only real experience was occupying some corner space at March Engineering in the 70s. Remember how wrong he got the 3-groove tires because like a dolt, he didn’t understand they would provide less rolling and aerodynamic resistance due to the reduced amount of rubber on the tire, to say nothing of the cars becoming narrow track in ’98?

      Mosley deserves a special place in hell.

      1. “Mosley deserves a special place in hell.”

        He does, the place where nazi ho’s spank you all day.

        1. LMAO!!! I’m not sure how to take that exactly as Max may actually like that! But it’s a funny image.

    3. DK (@seijakessen)
      9th April 2015, 0:19

      Always amusing to hear Max talk about F1’s financial woes, since his illicit deal with Bernie in 2000 is the exact reason why 50% of the grid is broke, and will remain broke for as long as the rights are bounced from one private equity firm to another.

      He’s such a disingenuous snake. All of F1’s current problems are a result of his ineptitude. Well, I suppose his best friend Bernie would disagree since Bernie became a billionaire out of it all, and Max only managed a few hundred million. Yeah those commercial rights sure were worth the equivalent of $3 million a year for 100 years.

      Too bad most of the fans still don’t get CVC will simply strip mine F1 till nothing is left before passing off the carcass to some other entity that thinks they can do a better job.

      Also don’t forget Max’s need to pretend as if he knew something about technical matters and how best to “guide” the sport…when his only real experience was occupying some corner space at March Engineering in the 70s. Remember how wrong he got the 3-groove tires because like a dolt, he didn’t understand they would provide less rolling and aerodynamic resistance due to the reduced amount of rubber on the tire, to say nothing of the cars becoming narrow track in ’98?

      Mosley deserves a special place where the fire burns.

      1. +1
        Exactly right

      2. Precisely what I was thinking! +100!

      3. I wish half of what you are saying was even correct. The FIA was forced to sell the commercial rights by the EU. As it was deemed to be a conflict to adjudicate F1 and to also profit from it. Hence, what you call an ‘illicit’ deal was struck with BE, who, with all due respect, was the best candidate. Furthermore, the price was based on a ‘gift’ amount that would not be deemed a conflict as was the time-duration. Land leases of 100 years are commonplace and essentially this deal is similar in structure. Would you rather buy an asset with a 15 year lease or 100? The issue now is the FiA’s new leader and his approach to keeping his hand’s off F1 completely.

        1. I do not find your argument convincing. The fact that 100 year leases are “commonplace” in one area of law does not mean that it is a _norm_ for all. In particular, given that no-one really knew what will the value be in a few decades, there was a very good reason to lease for a shorter time and then offer it again. Also, the conflict of interest you refer to could have been solved differently. A non-profit organization set up in such a way that it is not directly controlled by FIA would make it much more likely that money generated by F1 would stay in F1.

      4. Well, yeah. Max did sell for a lousy amount of money @seijakessen. Then again, at the time there weren’t many interested parties so BE was more or less the only potential buyer so its unlikely Max would have had an easy job finding higher bidders.

        And lets not forget the the contract is full of get out clauses, some of which I think Mosley would not have hesitated to use to either get control back or get a better deal from Bernie (BE standing trial, getting low on cars on the grid, scrapping European races, etc).

        1. @bascb Perhaps the number of potential buyers depends on how hard one searches and what terms one offers. In particular, there was absolutely no need to give a 100yrs lease. Just imagine if the lease was only for 15 years. We would now have a line-up of interested parties and FIA might even be able to impose some conditions on the lease, for instance regarding profit distribution structure.

          1. I doubt the number of potential buyers as well as imposing conditions, such as anything to do with profit. Remember, it’s a conflict of interest for the FiA to be involved commercially. Nevertheless, as BasCB (@bascb) said … re: “get out clauses, some of which I think Mosley would not have hesitated to use to either get control back or get a better deal from Bernie (BE standing trial, getting low on cars on the grid, scrapping European races, etc).” These would essentially to a stronger-willed FiA head serve the same purpose as a 15 year lease.

      5. I was asking myself: So Mr. Mosley thinks he has nothing to do with it?

        Guys, I think CVS is also to blame, they have the power to fire the almost century old Bernard Ecclestone.

        By the way, have anyone read Autosport today? Dieter Rencken wrote: “One would have thought that the sport would have
        learned from the near-universal derision the introduction
        of double points for the 2014 finale received. But no, F1’s
        top dogs have discussed a format that will prove even
        more controversial – namely 20 points awarded per race,
        divided 10 each for victory and pole position. Since
        when does topping qualifying equal winning grands
        prix, particularly given the importance of tyre strategy?”

        I think only a coup d’etat can save us from disaster!

      6. F1 Spain @ Catalunya Stand-A ticket price = €369

        MotoGP Spain @ Catalunya Stand-A ticket price = €99

        There seems to be so much MotoGP is getting right and so much F1 is getting wrong

    4. Mosley, fails to mention that it was collusion between him and BCE that has caused this situation, Billions of dollars have been siphoned out of F1 since Mosley as FIA chief gifted for a pittance the commercial rights of F1 to Bernie, not only has this allowed nearly half of the revenue from F1 to be spirited away by Bernie and his partners but it has also lead to the unfair distribution of revenue amongst the teams by Bernie as he negotiates favourable deals with the major teams at the expense of the smaller teams in order to break up team unity and keep an overall higher percentage of revenue at the end of the contractual periods.

    5. about what manor is saying on the ’15 ferrari PU, it must also be a relief for Haas, isn’t?

    6. I just want to leave this article here which I think it summarize very well the problems and maybe solutions for F1! I also want to highlight at least these 2 parts that I fully agree and think would solve the main problems for now, until something better is arranged.

      The first is about TV coverage and its importance for the sport:

      The model not only has a knock-on effect of reducing sponsorship interest in line with the declining eyeballs, but it makes it borderline impossible for F1 to attract the next generation of fans. Without free-to-air coverage, many of those currently following the sport (not to mention many of those working in it) would not have stumbled across and fallen in love with Formula 1. In order to promote F1 to a new audience, free-to-air broadcasters should be given free access to a number of ‘grand slam’ races with a view to securing the next generation of viewers.

      The second is about money distribution which I feel the need to applaud because it’s the best and most fair solution out there and the big teams would still gain more because they would be more successful in development and other areas:

      Profits should be split in such a way that basic operating costs – say power units, mandatory crash testing, and travel – are covered for all entrants through an equitable distribution of x percent of the pot, with the remainder being divvied up by championship position to reward success on track.

      Would like to hear all your opinions and maybe different and better ideas.

    7. Is it increased social media peddeling rumours that F1 is in such a state as when they were testing when they wanted and could develop engines when and however much they wanted there was no situation like now. How has it come to this when cost cutting measures started in 2007 with an engine freeze. Basically 8 years ago when there was not a major financial crisis in F1 they started cost cutting and now most teams have no money. Ferrari always got their magic payment, there was testing…etc. What the hell has happened?

      1. Good point. Cost cutting appears to be killing the sport.
        For me the show is all about the teams of hundreds of people creating the best cars handed to the best drivers they can afford to try and win. I also enjoy the spectacle of the circus that follows F1 (the glitz, glamor & exuberance) and the tantalizing detail that the teams have to work to, to ensure they are competitive on track, spending £100k on a part no one can see that makes the car go 0.05 seconds quicker is nuts but is the difference between winning and loosing, which ultimately is what the sport is about.

    8. Wow 80 pages,that’s too much or?

      1. You would think the first thing LH would do would be demand all contracts be wrote in ‘Plain English’ vs ‘Legalese’ – how could someone in such a position of power as LH currently is not make that his first demand. I hope this “I’m a grown up” moment works out for him…

        (For more info google Legalese VS. Plain English)

      2. Why won’t he hired a lawyer to review the contract?

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          9th April 2015, 5:08

          @celeste, exactly.
          That’s what his manager would have done; delegate where possible.

          1. @coldfly I’m worry about Lewis. Even if he wants to follow the “Vettel-no agent” model, Vettel has the sense to hired a lawyer and to ask for the advice from Schumacher’s agent.

            1. He does have a lawyer. Are we forgetting his words last week…

              “The contract is 99.6 complete, it’s with the lawyers now”

              It still does not mean that he’s not going to read what the contract stipulates.

            2. He DOES have lawyers, or solicitors for us english, to deal with legal matters but he still has to approve certain things and I guess that would mean reading what he is signing. Plus… id say reading something you are signing yourself is pretty good practice, no? I mean once its signed its signed and I wouldn’t put my name to anything just on someone elses say so, solicitor or not. If you think otherwise then I have a few things that require your signature. No need to read it

            3. I think he has a lawyer but people should read the contract themselves too.

            4. @jcost yeah I do read my contracts, but my lawyer explainme the “lawyer stuff”, that´s the reason I pay him the big.

      3. The contract got a font size 20. That´s why the 80 pages LOL.

      4. The Blade Runner (@)
        9th April 2015, 8:31

        Poor Lewis. Having to concentrate on the detail of a near record-breaking multi-million pound contract where you don’t have to share any of it with an agent must be sheer hell…

        1. Did Lewis say it was hell, or did he say it was a pain in the backside?

          Can’t beat good ol’ hatred.

    9. I watched some BTCC on Sunday it was great. Lots of action, 26 cars on the grid, many manufacturers represented, good stewarding when it came to close quaters driving.

      Generally very fun to watch.

      I know it is comparing two very different classes of motorsport, but I wish that F1 could learn from the grass roots stuff.

      1. uneedafinn2win
        9th April 2015, 4:46

        I’m sure BTCC loves the fact you just called them grassroots…😃

        1. haha, although the grassroots that support the BTCC (ie: MSA Formula 4) is always good fun. Always worth watching the whole support package.

        2. @uneedafinn2win @eurobrun

          I though someone would pick me up on calling BTCC grass roots. However, I ment in relation to F1.

          BTCC is far less alienated from genuine motorsport fans compared to F1 in my opinion. That is what I ment by grassroots. It is purely about good racing/actuon and it is fun to watch. It seems to respect casual and fanatic motorsport fans. It has good support series. It does not seem to employ too many gimmicks and short term fixes.

          Maybe grassroots was the wrong term….but I cannot think of one that decribes it……more down to earth? Genuine? I don’t know…

      2. I cannot stand the stupidly short 3-race format that BTCC runs nowadays as the races always seem like there over before you have had chance to settle in.
        Additionally I hate the silly gimmicks like randomly selected reverse grids & weight ballast that touring car usually plays around with.

        I used to be a big fan of touring cars through the 80s/90s when there was the 1 long feature race & no silly gimmicks, But since the format changed for ‘the show’ I just lost interest completely in both BTCC & WTCC.

        That been said i’ll be watching the WTCC round at the nordschleife this year, Not just because of the track but also because the race format will be as it used to be, 1 long race with no gimmicks.

      3. Success ballast. No thanks.

    10. Sometimes it feels like everything is changing, but really, it all stays the same.

      Formula 1 has never been more expensive than it is today. The ten teams spent around $2.5 billion in 2003, and the 2004 figure will be no lower. Despite the fact that tobacco sponsorship could be outlawed as early as 2005, in line with the European Union ban (or, failing that, 2006, which was the original date of the ban), five teams (B.A.R Honda, Ferrari, Jordan Ford, McLaren Mercedes-Benz and Renault) still rely on cigarette companies for the bulk of their financing.

      Formula 1 has lost two established teams over the past three years (Prost Grand Prix in 2001 and Arrows Racing in 2002), and can ill afford further casualties. Yet a significant number of teams—notably Jordan Ford and Minardi Cosworth—are finding it difficult to attract sufficient sponsorship. While Mr Ecclestone insists that both teams will survive the season, he has admitted that they may be “vulnerable” thereafter. In March 2004, F1 Racing magazine estimated Jordan Ford’s 2003 operational budget at just $79m, and Minardi Cosworth’s at only $46m (by comparison, F1 Racing claimed Ferrari had $418m to spend). In order to thrive, teams such as Minardi Cosworth and Jordan Ford must maintain, or even increase, their current sponsorship levels.

      http://www.economist.com/node/2785546

      From July 9th 2004…

      1. Good find. Indeed this has been a long time coming.

      2. Good find @beneboy; Interesting too @julianwins, that if those numbers are correct, Ferrari kept roughly same budget, while back of grid seems to have almost doubled budget in 10 years.

        1. I’m sorry, but that’s not true! At least that’s what I read in some articles where it says Ferrari had around $250m this year and injected herself more $100m.

      3. Very interesting. I don’t remember such debates at the time, as it was during a lull in my interest in F1.

    11. If Lego hadn’t used last year’s hideous cars, I’d have bought that McLaren set for sure. But as it is, the MP4-29 was one of the ugliest cars in recent memory, and puts me off that set every time I look at it. Yeah, I know I could get it & just change the car myself, but it’s just *hideous*. Same goes with the vacuum-cleaner Ferrari set as well.

    12. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
      9th April 2015, 2:28

      While Mosley is wrong in that he’s ignored his part in the current crisis, he is correct in that F1 is heading for collapse.
      I can’t see a positive outlook to be perfectly honest. The fans feel alienated with all these dumb gimmicks (then they are patronised by team owners who speak of improving the show with all their dumb ideas) aimed at dumbing down the sport yet they are expected to fork out hundreds and hundreds of pounds to not only see all the races live on TV, but to watch a single race from the stands. Sponsors are losing interest, costs are rising and no real attempt is being made at saving anyone at all. Half the grid is made up of drivers who deserve to be there and the other half are drivers who probably wouldn’t even win a race in the BTCC! No disrespect to the BTCC but it’s not the cream of motorsport. Nothing against the teams who use these drivers as they need to survive first and foremost. It’s a complete disaster that the world’s premier open wheel racing series can’t field 11-13 teams that can survive comfortably each year.

      The good circuits can’t afford races anymore, the new engines have diminished interest for half of the fans (rest don’t care or like it) in a poor marketing attempt aimed at making a sport which parades around the globe on millions of miles of air travel per year look ‘green’. Once again it is being dominated again by a single team with a grid made up of currently 19/20 cars which will no doubt shrink later in the season due to rising costs which provides very little excitement for anyone watching.
      I know I’m saying everything that has already been repeated about 1000 times on this website already but I am just so sick of it. I follow the news of F1 and I occasionally watch the races but I really don’t want to give them any money. Bernie wants everything from the fans and gives absolutely nothing back. I’m surprised as many people still go to the races and pay their subscription fees. I really do believe that there should be a mass boycott of F1 or else nothing is going to get done, it’s only going to get worse because there’s no reason for anyone at the top to change anything as they are still raking in the money!

      1. @Daniel
        Have you noticed that most sports are going the way of Pay TV. In UK even football is going
        that way. Soon most sports will be Pay to view in a pages and most sports fan will have some sort
        of sport pages else you will not be able too watch any descent sport.
        You still do not get it the tech that is coming out F1 at the moment is what makes the sport green.
        it is slowly starting to filter throw to the road cars and that is what makes the sport green.
        You speak of gimmicks but the bring sound in to it. Sound is a wast of power and there for has now use in making cars go faster but we need to have it. Sound to me as it is there to make the show better or a gimmick to a track more viewers. If you have watched the sport for a long time you showed have figured out by now that it is a sport of dominance it will stay that way become it is not a spec series.

        1. @koosoos

          Just because many sports are going the way of pay TV does not make it right though, does it? If that’s your attitude, then we must all say nothing about the issues we feel are fundamentally hurting our sport, right?

          As to the ‘amazing noise is wasted energy’ argument, well, I guess you have never attended a live race? Would you think it was an improvement if we had silent cars but with another 50 BHP?

          Green F1? Insanity! If you seriously think F1 technology ‘filters dow’n to road cars in any meaningful way, you are deluding yourself. It ‘filters down’ about as much as the wealth does in Republican ideology!……….;)

          1. @paulguitar
            I have seen more F1 races live in last five years then you have in your live. Secondly most new hybrids have tech that comes from F1 in one form or another. The brake to wire is coming out in some of Merc’s hybrid ranges and what they have learned from engine mapping is also put in to the cars. Secondly tell me
            who much fuel would have been saved by the plains and the trucks if we used V8.
            The problem ppl do not understand is that sponsors left the sport long before the crisis started. In to days life sponsors will rather invest in the channel that shows the sport then the sport it self.

            1. @koosoos

              I am not sure how you know how many races I have attended? If you have attended more in the last five years than I have attended in my life, then you have been very busy.

              I think you fundamentally misunderstand what racing and sport are about. Formula One clearly does not exist to develop more efficient engines for trucks and cars! It is supposed to be a sport unless there has been some change we have not been informed of?

            2. @paulguitar Yes, it is a sport. A very competitive and expensive sport.

              For engine suppliers to make it worth their while developing the engines, they must get something back for it. While they do charge the teams, they also need to gain exposure (advertising) and use the platform to develop technologies for use in other areas.

              Like it or not, automotive technology is heading towards greater efficiency. This is not a bad thing, even in motorsports. The ability to produce the same power for less fuel, or more power for the same fuel, has always been a goal. Noise is wasted energy, and the MGU-H harvests this energy so it can be used. This is a great thing for power output and efficiency, and the technology will enable better and more efficient vehicles elsewhere. It is a win-win, with the only down side to it being to the show.

              Personally, I loved the sound of the cars last year at Spa. They were so varied and rich, rather than the incessant scream of the V8’s. However, just as people complained when they switched from the V12s etc. to the V8s that they didn’t sound as good, the debate over this will (and already has, slightly) fallen off as people see the races.

              Personally, I will be going to more live races, when I can afford it. That’s the stumbling block for me, as the races are an amazing experience I will always cherish.

            3. If you think that F1 is only about the racing i will really advice you to start watching a spec series. F1 will alway be a despoilment for you. Some years will be great for you but most of the time it will be a despoilment. F1 is more then just cars going around the track. It is a sport where engineering is the biggest factor
              in the sport was and always will be. It is a sport where the engineer, strategist, driver and car with the most up to date tech comes together on a Sunday to give you the result of the races.
              If you watched last year you would now what difference 50 BHP makes

          2. @paulguitar
            If you think that F1 is only about the racing i will really advice you to start watching a spec series. F1 will alway be a despoilment for you. Some years will be great for you but most of the time it will be a despoilment. F1 is more then just cars going around the track. It is a sport where engineering is the biggest factor
            in the sport was and always will be. It is a sport where the engineer, strategist, driver and car with the most up to date tech comes together on a Sunday to give you the result of the races.
            If you watched last year you would now what difference 50 BHP makes

            1. @koosoos

              Indeed, the actual racing in spec series is often better. I have been watching f1 for 35 years, and I understand there is an element of compromise, in a sporting sense, with the whole way f1 is structured, with each manufacturer producing a car from scratch.

              @drmouse

              I do understand the need to seek greater efficiency with engine technology. Also, I am pleased for you that you enjoyed the sound of the new cars at Spa. we simply have different views, I think I would simply not be able to go to F1 at Spa now as last time I went there it was V10’s, and to me the current cars just sound like kitchen waste disposal units. Granted, slightly differing waste disposal units, depending on manufacturer, but still………The magic has been lost…………….

        2. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
          9th April 2015, 20:37

          I know a lot of sports are moving towards pay tv, but at least with Football you can go into the grounds and watch the matches at a more reasonable price (depending on team) and then watch Match of the Day every week which is far more popular than the F1 highlights.
          If I am a potential sponsor, why would I fork out millions of pounds to sponsor a car that not many people will be able to watch? I could spend less money and it would go much further.
          Also, is it right to charge people for it anyway?
          Yes I understand all the arguments for newer technology but it hasn’t really gone to plan. One new manufacturer has joined the sport and that is it. How much technology has really gone towards road cars? Not very much at all.
          The sound isn’t a ‘gimmick’ in the same way that DRS or tyres designed to fade are. Fair enough if you don’t care about the sound but for me personally, if I was going to break the bank to watch F1 live then I would want something very special to make it worth my while like the sound. Sounding the way that it does, I would rather go watch BTCC or WEC as they are far cheaper.

    13. It will be interesting to see what Manor can achieve with the 2015 Ferrari PU and the new chasis, Manor fighting for some points later in the season?

      1. Oh, that makes the world champions compete for the last two places.

      2. You can put an improved Ferrari PU in a pig, it will still be a pig.
        The Manor car is 5-7 seconds off the pace, even if we generously assume that the new Ferrari PU is worth 1 second per lap, and that the new chassis, even though it’s being developped with a serious lack of funding, is also 1 second per lap faster, they would still be limping behing around 3-5 seconds per lap. This wouldn’t even enable them to challenge McLaren if they kept their Honda PU down-tuned for the rest of the season. Unless a miracle happens, Manor are bound to stay in last position for as long as they stay in the game.

    14. Adrian Newey is likely to have more time to work on RBRs aero package as the Americas Cup has ditched the larger open development class in favour of the smaller near 1-design fleet racing class. Some people in the Americas Cup committees have been trying to do a Bernie and turn sail-boat racing into an F1 type cash-cow and have stripped out all the things that made the AC different and magnificent, now they are adopting the Mosley creed of cheaper and identical boats, the current AC will sink like a stone very soon as will F1 if they go the same route.

      1. Aren’t the AC62 and the new AC48 set to the same rule. I glanced over the rules and they look the same other than length. A super tight box rule with open foil and rudder design? Newey missed the boat on the AC. He may have had some influence on the last AC where aerodynamics were more crucial than ever, but this next one won’t matter. I was hoping the move to smaller boats would mean that they would open up the design rules. I guess this is one more design contest down the drain. I will end up following the Little AC from now on. The C-class cat is really the only class with open design rules. It’s a real shame that these guys like Coutts and Ainslie find it so important to line their own pockets. The AC and F1 are amazingly similar now. Both heading down the toilet.

    15. …enjoyed the race with people of like mind and socio economic background.

      – from CotD

      So a key part of watching races is that no poor people are around, but the people that are super-wealthy are in private areas as to not make you uncomfortable? No thanks on that.

      1. ColdFly F1 (@)
        9th April 2015, 4:30

        nitpicking – and you totally missed the point @Resort2Spa is making.

        maybe you can proof-read the next submission.

      2. Actually the general admission area on the grass along side Kemmel Straight was a lot of young people, students and blue collar types who saved for a GA ticket, got in a car with 4 mates and made a road trip to Spa. All these people were super happy to be at the Formula 1.

        I guess maybe you haven’t been to the Spa circuit but the grass section on Kemmel Straight doesn’t have waiters holding trays with prawns sandwiches.

        1. @resort2spa We always argued who was going to go get the next crate of beer because nobody wanted to leave the track to go the car…

          I’ve been to Spa plenty but this year will be my first GP abroad.

          1. @xtwl

            Good to see another road tripping, GA ticket buying F1 fanatic. :D

            I know there is a lot of complaints about the price of F1 tickets these days but there are still ways for minimum wage earning fans to attend events.

            Once inside, there is heaps to do and see that I still feel gives you plenty of value for money.

      3. antonyob (@)
        9th April 2015, 11:48

        yeh I noticed the socio economic thing. hilarious. I will be acting out of order for my socio economic group in Austria this year and I make no apologies for it.

    16. ColdFly F1 (@)
      9th April 2015, 4:34

      Good to finally get some wise words out of Mosley.

      But Mosley forgot to add that the collapse actually started with he did the deal with his mate Bernie.

      1. Personally I think it goes back even further with this duo when, post-Senna, they trumped up Ferrari by moving MS and crew from highly controversial Benetton with a mega contract that gave him a contracted subservient teammate which meant a designer car etc etc and eventually an elephant in the room that was impossible to compete against other than by throwing hundreds of millions at it and being told to ‘just compete’. The start of the inevitably ultimately unsustainable costs of competing in F1 began then, accented finally by a global recession that started in 08.

        So as most have pointed out, it is quite rich for MM to be talking about the current financial situation which he has much to do with from his tenure at the FIA, but then that is exactly what politicians of his ilk do. Shady only begins to describe this man. Not be trusted other than to look after his own end-game. And that of his buddies.

    17. Excellent comment of the day, but I feel it is a shame Keith did not quote it in full, missing the ending which was:

      ‘The only thing that takes away from an F1 race nowadays is the noise from the engines is now kinda mediocre compared to 2012.

      I didn’t wear my earplugs once during a race weekend… why would you!?!’

      This is the crux of it for me. All of the good points about attending races mentioned in the comment still stand, but don’t expect to be wowed by the visceral thrill of experiencing current F1 cars because it is massively reduced from what the writer of the COTD experienced in 2012.

      Regarding selective quoting from the comment of the day, I made this point yesterday:

      ‘I am aware from previous comments here there are some folks who get VERY upset with those that find the new sound terrible…….I very much feel we have an ‘Emperor’s new clothes’ situation. Nearly everyone involved with F1 as a profession is very reluctant to criticize too much as it is, of course ‘the hand that feeds them’.’

      1. @paulguitar : Majority here, including @keithcollantine are supporters of the new sound, hence the omission I guess

        1. @Foosa

          Yes, I think you are right on that. it is interesting reading the differing opinions on other forums. Over at ‘Motorsport’, my horror at the current sound and how important this is tends to be the prevailing view. Here, it seems to be far less important for many people.

          I suspect it might be an age thing. I am 43, which I don’t consider very old, but I bet I am one of the older commenters on this site. If I had only just started watching F1 or attending live, perhaps the sound would not matter to me? I don’t know, all I know is that without the glorious noise, F1 live for me is a bit like how cricket would be if they banned the fours and the sixes!

      2. Bemusing omission by @keithcollantine but his stance on the new engines is the right one.

        I am grudgingly supportive of the new engines and have accepted the wonderful audible experience of F1 may have gone forever. Though, the engines are louder this year and once the engineers have fully grasped the technology of hybrid engines then we may get a few more decibels yet. *Fingers crossed.

        The world is changing and F1 should be the leader of these technological advances.

        One argument is that this introduction of hybrid engines has led to a domination by Mercedes and therefore F1 is worse off.

        You could also argue that if we stayed with the previous engines, it might have lead to another 4 years of RBR/Vettel domination.

        It’s 6 of one and 1/2 a dozen of the other.

        Just really wish the glorious sound returns somehow :(

      3. The only reason the comment was shortened was because it was quite long and I didn’t want it to take up too much space in what was already quite a lengthy round-up. The protocol for editing of comments is explained in the FAQ which is linked in every comment form.

        Nearly everyone involved with F1 as a profession is very reluctant to criticise too much as it is, of course ‘the hand that feeds them’.

        Surely you’re not telling me I’m being too uncritical of F1? That would definitely be a first :-)

        1. Haha, well, fair enough @keithcollantine

          :)

    18. I’m sorry, but I struggle to take anything that Herr Mosely says seriously.

    19. I wonder if Max tells the same story at his sex parties.

    20. So if Hamilton’s contract is 80 pages and 99.6% complete, I’m guessing the final 0.4% or third of a page is the salary and signatures?

    21. I lost interest in the COTD when it mentioned socio-economic background. In F1 circles, isn’t that Bernie speak for “really rich old people wearing a Rolex”? ;)

      1. Ugh

        @benh
        The general admittance grassed area on the Kemmel Straight is so far from “really rich old people wearing a Rolex”.

        More of a Casio crowd really.

        Maybe they could name it Casio straight? or is that breaking copyright ;)

        1. @resort2spa It was meant more in jest (as I did read the bit about you going GA – did that for Monza a few years back and was great). Was just the way you phrased it was more something I would expect from someone like Bernie :P

        2. @resort2spa I was looking to be offended too and got really upset at the use of the term OLD people. Now where is my Rolex I have to go & count my winter fuel allowance!!

    22. @keithcollantine Keith, I, someone who has been subjected to being photographed amid a huddle of posing grid girls whilst my friends jeered, wholeheartedly support your position. Last year’s US Grand Prix gridwalk virtually reduced me to tears as a blatantly uninterested Pamela Anderson claimed “I just love this: fast cars and fast women” as she stood next to perhaps the most illiberally dressed grid girls of season. This pathetic neo-American tosh is both archaic and unnecessary, since F1 is quite capable of being appealing without support from a toned and tanned twenty-year old pouting at an FOM cameraman (when he isn’t documenting the shortness of Carman Jorda’s shorts that is).

      However is a gird girl ban realistic under the current quasi-traditionalist governance? Probably not. Female sexuality rather unfortunately got caught up in F1’s thriller-esque theme some decades ago; an ancillary of the “Hunt-effect” if you like. The commercial symbiosis of the hero/driver and his blonde post-race reward was allowed to passively develop, and now, whilst the era of driver studs is gone (hopefully), this dated and needless heterosexual doctrine lingers like a bad smell.

      At least it reminds fans of the need for a socialist coup d’etat…if failing teams, pay drivers, the loss of iconic races and the vehement implementation of gimmicks proves insufficient. I bet Bernie wears a UKIP badge in Shanghai…

      1. It is funny how ppl have to fight for some thing that they are not involve with. When a model poses in under wear in a ladies magazine it is ok but when a model dears to wear sexy close on a grid it is all wrong. No one has forts the model to be a grid girl and if they did’t want to do the job they could just say no. I showed my wife the comments on here and she just luaghted and said funny how men
        fight for some thing they do not even under stand.

        1. @koosoos Two points: 1) arguing that a sport should liberal, secular and asexual is not arguing against the global sexualization of femininity, and 2), who made those grid girl’s jobs necessary? A patriarchal governance of the sport who deem ranking women as objects of desire is an acceptable price in furthering the sport’s unnecessary heterosexual doctrine.

          1. This is what my wife basically replied to it when i showed her this comment of yours.
            I spend six days a week in the gime to look sexy. I do not mind if men looks at me and think i’m sexy. What goes on in his head is his problem not mine. Just because there are women out there how thinks it is degrading does not mean i do, and how gives these men and women the right to decided what i or other women my wear when i want to or what job i must do. If i want to be a model how holds up a board at a F1 race or want to look sexy that is my right. Nobody is forcing me to do it, it is my chiose. If you want to see me as a sex object then it is your problem. I’m proud and love my sexy body and work hard to keep my body sexy.
            I love showing it of and it makes me feel good when i notice some one looking at me. Most of the women how see it as degrading can’t take it that there men looks at sexy women because they know they can’t look that way because they are to lazy to do the work to have the body the girls have on there.

    23. Boy, I hope the news about the De Niro biopic on Enzo Ferrari isn’t a sham, I just got really giddy about it. By far my favourite actor working on a project about such an icon of the motoring world, that’s heaven!

    Comments are closed.