Interest in owning a Formula 1 team has grown so high that some are being offered billions of dollars to sell, according to the series’ CEO Stefano Domenicali.
The FIA has invited applications from potential new teams to enter the series from 2025. However Domenicali has consistently said he does not believe F1 needs more than its current 10 teams.“I don’t think so, that’s a personal opinion, I need to say that,” he told the official F1 website. “If you have a good show, 20 cars are more than enough.
“If you have two cars or two drivers fighting, the level of attention is mega. So if you have already two teams fighting, that means four cars, it’s just incredible. So can you imagine 20 cars, 10 teams are at the level where there is competition on track? It would be impressive.”
Several potential new teams have expressed an interest in joining the series. Domenicali said he is not opposed to them joining but stressed F1 must respect the existing competitors who have already spent considerable sums developing their operations.
“I would say let’s wait and see. My ‘no’ is not against someone wants to come in, I need to clarify that because otherwise it seems that I want to be protectionist, that is not the case. I want to see the right one and I need to also respect the ones that have invested in F1 in the last period, because we forget too quickly the respect.
“Now everyone wants to jump in the coach that is very fast. But we need to be prudent, we need to take the right decision, that’s what I’m saying.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
The FIA invited applications from potential new teams earlier this year, which it is now considering. The deadline for the governing body and F1 to decide whether to admit any new competitors is at the end of this month.
The current 10 teams are committed to F1 under the terms of the Concorde Agreement which binds the parties, along with the FIA. The possibility of admitting any new competitors has to be considered alongside negotiations around the future commercial terms for the sport, said Domenicali.
“There is an evaluation going on today that involves the FIA and us to make the right call for the future,” he explained. “This is something that is also connected to the future discussion that will happen with the renewal of the Concorde Agreement, that we need to remember is expiring at the end of 2025.
“So we have still a long time to go, but it’s an evaluation that we need to take considering what I said in this period of time where in the past there were teams that were coming in, getting out with zero value. Now the teams are stable, very profitable and very strong in terms of also technical capability to be competitive on the track.
“Therefore, the right answer is that in the next months it will be a very important point of discussion that we need to tackle. That is, do we need to stay with 10, do we need to have more teams or we can give the exemption to a future possible team to be really very, very strong that can join F1? This is all a topic that will be part of the discussion for the future.”
F1 should prioritise safeguarding the stability of its existing teams before looking to add more, Domenicali believes.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
“In my role I need to consider that the sport can grow only if the majority of all the teams can grow. That was one of the fundamentals of the budget cap to give a credible financial stability to the value of the franchise of the team.
“The more you are able to have a competitive field, the more you may have interesting races, the more you can create the interest in the sport and that’s for sure very, very important.
“It is clear that there are situations where the interest in F1 of these teams is bigger because they are investing and believe this is a real project on which to develop other things. And therefore it is important that we give sustainable financial stability for each of them to make sure that everyone can do that.”
Under the current Concorde Agreement, any new team must pay an ‘anti-dilution fee’ of $200 million upon entering, which is divided between the existing teams to compensate them when F1’s prize fund is shared between a larger number of competitors. However Domenicali indicated the value of teams has risen since that figure was set.
“If you look what has happened in such a short term, talking about the value of one team, that was not many years ago – I would say two years ago when the new Concorde Agreement has been signed – when there was the talk about what is the value of a team that has to come in F1, there was a number put on the Concorde Agreement that was 200 million. Which seems unreachable, because there were teams in the past that were sold for £1.
“Now the market is offering almost billions to teams and they are refusing that. Can you imagine that?
“So that gives you the perspective of what we are building as an ecosystem. We are building important structure, important dynamics of which the more everyone is growing, the better and the stronger is the business platform which we are all working in.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
2023 F1 season
- Piastri’s rapid learning key to his “exceptional” rookie season – Stella
- Perez targets qualifying gains in 2024 as “Sunday form has been very, very strong”
- “It should not happen”: Gasly wants explanation for Ocon’s strategy advantage
- Red Bull’s race advantage ‘the major thing we’ll see different next year’ – Domenicali
- Ocon leads O’Ward in post-season test as Russell crashes
S
14th June 2023, 11:38
If teams are really being offered “almost billions” then clearly there is sufficient means to open the grid up to at least 2 new teams, if not fill all 3 spots that a available by regulation.
If the new teams suck, then they are only embarrassing themselves, while simultaneously making the rest look even better by comparison.
And if there are no new teams allowed, then of course Domenicali will be labelled a protectionist – because that’s exactly what he is. His job is to grow the series, not internalise it and close it off. His group has already done enough of that by franchising the existing teams.
BasCB (@bascb)
15th June 2023, 7:19
Exactly. This valuation shows there really is no question that being IN the sport with a working team gives it a value they can use to invest, borrow and find partners. And it shows that adding a team or 2 would not risk any of that, provided the team backers is/are serious, and not a pirate, thug or autocrat country looking to whitewash their loot.
DB-C90 (@dbradock)
14th June 2023, 12:07
I’d love to have some of what he’s having that gives him the sort of fantasy world he lives in.
No wonder Ferrari is in such a state – he probably thought they were actually winning all the races and won multiple WCC’s during his reign and they all had the same kool aid.
Andy Bunting (@wildbiker)
14th June 2023, 12:51
+1
rsp123 (@rsp123)
14th June 2023, 14:52
+1
anon
14th June 2023, 18:57
As noted by others, the more likely reality is that he has been told to push a particular line by Liberty Media, most likely as part of the current discussions over the applications for a spot on the grid. Trying to pump up the value of the teams fits in with the general push to increase the entry fee.
Stephen Mepham
14th June 2023, 12:13
I wouldn’t want to be seen as protectionist, says the mad protectionist madly protecting the status quo.
Kringle
14th June 2023, 12:42
The guy needs a lie down.
raddie (@raddie)
14th June 2023, 12:48
Compared to this year’s Le Mans, an absolute tragedy. Every GT3 race is far more exciting than an entire F1 season.
Andy Bunting (@wildbiker)
14th June 2023, 12:51
What a load of cockwaffle! He’s a Ferrari schill. Remember that!
Possibly still upset that the poisoned dwarf, aka Bernie E, made off with the only billions from F1?
Proesterchen (@proesterchen)
14th June 2023, 13:15
You cannot give entries away for 200 million when you want the existing ones valued at 1+ billion.
So that number will change with the next commercial agreement.
BasCB (@bascb)
15th June 2023, 7:21
Remember the 200 million only covers a part of what needs to be invested @proesterchen, apart from that a new team would probably have to invest a billion in tech to design and produce cars and another say billion in operating cost for the first few years to get going, recruit people etc before they will ever be able to even field a car with that entry onto the grid.
rsp123 (@rsp123)
14th June 2023, 14:57
If Ferrari didn’t get all that “special Ferrari money” and other advantages that no other team has, they’d be dead last in every race.
If the teams hadn’t sold out to Eccelstone the series would be in much better shape. Why? Because there would be more competition. Teams wouldn’t be hostages.
I say make the series open and introduce a claiming rule like they have in MotoGP – any team can buy another team’s car for a set sum.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
14th June 2023, 18:26
Makes no sense at all, those 40 mil make no difference with the budget cap and ferrari is still a relatively competitive team, and those special advantages are laughable, in the sense they barely make any difference. Merc and red bull played a lot more the political game than ferrari did.
Darryn Smith (@darryn)
14th June 2023, 15:17
They’d all be selling if that were true. This is going to be a hard fall for F1 when all the hype fans realize 1 guy wins all the races in F1.
Nick T.
14th June 2023, 17:47
That’s been F1 65% of the time since time immemorial. I dislike Max and RBR, but this comment type is usually left by bitter Merc fans who act as if a big rules change hasn’t ended a dominant streak for a team a dozen times before that or that they were allowed one of the longest reigns without a new design regs challenge.
As long as DTS keeps manufacturing fake hype they’ll be satisfied.
Nick T:
14th June 2023, 17:52
ps – if you want to be bitter about something. Be bitter about the fact F1 cars now hugely overweight, tanker sized monsters with no sound that make for dull racing even before you factor in the post-Whiting race directors who throw an SC if they spot a pebble on the track and a red flag if they sneeze onto the track for “dangerously wet conditions.”
Darryn Smith (@darryn)
14th June 2023, 22:50
Eat me. You’re the only one who seems to be bitter. I’m enjoying the dominance. I expect the new fans aren’t.
Nick T.
17th June 2023, 3:10
Look at my past comments. The only people I blast are Wittich and people who say RBR’s advantage is unfair.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
14th June 2023, 18:27
Yes, it’s hard to believe that’s true: williams, haas, with the limited amount of money they came in with wouldn’t sell for 1 billion?
Nick T.
14th June 2023, 21:49
Did they specify which teams these valuations and/or were for? Otherwise, these may be offers for more competitive teams.
Martin (@f1hornet)
14th June 2023, 16:18
Given what’s happening in soccer and golf, I do wonder how long before we see a petro-state just buy a controlling stake in an F1 team. I know we’ve had individuals from the middle-east with minority stakes, but we haven’t seen the extent of the involvement we see with PSG, Man City, Newcastle United etc. Or maybe without the supporter base (other than Ferrari) it’s just more attractive to have Grands Prix and sponsor the sport?
BasCB (@bascb)
15th June 2023, 7:23
I mean, Bahrain is the biggest shareholder in McLaren, and isn’t Saudi Arabia involved in Aston Martin, for example? But yeah, I am sure they are all looking at this @f1hornet
Nulla Pax (@nullapax)
14th June 2023, 17:02
I’m willing to sell my interest in F1 to a decent offer.
Doesn’t have to be Billions of Dollars …. a bag of sweets and a can of lager will be enough to start negotiations.
Qeki (@qeki)
14th June 2023, 19:20
@nullapax Send me your info and it is a done deal :D. I would like some interest back!
ajaya
14th June 2023, 21:12
its a procession anyway.. so why restrict to 10, teams
Don
14th June 2023, 17:21
“If you have a good show, 20 cars are more than enough.” Really, you consider one team and driver winning all the time a good show ?
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
14th June 2023, 18:28
Yes, so far in terms of competition it’s been a terrible show in 2023; obviously not new as f1 had dominant periods before, although since 2010 there’s been more dominance than ever before.
Nick T.
14th June 2023, 17:42
I hate DTS, but boy do the bean counters at the teams and Liberty owe those producers and Netflix.
Witan
14th June 2023, 20:16
Keep pumping up the balloon and there is only one, predictable, end.
ferrox glideh (@ferrox-glideh)
14th June 2023, 22:13
At least you can eat a tulip.
Leroy (@g-funk)
14th June 2023, 20:43
Pump and Dump scheme
https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/investing-basics/glossary/pump-and-dump-schemes
Adysseus (@adysseus)
14th June 2023, 20:47
there was a time were anyone could join a f1 race if he could qualify, there used to be three or more cars per team and even 6 wheels on cars open the competition, set a max. number of cars and don’t kill creativity
Jon
14th June 2023, 21:04
As F1 fan from 1990s If value teams keeps going up it could be cheaper to create new racing series with European tracks , V8 and no drs. 1hr qually , 26 cars. I can dream i guess . In the means time i have sports cars to watch
Nick T.
14th June 2023, 21:56
At a certain point they’re no longer going to be able to do the road relevance burlesque they do to attract manufacturers and allow manufacturers to justify F1, unless they go all electric or a certain biofuel breaks through to the mass market.
At that point it will revert to privateers and the racing + cars will have to sell the show itself rather and I believe we’ll see them go back to those type of cars. The drive to attract manufacturers really changed F1 for the worse and made it less stable since the series was subject to sudden collapse based on the whims of corporate boards and shareholders.
ferrox glideh (@ferrox-glideh)
14th June 2023, 22:19
Utter codswallop.
T
15th June 2023, 3:29
IS ANYONE ACTUALLY BOTHERING TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE LIKE AT ALL?!
MY WORD!
S
15th June 2023, 4:41
I did.
And it all sounds exactly like something a marketing executive would come up with, to justify the raw greed that is on display within all of F1.
T
15th June 2023, 19:25
point to the greed for me, all i read was rightful and tactful apprehension about the future of the sport. that’s all he conveyed. Stef wants the existing teams to be happy and the new entrant(s) if deemed necessary to be additive, he’s even willing to give special treatment if need be, to the new entrant. The man appears to be open to anything and he’s the one who said 20 cars are fine in the beginning.
if a more likable personality said this, no one would have batted an eye.
this is why i’m asking if anyone actually bothered to read the article.
S
16th June 2023, 4:45
He’s the corporate face of a huge corporation. The primary point of that’s corporation’s existence is to maximise profit. Greed.
They could run F1 in a totally different way that would be far more satisfying to most people, but it just wouldn’t be as profitable. Of course, that’s exactly why this subject is an ongoing issue.
I have absolutely no idea how get that he’s really open to new entrants – despite his hollow words – as he has done nothing but reject them since he came in to his position. He has said repeatedly that F1 doesn’t need any more (in his opinion as leader of F1’s commercial division) and that he personally doesn’t support adding any more.
Andretti, for one, should have been approved already and should be well into designing and even building their car for next year. But F1 are still fumbling and internalising to keep their current ‘club’ members satisfied with their generous profits. That’s exactly why they have secured the Concorde Agreement – to make sure everyone alreday in the club is protected from anyone wishing to enter. Remember there is also the $200m anti-competition fee (not a typo) that Domenicali is at the forefront of the argument to raise even further.
If a more likeable person said this as often as Domenicali does, they wouldn’t remain likeable for very long either.
Domenicali wasn’t exactly F1’s most unpopular person a few years ago…
Perhaps everyone who commented did in fact read the entire article (and all the others on this topic) and simply came to a different conclusion than you did? By taking more in to consideration than just what was published in this one article alone…
T
16th June 2023, 20:30
Maximizing profits is how you grow, stay on top, and afloat/sustainable, welcome to the business world. IF your profits stagnate you lose, as costs are an ever-growing facet. It isn’t greed. If you don’t love it that’s fine but stop defining it as greed. Now if you want to see greed in F1, cast your mind back to Bernie Ecclestone’s glory days.
You claim to have read the article but somehow have no idea how Stef is really open to new entrants?! Seriously? Did you see the part where he specifically floated the idea of rolling out the red carpet for a potential entry solely on the promise of being “really very, very strong”? however nebulous that criterion is? Did you also see the part where he clarified his ‘no’ is not a blanket statement but rather a nuance personal opinion in finding the right entrant(s)? So, I once again ask, did you. read the article?
Yeah, at the start and now look what he just said, look at what he’s been saying and look at the clarifying and nuanced answers he gave. He’s actually and actively changing his mind live in front of your very eyes and you’re too busy regurgitating Andretti’s words to even realize it’s happening. But please, go on and lecture me on only taking one side of an argument into consideration.
I have already attempted to open up a dialogue specifically about Andretti and you bolted. The exact same Andretti you so adamantly want in on principle is already struggling to build its claimed state of the art race center. The found hasn’t even been laid, they move some dirt for a photo op and that’s it. It has already come out from the Andretti camp that they knew from the very beginning that without actual OEM backing their entry was dead on arrival, but they spent months banging doors and spinning narratives through every media outlet who’d publish their words until Cadillac came along.
And even then, I maintain Cadillac is a badging exercise: the fact that they still haven’t applied for OEM status is baffling – don’t talk to me about deadlines, Honda walked right in after dilly dallying around about reentry, even Ford has a mouthpiece at the table and the FIA/F1 will easily let GM at the table if they cared enough to ask. Cadillac has one foot in the door and the other out. If that’s commitment, then INEOS is an OEM then. We both know they can do it, their IMSA program is proof. Micheal’s retort about some nebulous “Cadillac IP” showing up in an existing engine partner’s stack therefore making it not a badging exercise is laughable. Slapping batteries Cadillac procured in the car powered by Alpine is still a badging exercise Micheal. You want to fight for championships in five years and your principal partner hasn’t bothered to even pretend to be an OEM yet. Cadillac’s plan appears to be to sit out the engine regs discussion, not contribute/register and twiddle their thumbs then hope to have a say and or deliver anything of value to another existing registered and contributing OEM (Alpine) so Andretti can say it’s not a badging exercise then hope that’s enough to fight for wins?? Even seems like Alpine barely wants them as a partner. Seriously, tell me, who’s “fumbling and internalising” here?! Do you fathom how odd (at best) this looks? Especially as the likes of Aston Martin and RB actually commit to being OEM or OEM backed in formula 1?
The anti-dilution fee is an anti-dilution fee for a reason, calling it the anti-competitive fee doesn’t make you clever, it broadcasts your naiveté.
Cheers!
S
17th June 2023, 17:20
Wanting more than you need is greed. It’s really that simple. That is business, absolutely. F1 isn’t the only greedy business with greedy individuals – it’s everywhere. But being everywhere doesn’t make it not greed.
Your mate Stef has stated he is only open to one type of entrant – a manufacturer with extremely deep pockets and enormous marketing pull – but where are they?
Andretti is as good as the submissions get – motorsport through and through, and a long and rich heritage not just in the USA but also back to F1 with Mario. If that’s not good enough for ‘Stef’ then there simply won’t be any more teams.
I answer again – yes I did. All of it. And many others on the same subject on this website and others. And all of them cover approximately the same point in his own words.
I haven’t mentioned Andretti’s words – only Domenicali’s. He saying it himself. Repeatedly.
What does it matter if Andretti haven’t yet built their new facility? They haven’t yet been granted access to F1 either – no doubt that would open up some pretty substantial funding avenues for them, don’t you think?
Yeah, Domenicali said manufacturer, Andretti found a manufacturer. Still not good enough.
Reminder that Aston Martin is a badging exercise, as is Alpine and Mercedes. Red Bull Powertrains is concocted simply for F1, but doesn’t actually make an engine either. Lots of ‘manufacturers’ (many not even associated with motorsport or the automotive industry at all) have badged engines for F1 for several decades. It was never a problem before but it is now?
GM? They own Cadillac….
And batteries? Which manufacturer is making F1 batteries? Saft is among the leading suppliers there, and Panasonic is also a player… Which teams do they have their names on? OEM who?
And finally, the anti-competition fee – it exists to primarily keep out new teams. There is no other reason for it to exist except… You guessed, greed.
T
18th June 2023, 2:31
this makes no sense, if you acknowledge stagnating profits means you lose in business then how it is greedy? how is it wanting more than you need when you need more to stay afloat? it looks like we both just agreed on the definition of business and then you hop scotched over to “greedy business”. If you need more then you need more, it’s not greed. Greed is when you don’t need more then go for it anyway. I implore you to attempt engage in this conversation with a modicum of good faith. It’s like you’ve decided in this specific instance F1 = greedy and that’s it – even if you agree what you keep calling greed is just business 101. I also didn’t say it’s everywhere I said that how it works, that’s the modus operandi and then I explicitly went on to say if you wanted examples of greed especially in F1, to cast your mind to Bernie. I’ve already asked you to point to the greed in Stef’s words. We’ve been gabbing for what, two days now? and you’ve done no such thing.
I don’t know but “my mate” Stef has also stated multiple times there are potential entrants who aren’t actively seeking microphones to speak into. “My mate” Stef has also said no such thing about “a manufacturer with extremely deep pockets and enormous marketing pull “. For the third time, did you actually read the article? Did you also read the other articles from Stef regarding new entrants? His stance has always been if the ten teams are enough to put on the show then keep it as is until recently where he’s been expressly leaving the door open for compelling entrants even going as far as willing to shaft the current teams for this new entry. He goes deeper in the beyond the grid podcast and this article as well.
“It’s not good enough for Stef” probably because Andretti’s entire claim to an entry is “we’re American, we’ll do it the American way that should be good enough”. No seriously that’s it. I’ve been paying close attention to and actively following their circus and bid and they have never, ever once answered what exact additive value they provide to F1 and they sure do a lot of talking. I’ve already told you this already, F1 does not need Andretti, you can be as angry as you want about it but the numbers don’t lie. If they had the cache they so confidently believe to have the other series Andretti participates in would have enjoyed better engagement, stable if not growing profits, and numbers. Andretti aren’t the magic pill and F1 is doing fine in the U.S. without them. If you don’t love that reason, how about the fact their bid doesn’t make any sense and is already falling apart?
“What does it matter if Andretti haven’t yet built their new facility?” Because that’s supposed to be the base of their entire operation, the heartbeat of it all. Remember, they want to keep it local so everything important is going to be in the US, the UK will be satellite offices at best. You know, the Andretti way. Have you read the lawsuit I linked? It’s really damning. This facility is supposed to be ready in under two years – when they plan on joining the grid and it’s already locked in a legal battle about breach of contract. Oh also, they claim they aren’t strapped for cash so this isn’t about opening up “some pretty substantial funding avenues”. Their F1 operations are – at least on paper – worth more than entire countries’ GDPs so this lawsuit is, and I cannot stress this enough, fascinating. Especially so in the back drop of: Andretti liquidating its current race shop and Micheal claiming the deal with Sauber fell through because of control issues not money – mind you the same entity he claimed to be controlling just sold its entire stake and identity to Audi so whatever did he mean by controlling? Every time a reporter has asked how their F1 preparation is going the Andrettis have just said something to the effect of “it’s going, we’re working as though we’ve been given the green light” but their actions are not backing it up. Look at the entire picture, you’re calling on their rich history and that’s fine and completely true but you also need to look at their very interesting present. Would you really feel as strongly if this was HRT?
I’ve already told you why I maintain Cadillac is a badging exercise. Domenicali asked for a manufacturer and Andretti brought a title sponsor. You know, you know very well manufacturer refers to an entity that is specifically directly providing additive value to F1 including but not limited to OEM engine and power unit supply. That’s the problem, Cadillac isn’t doing ANYTHING for F1, that’s why I’m saying if you believe Cadillac is showing manufacture commitment then INEOS have been manufacturers for a while now just by virtue of slapping their name on a Mercedes rear wing and owning some shares.
How is Alpine a badging exercise exactly? You know Renault outright owns Alpine right? Alpine is their (motor)sports car division and like Toyota with Lexus or wait for it, GM with Cadillac, they represent the parent OEM and have full OEM status and backing. I don’t even know how to explain to you Mercedes is an OEM so here’s the Wikipedia article, read it or don’t, I frankly don’t care anymore. Also, how is setting up an entire project dedicated to supplying four cars with engines and partnering with Ford for electrification in 2026 a badging exercise? RB have actually done more in their short tenure as Red Bull Powertrains than Andretti Cadillac with all the actual tools, manpower, resources and industry knowledge at their finger tips. They even have a road legal car. It’s crazy how little effort actually appears to be put into this by Cadillac.
Did you also see the part where I said OEM or OEM backed, yea that part is for the Aston Martin/Honda and to another extent RB/Ford tie up, do keep up.
I know GM owns Cadillac, that’s why I brought up that if the parent company queried the FIA/F1, they could easily get Cadillac a seat at the table for the 2026 regs discussion for OEMs.
Manufacturers are going to be responsible for a greater output of electrification in the 2026 regs. Ford signing on with RB as partner OEM cite the new drafted regs for its part in less complexity, more electrification – thus to an extent, road car relevancy, and green fuels and I’m not surpassed, the regs are actively being designed to court the likes of them. Cadillac specifically is building domain in electrification in the real world, that’s where the slapping batteries into an Alpine quip came from. once more, keep up.
Look, I’m tired of explaining this to you, I tried months ago and also I linked an excellent breakdown in the prior reply. What makes (financial) sense, makes (financial) sense it doesn’t magically became nonsense because you want it to. I’m starting to realize I’m just talking in circles and I may as well be earnestly engaging in conversations with a brick wall. Consider this me giving up on you, I don’t care if you feel like you’ve won, you clearly need this more than I do.
have a day you deserve mate, I’m tired and I’m done.
knightameer (@knightameer)
15th June 2023, 6:58
I find it hard to believe that offers worth billions are kept secret and hidden in this age of internet while even the smallest such things were uncovered way too easily in the past with less media coverage possible.
bernasaurus (@bernasaurus)
15th June 2023, 8:25
Reading the comments. It would seem Stefano’s views are very much out of sync with F1 fans. And we are F1 fans on here. Why is he doing this? I don’t for a second believe he truly means what he is saying. His loyalty is to his employer and his salary. Their loyalty is to making money.
By putting up a fence to stop newcomers it drives up prices.
New teams will join, but those who can will get paid handsomely for it. It’s just Bernie MKIi. And they’ll take note that fans are committed by nature, and they’ll still tune in whether there’s 10 teams or 13.
The fact I wouldn’t want to be friends with these types of people, I doubt bothers them at all.
Short Circuit (@jjohn)
15th June 2023, 11:16
About as interesting and genuine as the driver ratings for a GP.
Was reported elsewhere and here months ago.
Paul (@frankjaeger)
15th June 2023, 13:50
walking, talking hypocrisy. Makes no sense
Robert
15th June 2023, 15:02
Adding a team, maybe two would be simple addition to the grid. Let’s face it, there are gaps that can be filled between the groups in the front of the pack, best of the rest, upcoming, and bad teams. But the amount of expansion is limited by the mess at the start of the race.
Based on the money being offered though, they could/should consider serious expansion, but would require significant changes to the structure of the sport. Imagine fifteen teams, thirty cars. Two races. One full race, one sprint. One driver per team in each race. You want to make things interesting? Try that.
Denis (@denis1304)
16th June 2023, 9:37
That is just a BS talk to hike admission cost for potential new teams.