Start, Circuit of the Americas, 2012

FIA president Ben Sulayem open to adding 12th F1 team after Cadillac

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem is open to continuing F1’s grid expansion after the series dropped its opposition to an 11th team joining.

Become a RaceFans Supporter and go ad-free

RaceFans operates thanks in part to the support of its readers. In order to help fund the development and growth of the site please consider becoming a RaceFans Supporter.

For just £1 per month/£12 per year you will also be upgraded to an ad-free account. Sign up and find out more below:

In brief

F1 could have 12th team – Ben Sulayem

Last month Formula One Management confirmed it had reached an agreement in principle for Cadillac to enter the series as an 11th team, having previously opposed expansion of the grid.

The FIA rules allow more than 11 teams to participate, however, and Ben Sulayem says he is open to admitting another. “It’s about doing the right thing,” he told Reuters. “So why do we have an option of 12 if we are going to say no, no, no?”

“With me it is very clear it is a win for everyone with the 11th team.”

F1 last had 12 teams during the 2012 season, before HRT folded.

F1 Academy adds race

F1 Academy has added an extra race to its final round at Yas Marina this weekend. The double-header will therefore become a triple-header.

Its three races will take place at 12:15pm and 8:15pm local time on Saturday and 11:15am on Sunday. The grids will be decided by a single qualifying session with the fastest time deciding starting positions for race one, second fastest for race two and third for race three.

The series is making the addition due to the cancellation of last weekend’s second race at the Losail International Circuit due to barrier damage caused by another series.

Williams place Giusti in F3

Williams junior driver Alessandro Giusti will move from the Formula Regional European championship to Formula 3 next year. He will drive for MP.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Social media

Notable posts from X (formerly Twitter), TikTok and more:

Following Max Verstappen's victory last weekend, he, Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso have now won 200 grands prix between them.

However one of them has been waiting over a decade since his last win…

#F1 #QatarGP #RaceFans

[image or embed]

— RaceFans (@racefansdotnet.bsky.social) 3 December 2024 at 16:14

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

The time has come for Red Bull to replace Perez, says Todfod:

From 2010 to 2013 I always wondered why Massa was retained by Ferrari. Despite Massa’s confidence that he had a contract for next year, he was eventually dumped after four lacklustre seasons. Massa wasn’t even terrible.. he was just just slightly off Alonso’s pace on a consistent basis.

Perez also completed four seasons with Red Bull. His 2021 season wasn’t terrible… but from the second half of 2022 to the end of 2024, he’s been one of the worst drivers to ever drive a championship winning car.

I don’t see Red Bull retaining a driver that’s not even good enough to drive for their B team. His sponsorship money was a nice bonus to the team, but finishing in third in the constructors’ championship along with multiple crashes has definitely taken away from that bonus. He’s a liability currently and it would be foolish of Marko-Horner to put him in that seat for next year and lose another constructors’ championship.
Todfod

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Noel and Sw6569!

On this day in motorsport

  • Born 80 years ago today: Francois Migault, who started 13 grands prix in the seventies and achieved a best finish of 14th in his home race at Dijon in 1974, driving a BRM P160E.

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.

35 comments on “FIA president Ben Sulayem open to adding 12th F1 team after Cadillac”

  1. I would still like to see a return of 13 teams/26 cars on the grid with there been the ability for more than that to attempt to qualify.

    I don’t like how F1 has become a closed shop and how now potential entrants have to jump though hoops and even when they meet all of those criteria they still can get refused.

    If a team has the facilities to design & built 2 cars that meet the regulations and are able to show they have the budget to run them and drivers to drive them then they should be allowed an entry. Thats how it used to be when it was more of a sport and there’s no sporting reason to not do that now.

    More teams means more competition (Which is more action for fans) and equally as (If not more) important it’s also more opportunities for drivers, designers, engineers etc….

    But then we all know that F1 doesn’t want privateer teams that want to be on the grid because they have a love and passion for the sport. Thats just not what F1 is about now because it’s become a very sterile corporate show where there’s no room for the likes of Frank Williams, Ken Tyrrell, Giancarlo Minardi & so on who bring nothing but a love and passion for the sport.

    It’s a shame.

    1. I like the thought process but what about the last time F1 had extra teams. HRT, Caterham, and Marrusia were blights on the series and a discredit to all of the drivers who drove for them. Except Bianchi’s 9th place finish. They added nothing to the spectacle and it actually forced F1 to go against its own rules, the 107% rule.

      I hope Cadillac gets it right but I’m not holding my breath.

      1. Yes, but. The teams you cite were brought in with the understanding of a budget limit. Which was subsequently lifted, wasn’t it? Leaving them pretty helpless.

        1. Good point but the fact they couldn’t even get to 107% makes me think that even with a budget cap they weren’t going to perform or enhance the series. Even the drivers they selected weren’t exactly setting the world on fire, mostly pay drivers. F1 could use less of those guys!

          1. It would have made a huge difference, given the budget cap was due to be $20 m when the three teams were required to apply, $40 m by the time they were accepted and gone (with the prevailing effective minimum to survive up at $80 m in 2009) a couple of months later.

            Marussia was able to generate an average of $55 m during its years in F1, so if it had been competing in a $20 m or $40 m budget cap, it would have been laughing.

          2. Wow, didn’t know about this budget cap thing, but note how much lower it is than the budget cap we have nowadays, so maybe they reasoned it’d be unrealistic to force such a low cap.

      2. They added 6 extra seats on the grid and gave opportunities not only to drivers who may not otherwise have had them but also engineers, designers & mechanics….. Many of whom have subsequently moved up the grid and did so in part because they had F1 experience.

        The backmarker teams always add something because of that and many F1 drivers (Including race winners and world champions) started out by driving for those teams as did many of the leading designers, engineers etc..

        I’d rather underdog independent teams who are on the grid because those running them have a genuine passion for the sport over corporate manufacturers who are run by a board who have no real love for the sport. It’s far easier to get behind, cheer for and become fans of the independents than it is the faceless corporate manufactures.

        Plus as a fan of 40+ years i’ve seen what the manufacturers always do. They never stick around long term and always leave the sport in a worse position than when they got there. The biggest difference between now and the past however is the lack of independent privateer teams to keep the car count up as manufacturers come and go.

        It was those independent teams that kept F1 going after the manufacturer exodus of 2009/10 and the same is true if you go back further to the manufacturer exodus of the 80s & the 50s/60s.

        The board at Cadillac likely don’t even really know what F1 is and are likely only interested now because it’s in a boom period….. Just like it was when manufacturers flooded it in the 80s & 00s and when the boom ended they all left. Same will happen now but again without the independents to fill the void.

        1. @roger-ayles how long did the independent teams really stick around for? Did they really “keep the sport going” as much as you say they did, or is that an over-idealisation of the past driven by nostalgia and romanticism for an era where you likely only remember the bits that you want to?

          As an aside, you say that “The board at Cadillac likely don’t even really know what F1 is and are likely only interested now because it’s in a boom period” – but, when you look at the independent teams that entered in the 1980s and 1990s, there were plenty that had the same mentality as well.

        2. How many ‘independent privateer teams’ have a $450m anti-dilution fee just sitting around. As much as I wish it was true, this isn’t the 70s or 80s anymore!

      3. The 107% rule was actually reintroduced for the new teams in 2010, having been dropped a few years previously. There were only a handful of occasions where the new teams failed to qualify under it – in most cases they were within 107%.

        1. From 2011-2015 the 107% rule was broken 17 times. It was enforced only 4 times. Thats not just a handful in my opinion. Loser teams and loser rules that were NOT enforced, just to protect the image of those teams.

          And the previous stint that the rule was implemented was more like 50/50. With the rules protecting Arrows, Minardi and sometimes Jordan.

          Rules are rules, unless its F1!

  2. Twelve teams would be good. Keep them coming, Ben! Let’s have Lotus next. They haven’t been resurrected as many times as Atari yet. The current owners can certainly afford to run a team and they can bring Zhou back in with them.

    1. Last I heard, Zhou’s manager was involved with the GM effort. He might not be available for Lotus to poach ;)

  3. Would be interesting to see a Chinese team in F1.

    1. Absolutely, however China has been forward thinking and has taken opportunities to leapfrog technologies whenever possible.

      Logically the reason we are passionate about cars and motor racing is a nostalgia and an environment in which we were raised. From my understanding there was never much of a “car culture” in China the way there was in the US, UK, Germany, or Japan.

      Even still, it would be cool if Geely group purchased the IP of Alpine PUs (via their relationship with Renault) and reentered with Lotus branded cars powered by Horse Powertrain.

      1. Probably not going to happen. Once China absorbs Taiwan, and the US goes nuts, its going to be difficult, unless they are trying to steal assets/monies like the EU/US did Russia, then maybe the sucker move, is worth taking.

        1. notagrumpyfan
          4th December 2024, 8:32

          steal assets/monies like the EU/US did Russia, then maybe the sucker move, is worth taking.

          Of course not ‘stealing’ if based on laws, and checked by an independent legal system.

          But I guess those who fall for Russian propaganda, or populist accusations, don’t understand those processes.

  4. FIA taking so much heat these days. But they talking more sense than guys like Toto so it can’t be all bad. Maybe the FIA can stop trying to protect the commercial rights holders and spice up the racing by not protecting guys like George or Max anymore, but also police the ridiculous crying on the radio, by banning it from the media if it’s in bad taste.

    1. @pcxmac The FIA is going to be in legal trouble if it makes the proposed change to the ethics committee, the first time it tries to use the rule (French law doesn’t allow internal investigations to be blocked or delayed unless an alternative remedy is made available without delay).

  5. Evidently the “12 team” comments have done their bit to bury bad news.
    Let’s worry about keeping 20 cars on track without being affected by unnecessary debris, before worrying about the “in principle” 22, before even contemplating 24 – without any existing team dropping out or selling up (Alpine?).
    And let’s actually worry about the president and governing body actively seeking to limit the ways its leadership can be held to account for bad governance!

    1. Yes, it’s like having Bernie back again. Is it the bad news from Zandvoort, or something else?

      1. @bullfrog Several different things, including the backlash from trying to get the FIA ethics committee to stop investigating the FIA President.

    2. notagrumpyfan
      4th December 2024, 8:39

      Evidently the “12 team” comments have done their bit to bury bad news.

      That BBC link just proves how dangerous the current FIA moves to become an autocratic organisation are.
      I guess the president of South Korea will be jealous.

    3. I can’t see a team dropping out in the current environment. Since the franchise/closed-shop model was introduced the value of entries has risen massively. If you pulled your team out of F1 altogether you’d be losing out on potentially hundreds of millions of dollars.

      Far more likely that Alpine sells up to someone – indeed it is speculated that the reason Briatore was brought back was to help facilitate the eventual sale of the team.

    4. Not really. These things happen simultaneously. The FIA has been a proponent of running with full grids since the start of the current administration.

      No wonder FOM and the teams have their minions creating a hostile environment surrounding the FIA!

      I guess Toto Wolff and his ilk just need a few more millions.

  6. Stefan GP

    1. Somewhere in Serbia there’s a shipping container full of office equipment just waiting to be deployed to an F1 paddock.

  7. – Motorsport’s governing body wants to change its rules to limit the ways its leadership can be held to account for bad governance. –
    In other words, it will still look more like a dictatorship if Mohammed Ben Sulayem is not responsible for poor leadership. Very worrying.

    1. The ethics committee was playing politics, blatantly and clumsily, so a change was needed. The proposed changes are not ideal, however. Independent menbers are a better way to go. No doubt the Senate and GA will want to make sure their influence is not diminished, so whether or not these will pass remains to be seen. But whatever the case, the FIA president still serves as an elected representative of the members and is accountable to them.

      It’s high time FOM and F1 get some resistance from the FIA. Todt was so scared to be seen as partial (to Ferrari) that he gave up far too much of the FIA’s power and role. FOM and F1 have far better media representation, too, so any news about this must always consider this. For example; the English BBC’s report yesterday on the proposed changes “somehow” managed to name only the non-European members of the senate (a minority!). There’s an agenda here that’s obvious to see.

      1. The ethics committee is composed of members who are as independent as the fact the FIA requires them to be FIA personnel will permit.

        The BBC’s report on the proposed changes named the senate members average readers of its F1 news pages were likely to have heard of. Just about everyone else in the Senate would only be known to motorsports fans. That’s not “somehow”, that’s knowing journalism is not about doing a dry list of names, rather about linking the information provided to information the audience is likely (or at any rate more likely) to already possess, so they remember the news item. Apparently following standard tenets of journalism is such an obvious agenda, it did not occur to you to consider it. (Obviously a different journalist outlet would emphasise names that would be known to its specific audience, and therefore might pick different names – for example, if someone from the Senate was known for activities in the same country as the journalistic outlet, or if the outlet was a specialist motorsport publication rather than a general news site that happens to have a motorsport section).

        1. @alianora-la-canta it’s MichaelN – that poster always responds to even the mildest criticism of Sulayem by posting fake news that seems to be part of a smear campaign against anybody who dares criticise him, to the point you have to wonder if he is one of Sulayem’s own personal assistants.

          Just take, for example, the fake claim that the article above ““somehow” managed to name only the non-European members of the senate (a minority!)”. That is in fact a lie – indeed, it comes across as deeply ignorant of that poster when the majority of the senate members are actually non-European, unless, for example, Senegal, China and the Philippines are now all “European”.

  8. With so many rookies in the grid, why not? Get the full grid. No more charter teams like in the early 90s when they had to pre-qualify and qualify for the maximum 26 cars. Life GP, Coloni, Pacific and Zakspeed came to mind.

  9. This is one of the saddest round-ups. To be honest.

    F1 moves further to the periphery of true relevance as the market value grows. Passion does not stem from dollars, and is impervious to corruption.

  10. From 2010 to 2013 I always wondered why Massa was retained by Ferrari. Despite Massa’s confidence that he had a contract for next year, he was eventually dumped after four lacklustre seasons. Massa wasn’t even terrible.. he was just just slightly off Alonso’s pace on a consistent basis.

    Re COTD :
    Ferrari had planned to sign Robert Kubica for the 2012 season, but his rally accident ended those plans. They also offered a seat to Mark Webber, who declined due to his strong position at RBR and close ties with Dietrich Mateschitz. Nico Rosberg similarly turned down an offer, reportedly on Keke’s advice, shortly after his first F1 win at the 2012 Chinese Grand Prix. At the time, Raikkonen, wasn’t an option neither were Vettel and Hamilton.

  11. BBC article, FIA seeks rule changes after president allegations, highlights a mafia becoming more mafioso. Absolutely disgusting. You’d think CAS would not allow this.

Comments are closed.