In the world of fashion it is often said that less is more and that adding too much to an outfit spoils it. In Formula 1 these days, adding extra races means that the existing race promoters can be charged less – a comfortable arrangement for those who are struggling but a way to push up earnings nonetheless.
There are several race promoters around the world baulking at the prices being charged by Formula One Management at the moment and it is clear that some of them cannot generate more money in the current economic climate. The sport does not want to lose income and so it can only really make more by adding races. The teams will be happy if they get extra money to cover the costs and Ecclestone is now talking about 20 races, rather than the planned 19. At the moment there are two new races planned in 2010 with the return of Canada and a new event in South Korea. The teams have cut back on testing and the idea of Monday testing after races has been discussed a lot as the cost of that would be minimal given that everyone would be there at the circuit after the race weekend.
The only obvious candidate for the 20th race would have to be France, which is in the spotlight again as Jean Todt, the new FIA President, is French, and he wasted no time in talking about the idea after his election.
Todt is talking to the French government about help for a revived race, probably at Magny-Cours and if some money can be raised and a deal cut with Ecclestone then the British GP can get the deal it is looking for as well and everyone will be happy. Adding the French GP will reduce criticism that the Formula One group is turning its back on Europe and will provide a relatively cheap race for all concerned.
A similar attitude will probably be adopted with trackside advertising as well as the new bridges seen in Abu Dhabi, with several sponsors names being featured rather than just one, will mean that revenues will rise as each sponsor will pay less than before but the total will he higher.
joeblogsf1 
France is the only obvious candidate for a new race?
After your excellent article regarding Japan and the importance of the American market for economic health, you have no belief that a revived U.S. Grand Prix will be staged at some point in the near future?
Gman,
I would love to see a race in the United States. But where is the promoter to do it?
Joe, I think you just asked the (multi) million-dollar question, and I don’t have any good idea on that! I don’t think there is a lack of interest from prospective promoters, but the issues of price is a big one. Having a Grand Prix is a great asset for any potential promotera nd other involved parties, but when there are so many other alternatives here that will bring in people and turn a profit, I cannot blame any American-based promoter from keeping away from the F1 circus as it currently operates.
I suppose the best thing I can say is that I don’t know what plans and proposals are sitting on Bernie’s desk, so hope springs eternal here across the Atlantic. With the launch of USF1, Alex Rossi driving in GP2 Asia (which I just discovered while reading GrandPrix.com) and the return of Montreal, hopefully enough momentum will emerge on both sides of a prospective deal to allow for a quality race here in the USA. I think we can see this with MotoGP, where the American market (as well as the tradition European strongholds- Portugal/Netherlands anyone?) is visited and recognized, yet the series also expands into the Middle East and Asia with success.
Joe, in your previous article about Todt and the French Grand Prix, you referred to the deal between the FIA and FOM about protecting classic races, presumably both French and British GPs come under the heading ‘classic’.
No doubt there are strings attached, financial ones, to this agreement, so how hard can Todt push this to re-establish ‘classic’ races? How much help can he expect from FOTA?
@ joesaward
“But where is the promoter to do it?”
Until recently there was one at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, but they weren’t interested in paying B.C. Ecclestone any more than reasonable. And rightly so, I reckon.
Maybe they will have to keep adding more bridges until the whole circuit is covered up like inside a tunnel to make the numbers work… sigh… Thanks to Toyota and Mr Howett for messing it up for everyone
Joe, all:
Please confirm if I am thinking about this in the correct way:
FOM (Bernie) receive money from the promoter (the circuit). The circuit receives money from advertising and ticket sales ?
FOM are owned by CVC ? who are a hedge fund or group of investors or other aggressive financially minded individuals ?
So, the reason FOM are asking so much to host a race is down to a financial group, demanding money from FOM ?
I understand I am simplfying this somewhat, but it is almost 5am.. 🙂
Thanks !
Daniel,
FOM gets money from promoters, TV companies, trackside advertisers, official suppliers and rental of circuit space to merchandisers.
Circuits get money tickets only.
FOM is owned by CVC. CVC has borrowed money secured with the future profits of F1. The debts require an aggressive repayment schedule.
Teams now get 50%.
That says it in a nutshell.