Thoughts en route to Texas

As we head off to Austin in a couple of days, there are quiet rumours cooking over in Texas that the promoters of the United States Grand Prix at the Circuit of the Americas are struggling to make the event pay and want to make some changes in the future. The word is that Texan free enterprise and the Formula One group seem to have a potato/potahto, tomato/tomahto kind of problem and are beginning to head either to High Noon on Main Street or towards Gerschwin’s celebrated chorus: “Let’s call the whole thing off”. Now, Austin is charming and is, if nothing else, a race in the United States, but it is not New York nor Los Angeles and F1’s penetration into the US markets is still minimal as a result. This makes no sense because F1 is a consumer business and the United States is the world’s largest consumer market (by a million miles – and will remain so for at least another generation, no matter how hard the Chinese work). Thus if F1 is to fulfil its potential it should be making major efforts to get into the United States. This talk of a race in Las Vegas does not appear to have any substance at all (in the finest traditions of Vegas smoke and mirrors), but serious projects in California and New Jersey have fallen by the wayside because F1 will not compromise on money. F1 compromises to be in Monte Carlo, why cannot it do the same in other places? Many big international corporations alter their approach in different markets, in order to achieve the best possible results.

At the same time we are going to Austin with two assets that might help growth in the US market and there is no definite sign that either one will be used. Alexander Rossi is the only American driver within realistic range of F1 and yet getting into a race seat has proven to be difficult because there is no money to support him. If he is again left out in Austin because someone else came along with cash, it would not be smart, although one can understand it if Marussia need the money to survive. Surely, it would be wiser for the sport to find some cash from a shoebox under the bed somewhere and got Rossi into a car. This would get the US fans excited. If there is a US driver more people will watch… etc etc etc.

The same is true of Simona de Silvestro. She has enormous potential for the sport, not simply because she is a women who can (perhaps) race competitively and not be merely a token presence, but also because she is already a known quantity in the US, with a proven record in IndyCar, including a second place finish on a street circuit (which is a pretty good recommendation). As we have seen with Danica Patrick, the popularity of a racing series can go through the roof if there is a woman racing. It adds massive interest in the sport.

The two youngsters are assets that could go to waste and while there is an argument that F1 drivers have to make things happen for themselves, there is also logic in the argument that wasting assets is simply not very sensible.

102 thoughts on “Thoughts en route to Texas

  1. Wow Joe A very prolific 3 days of posting and comment responses! Nice to have “our Man on the scene” covering breaking news.

    Regarding troubles in Austin, maybe the organizers are concerned about losing market share to the developing Mexican GP? They may as well take a stand now. If Bernie wants two races in close proximity he will be pressed to insure some level of profitability by reducing fee charges.

    One way of increasing fee values is guaranteeing exclusivity. And a sure way to decrease it is by saturating a market with an alternative product a short distance away.

    1. Austin and Mexico City aren’t really all that close, about 1500 Km or 950 miles. Almost as far as Silverstone to Budapest. That being said a very substantial number of fans at the US GP are Mexicans who may well rather go to Mexico City, at least the first year or two.

    1. Yes, it really has been cracking. This is the first blog I look at to keep up to date on things. Thanks for all your efforts Joe.

      Rob

  2. Ah, so it really is Austin that Vegas rumour was targetted at. that makes a lot of sense then.
    I guess its great that Bernie often works the same way – we hear some kind of rumour and can take it as confirmation that something is going on elsewhere – as a que to have a bit of a dig / look at other buzz to find out why it was said!

  3. Any news on Ferrari and/or McLaren wanting to announce where Vettel and Alonso are going to be driving next year?
    I saw Ferrari actually tweeting a picture of a sealed envelope with their adress written on it in German (likely a hint of singed contract with Vettel). And McLaren showing their P1 GTR project off (place to put Button in?)

    1. There is no doubt at all that Vettel will drive for Ferrari. Everyone is presuming that Alonso will join McLaren but there is still talking to be done, I guess.

      1. I don’t know whether El Ron is a revenge-best-served-cold type of person, but it would be slightly amusing if the negotiations with Alonso end up fizzling out after all his other options have disappeared, with the final statement from Woking being something like “That’s for the $100M and the 2008 constructors’, pal — all the best for 2015.”

        1. Dennis probably does blame Alonso for the $100 million fine but that’s a bit like a bank robber in jail saying that he wouldn’t be there if it wasn’t for the cops who tracked him down and arrested him. He says he’s in jail because the cops caught him but most people would say he’s in jail because he robbed the bank.

          But regardless it’s hard to see how how the two could have a good working relationship.

          I heard a very wild rumor – the new American team will be using Ferrari engines and other components. That doesn’t exactly make them the Ferrari junior team but if the two teams are close, and Alonso has another year on his contract and he has no other place to land then he just might end up there for a year. OK, the chances are slim but…

          1. This comment has a number of glitches
            1: the a story of 2007 has yet to be fully told.
            2: a snitch and a policeman do different jobs
            3: it is no secret that Haas has a deal with Ferrari
            4: Haas is not coming until 2016
            5: Alonso has terminated his Ferrari contract – willingly.
            6: Ferrari accepted the termination and were quite happy to do so.
            7: The chances are not slim. They are as dead as the Norwegian Blue parrot.

            Apart from that I agree with you entirely.

      2. If Alonso doesn’t go to Woking what then for McLaren and their search for a star? Presumably Hamilton’s value would shoot right back up again after becoming slightly suppressed by the Red Bull/Kvyat signing.
        I’m not sure who holds the Ace card here …

        1. I expect Ron Dennis will have Alonzo working for peanuts… and loving it (as much as Ron Dennis can love a driver named F. Alonzo)…

  4. Until Ecclestone goes from Formula 1, very little will change both in the distribution of money to the teams, or any viable US races determined by market forces rather than just paying the required fees as ‘Bernie’ and CVC demand, I fear this will be the last US Grand Prix until we see a change of management, Austin will disappear as many previous ones have!

  5. I doubt the American public would be engaged by watching their man (or woman) driving around at the back of pack with no chance of a point never mind winning. Until they are kicking butt, they will not be interested in a big way.

      1. Of course you’re right that Rossi can’t just drop into a top team.

        At the same time, the number of Americans who would be “excited” about him driving in Austin are numbered in the hundreds… and many of them will be his family and friends. Nothing against the guy, but the only people who seem to think he matters are those within the F1 club who think having an American, any American, matters. Whether Rossi drives in Austin or not won’t matter at all.

        Now, if he manages to have some significant success in F1, that could change. But just putting him in a car? Nope…

          1. I’d love to see the details. While I’m sure he has plenty of family and friends, I’d be surprised if he has *that* many.

            I’m not trying to diss the guy, I hope he succeeds. But at present he’s a nobody. If someone has lead you to believe that Americans would be excited to see him trundling around in a crappy car at the back, well, I’m afraid they’ve misinformed you.

      2. Depends on your definition of “arrive”. Besides JV there was one L. Hamilton in 2007 winning in a top team. But I think those were different sorts of “arrivals”.

  6. To me, as a UK Telly based fan,

    a) Austin a cracking circuit, and am really looking forward to this years race with reduced aero rounds 3-9 and turn 19.

    and b) the prospect of a doubleheader with Mexico 1000miles/1week away sounds a very tempting Summer Holiday prospect. 2 races and a road trip.

    Is there not, as well as cost savings for the team, some advantage to both circuits of both existing?

  7. “As we have seen with Danica Patrick, the popularity of a racing series can go through the roof if there is a woman racing. It adds massive interest in the sport.”

    You missed out the word ‘sexy’.

  8. Look in a “shoebox” you say… I wonder how big Bernie’s feet are?

    Regarding Simona, didn’t she miss the chance to get a superlicence because of money issues? I seem to recall Monisha Kaltenborn said something like they were ready to work with her, but there were problems on Simona’s side which stopped them moving forward?

  9. Why not put those two in the second Ferrari and Williams? Give them a chance to be competitive – within reason – and couldn’t do much worse than those presently occupying the seats.

  10. And what about Miami? I think this is the place for a F1 street racing. You have the (latin) fans, the glamour, the scenery, the climate, the public, the hotels, the hub airport etc… So why not?

  11. Not at all surprised that Texas would be having 2nd thoughts about Bernie, Inc… but I didn’t expect it to come to the surface quite this fast. (From the moment he decided to treat UT football as a mere inconsequential detail, I started a 5 year clock on him wearing out his welcome.)

    However, I can’t help but wonder if they’ve been watching Bernie come up empty in both NY/NJ and Calif… to the point where he was reduced to spreading the comically thin story about Vegas… and perhaps the Austin folks think they have him by the short hairs?

    Can Bernie afford to have Yet Another Failure in the US?

    1. I seem to remember a $25 million dollar annual subsidy from the State to help offset the track start up costs. I also seem to remember it was for the first 5 years?

      Confirmation anyone???

      1. It’s that amount, but it must be approved on a year-by-year basis by the TX Sec of State based on her judgment that the income to the state economy warrants it. She does this by looking at sales tax numbers. The criteria appears to up to her, AFAIK it’s not based on an explicit formula.

        Wherever I look, I see 10 years… but I have some recollection of reading/hearing that it’s really only a commitment for 5 years… however, I can’t be sure of that last part, I might be wrong about that.

        1. The fact that the subsidy is conditional based on the judgment of the state comptroller means that its 10-yr length is effectively non-binding. Don’t know if this has any bearing on the promoter’s contract with FOM, but the state likely can cite falling attendance as ample cause for bailing out.

      2. GeorgeK, there is no subsidy. The Major Events Trust Fund was designed to use the sales Taxes created from these large events to pay back the promoters their expenses (to a certain point). In other words, what State sales taxes are collected because of the event are given back to the promoters as a reward for them bringing in the large event.

        There is no line item in the State budget for this fund, the fund is filled with taxes from the event. It’s a win-win for everyone.

        1. As long as the comptroller deems the race to have had sufficient economic impact (a judgment that appears to be at her discretion without firm criteria), the promoters will get $25M from the state for as many as 10 years. That was a precondition for the whole thing moving forward to begin with.

          The fact that the $25M is not a line item in the state budget, but rather comes from the Major Events Trust Fund, doesn’t mean it’s not a subsidy. While there may be some term other than subsidy to describe it, I have yet to see any alternate term used in print. Every item in the TX press I can find calls it a subsidy. (If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…)

          1. RShack, if it doesn’t come from my pocket, it isn’t a subsidy. The only way an individual will pay from his pocket is to actually consume the product. If you go to the race, the sales taxes collected will be used to build up the fund. If you drink at bars during the next week, it goes into the fund. BTW, since this is a “Major” event, the time period for collecting taxes like this is one year. This means events that are not in and around next weekend but are Formula One related could be used in these calculations.

            This cannot be any simplier, IMHO. Yes, I’m not an accountant nor do I play one at work but the premise seems to be logical.

            1. > RShack, if it doesn’t come from my pocket, it isn’t a subsidy.

              Um, well, OK… if you say so…

              Based on what you said earlier, I wonder (not conclude, but wonder) if you might think there is a tight coupling between the race’s economic activity and what it receives from the state. There is not. The $25M given by the state to the race organizers is not tied to those monies that go into the fund from the race weekend. Rather, it’s a very loose coupling: money goes into the Major Events Fund from all sorts of things, and then the state disburses $25M to the race organizers each year provided that the comptroller signs off on it. There is no requirement that the race generate that much revenue for the state coffers or for the state’s economy.

  12. “assets that could go to waste” They are not good enough so the they do not deserve to be there! Already too much money over talent in f1

      1. They are too old already. Vettel was a triple World Champion at Simona’s age. And he had won 7 races already at Rossi’s age. With the debut age of F1 drivers in modern F1 being 17 years, as the example of Verstappen proves, I’m afraid they have no chance to make it big in F1. And who needs another tailender just to make up the numbers?

        1. What a lot of rubbish. Drivers coming to F1 don’t have to be a certain age. If they are under 30 them that is fine but to say that a 23 year old and 26 year old are too old is just plain stupid.

          1. It could well be that talent is the reason. There have always been backers for talented drivers, like Vettel, Alonso, Hamilton, Raikkonen, Button, Liuzzi, Alguersuari, to name just a few. Some didn’t achieve much because the backers thougfht they didn’t live up to the promise they seemed to be, but others went on to win titles.

  13. Joe, do you feel that in order for this great sport to continue that Bernie or whomever is in charge will have to take a look at the fees charged for hosting thses events?

    The world economy is not what it used to be and less and less people come to the races but fees continue to rise. Bernie is a smart man, I guess, and does see this but hasn’t reacted fast enough to silence the haters of the sport.

    Austin is a great place as I’ve been here since 1968. I’ve seen it grow Austin is the 11th largest city in the US by population and the surrounding area is growing faster. We may not be NY or LA but we are Texas…

    Welcome back

    1. But there seems to be an endless queue of governments willing to ship cash to Bernie (Russia, Azerbaijan, Mexico…) for the prestige of putting on a race. So Bernie is feeling no pain. It would be a great pity if Austin ends up losing the race because of this.

  14. I have to admit, going to Austin doesn’t have a lot of appeal, but a race in NY, California or Florida would. As far as a US driver, I’d rather see Jimmy Johnson in a third Mercedes for one race, than Alex Rossi trundling around the back.

      1. It’s not realistic to think either Rossi or Di Silvestro would have any significant or lasting impact on the popularity of F1 in the US. F1 would need a Johnson or Jr or Busch brother to have an impact and that’s not realistic either.

        Open wheel and road racing in general is a niche sport in the US. That is the reality. The average number of persons watching an F1 race on NBCSN so far this year is still under 400,000, or about the same as Indycar. Any variances when Rossi drives are so small it’s not possible to directly attribute them to him and him alone. Much of the growth is due to extended carriage deals where NBCSN is more available in markets not requiring additional subscriptions. The same is happening with Fox, more markets at no extra cost, included in the basic subscription.

        1. Why are you incapable of looking beyond next week? If you do not have an American at least trying to get into F1, then you are never going to get one. Jimmie Johnson is nt going to give up in NASCAR to drive an F1 car. It’s obvious.

          1. There’s nothing wrong with the idea that Rossi might have beneficial effects over time… the idea that’s not sound is the notion that putting him in a bad car for the upcoming race in Austin will excite more than just a very few… these are two very different things…

  15. I think a key ingredient for U.S. Public interest is not having a driver, but rather having a known, successful driver. Perhaps I’m dating myself, but back in the 1970’s there was an American driver in F1 named Bret Lunger. Curiously, he drove a customer McLaren that he purchased from the team, which could be done at the time. Bret was a decent mid-field finisher, but as Ron Dennis recently pointed out, customer cars will never be in the thick of things. Consequently, Bret Lunger was never popular in the US. If the series wants American attention, an American needs to be ina competitive car and needs to be winning and a contender for the World Championship. Putting an unknown (to the mass public) American in an uncompetitive car is just blowing smoke up a dead cows ass. To gain American interest, an American has to be winning, and that’s the bottom line.

    1. I was always sort of rooting for Brett Lunger as an underdog. Once I was at a restaurant in Elmira during a USGP and he was at a nearby table, apparently unrecognized. Often wonder if he would have appreciated the recognition or not.

        1. Yes, but I think that any customer car starts as an underdog. Even Moss / Walker rarely beat the factory team (and that was long ago).

  16. “F1 compromises to be in Monte Carlo, why cannot it do the same in other places? Many big international corporations alter their approach in different markets, in order to achieve the best possible results.”
    This statement couldn’t be more true. I beleive it just shows that F1 is an international company that thinks very small.
    Is Bernie doing this to buy F1 for a reduced price? Or are CVC that greedy that they are looking at how much can we make today and not looking at the future?
    No American businessman is going to invest huge amounts of money without a reasonable return and American governments do not need exposure or the extra tourist dollars that F1 brings. (in the overall picture in the USA it is peanuts)
    Why is Moto GP doing so well in the US? Maybe F1 owners should keep their ego in check and have a look.

    1. Because MotoGP is doing so bad in most other countries except Spain and US. That means they somehow need to fill the schedule. It works because they ask for little money compared to the F1 fees.

    2. “It works because they ask for little money compared to the F1 fees.”

      That’s the point exactly…….

      The Moto GP races in the U.S. are very successful.

  17. I am not sure if your impression of Austin as a provincial town is accurate, Joe. From what I hear it is a town on the rise, with a thriving and vibrant cultural scene that rivals traditional cultural centers like NYC and LA.

    Atlanta was regarded as a dowdy Southern town just 30 years ao, but it is one of the most important cities of the USA now. Same goes for Denver.
    I think F1 landed in Austin for a reason.

    1. Please don’t try to claim that Austin is on a par with New York and Los Angeles in terms of influence. That was my point. As I said I like Austin. Don’t make more of the comment than was intended.

      1. No doubt LA and NY are much, much larger media markets. The kings of US media. I don’t know though in this case if that makes much of a difference for US fans attending or watching on TV. In many places in the US LA and NYC aren’t looked upon favorably as compared to other places in the US. LA and NYC aren’t a hotbed of race fans as a percentage of the population. The locales and so populated that even a small percentage of people is a pretty good number but if one wanted to reach more into the US motor racing culture it would be either Indianapolis (which I think is fitting but F1 wore out their welcome with the track) or Charlotte or Daytona. And either of the latter I think one would be certifiable to think a race would be run in either of those cities. Though to be fair, when I first heard Austin as a candidate I didn’t believe it either.

    2. > I think F1 landed in Austin for a reason.

      Yes, there was a reason: Somebody got Texas to pay Bernie $25 million per year for the privilege of losing money.

      He’d hold a race in your grandmother’s back yard if she spent a few hundred million to build an F1 track and agreed to pay him tens of millions per year.

      1. And? That is the same for every GP venue. It merely serves to illustrate that the City of Austin is ambitious and $25 million is a relative bargain for a worldwide advertising campaign.

        Like I said in my previous post, cities like Atlanta and Denver were on nobody’s radar 30 years ago, until key people in the area decided to increase their city’s renown. Nowadays they are major commercial and cultural hubs.

        Austin has traditionally been overshadowed by larger cities like Houston, Dallas/FortWorth, and San Antonio. Shoot, they don’t even have an NBA team.

        If the City has decided to compete and strive for greater renown, an F1 event is a great idea, and the money it takes a mere operating expense in the grand scheme of things.

        1. Hey… I’m not trying to diss Austin… I like Austin… I think Austin is great…

          My *only* point is that having an F1 race is not in any way an indicator of a city’s cultural or economic status… it’s just an indicator of Bernie getting his money, that’s all…

          p.s. Re: Atlanta and Denver, I think you might be off by a couple decades… but that doesn’t matter… I take your point about up-and-coming cities regardless…

  18. I totally agree regarding getting Rossi a race seat.

    He is a good driver, articulate, charismatic and good looking.
    Combined with getting Simona a drive could significantly boost viewership in the United States, and both would appeal to Americans and grow female viewership: F1 is sexy and no one is trying to tap into that element.

    A slight tangent-
    PR is to tight within F1, photographers have almost zero access to shoot the drivers, so Americans don’t know who they are, what they look like, and can’t pronounce most of their names.

    The teams have got to make these guys more available – For automobile, lifestyle and fashion magazines! F1 can be the new soccer!

  19. Circuit of The Americas hosted a screening of “Senna” last night at Alamo Drafthouse here in Austin. It was packed. The interest within the city seems to be growing. CoTA has finally started doing some actual marketing on the radio and TV. Texas Motor Speedway has actually started copying the format of CoTA’s “How the West was Formula 1” radio ad.

    It is a shame that this “no money to pay for the race” thing is actually an issue. The interest in the US will build, but It needs time. It needs a decade. It needs more races, it needs an American driver, it needs an American team. All of these things take time, but they are starting to happen.

    The point is this: If F1 really wants to crack the US market, the key must be to make the race affordable for the promoter. If FOM wants it done, that is what needs to happen. Austin has proven to be an excellent match for F1. The fee is just too damn high. They can’t treat the US market like they treat the European and Asian markets. The interest exists in Europe and Asia because that is the highest form of Motorsport they have. Venues are a dime a dozen and they can afford to just keep charging the promoter to death because they have a line of venues waiting to pay.

    In the US we have NASCAR. We don’t need F1. FOM must remember that they are the ones who need America, and not the other way around. If you are trying to win a market, you don’t do it by overcharging for your product.

    I can’t wait for Friday in Austin, Joe. There is so much to discuss!

  20. Austin is a lovely, hipster-soaked town, but if you want F1 to succeed in America you will need to move it off NBC Sports and on to Fox. Fox is drawing 1 million viewers on NFL Sundays just to watch a pre-recorded IMSA race. It’s a numbers game in the US, and only 400,000 or so are seeing the NBCSN races. No one outside of the hard core enthusiast knows who Alex Rossi is, and the same is true (largely) for Simona. You won’t move the numbers with either of those two in a car. Kurt Busch, maybe.

      1. I believe the closest Rossi has gotten to a car was Belgium and Russia. The ratings for were up 70% for Belgium which is good but less than the 93% overall increase NBC has seen for the cable broadcasts this year. Russia had 402,000 viewers which is at the bottom of the 730 AM Eastern broadcasts.
        http://www.racer.com/f1/item/109906-nbc-reports-russian-gp-coverage-continues-positive-ratings-trend

        A top American driver would help. One advantage F1 has that it needs to promote is its technology. American racing series -NASCAR, IndyCar, and Tudor sportscar, have gone the stifling spec car route. F1 needs to promote what it has, and promote in general.

        1. You have to start somewhere. We all know that no American star is going to wander into F1 and perform at his best straight away. It takes time. Just as Montoya, Hornish and Franchitti all struggled in NASCAR, so the same would happen if the story was F1. We saw it 20 years ago with Michael Andretti. He was a great driver but did not get the time needed to get up to speed in F1 – and it’s harder now. So working your way up is the only way and Rossi is the only game in town at the moment!

    1. Joe, feel free to publish or not… but FYI that link you just published in a post from Alberto Dietz is to a wacko rightwingnut web site… they deal in bizarro looney-tunes stuff…

        1. > RShack just missed an excellent opportunity to either
          > thoroughly refute or remain silent.

          I used to try, but have learned it’s pointless. Some folks live in a parallel universe and are immune to reason. (I’m sure you say the same about those who aren’t in your thankfully small club.)

          Plus, Joe’s house is not the place. You should have had enough respect for that to not post links to cultist propaganda.

  21. Everyone goes on about needing a ” ‘Merican ” driver. This may be true, but I think another problem F-1 doesn’t draw more people in the U.S. is simple geography. You mentioned earlier, Joe in the first post this week about “Las Vegas”, that a night race there would be a “rubbish” time for European viewers. Well, most of the races, in order to show them at a “non rubbish” time for said viewers, happen to take place at a rubbish time for folk here in the US, especially on the left coast. Some of us do get up to watch the races live, usually 5:00 am, sometimes as early as 3:00am. We are the niche sport viewers though, not the mainstream. I also get up early to watch Premier League. Mainstream sports fans can have a relaxing breakfast before tuning in to the game, be it Baseball, NFL Football, or NASCAR.
    At one time, tape delay was the answer. In fact, for the first two decades that the Indy 500 was televised, it was done so via tape delay. Now days, that’s just not going to work, since we have instant results thanks to the computers we all carry in our pockets.
    Personally, I prefer to watch the races live. If I wait and record it to watch later, I tend to lose interest, knowing that I can always watch it later. Soon, I end up never watching it, especially since I already know the result.
    You will also find that viewership for all motor sports in the US in on the decline, making it much harder for sponsors to get their bang for their buck. I don’t know what is driving this trend, and perhaps that is fodder for a later story.
    I am passionate about motor sports, Formula One in particular. I study the sport, take two publications (F1 Racing and Racer), as well as subscribe to your wonderful GP+ (to anyone on the fencepost about this one, it is perhaps the best value in any publishing regarding Formula One). I cannot, however, count more than two other people in the town I live in that even have a clue about the difference between NASCAR and Formula One, much less Prototype racing, or IndyCar racing.
    There is a lot out there that Formula One is competing with for attention these days, and while I don’t suggest FOM starts scheduling racing around our hours, the powers that be have to realize that their priceless jewell has far less value in the U.S., and that people like me, who would love to have more races in North America, are very much in the margins. I think FOM needs to be more realistic in it’s expectations of what the market will bear, keeping in mind that such a market doesn’t really exist, and cannot until due diligence is done in marketing, and reasonable sanctioning fees. Formula One needs North America more than North America needs Formula One. To most here, the announcement of a new race is met with “meh…..”

    1. The key is to create a TV market in the US time zones: Canada, Brazil, Mexico and three US races would do it. That would be enough to create TV value in the US and then start times in Europe could be played with to add more possible viewing at sensible hours. However the plan falls at the first fence because F1 is overpriced for US markets.

    2. +1000. Very well written and thoughtful; I agree 100%. As a left coaster I feel exactly the same way about race times. I am so looking forward to watching a race in the middle of the day!

  22. Joe,
    I don’t think you understand a lot of the American mindset. (for example – I think after being in Austin for the football game last year opened your eyes to how big college football is in the US). I am a devoted F1 fan – have been all of my life and I spend money to go to races. I live in LA, but I go to the race in Austin every year. I also go to races abroad. You could not pay me to go to a race around New York / New Jersey. And I have been there dozens of times. If I am going to travel to that area for a race, I would much rather go Quebec.
    If the race was in Southern California were I live, I would probably go to the race. That being said, I have not gone to the races at Fontana (NASCAR, IndyCar-CART) in years, and where as I use to go to the Long Beach GP both F1 & CART, I have given up on that for the last several years.
    Its like real-estate – location – location – location. It has to be someplace that I want to go to.
    To get more Americans interested – an American driver and an American team would sure help. But they have to be competitive!. American Olympic coverage is generally limited to sports that Americans can possibly win. Sticking an American in a third car of a winning team would go far to make both the team and the sport better known in America.

  23. Ironic that two of the teams that are in the worst financial trouble (excluding Caterham which looks like it won’t be racing in Austin and possibly a humongous lid being kept on the problems of a certain green-and-orange team) are the ones that hold possible keys for F1’s future in the Americas. Now, if F1 were a normal business that was aware of its risks and opportunities in the US market, they’d be laughing… If.

Leave a comment