I am a big fan of the Singapore Grand Prix, even if it is probably the toughest race of the year. The entire F1 programme is shunted six hours backwards in the day. This is fine if you live on European time, going to bed at five or six in the morning and then sleeping until midday or one in the afternoon. It gets rather amusing as the F1 folk arrive at the track at three in the afternoon, saying “Good morning” to one another and eating breakfast… Lunch for them was (obviously) at six pm and dinner was any time after two in the morning. The teams mainly ate at the race track, served by their hospitality units, but the rest of us did what we could, which is where it got complicated because there are not too many places serving dinner at three am. Most of us lived off sandwiches, ice cream, energy bars and coffee that was kindly provided by the Media Centre. Most of the pressmen seemed to be able to adapt to the timings, although a few achieved this only by staying out partying until the dawn. I work on the principle that one sleeps when you need to. Unfortunately I adapt very quickly to time changes, after many years dealing with them, but in Singapore that means that rather than staying on European time I was getting up at eight o’clock in the morning, but would then find myself working until two or three or four in the morning. Sunday night did not really finish until seven o’clock on Monday morning, and then I had a couple of hours asleep before needing to finish off other deadlines that do not move. I spent the rest of the Monday seeing old friends, admittedly in a rather sleepy fashion, although lunch at the Swiss Club was very pleasant. Then it was time for a few swift glasses in the lounge and sleeping most of the way home. Now I am back in Paris and on French time again and I don’t feel too bad, although I have decided to abandon the US visa interview that was supposed to happen tomorrow because I dare not risk having no passports at all, as my second one (British people with a good excuse are allowed two) is with the Indian authorities and I dare not hand the other over to the Americans lest I find myself without a passport to go to Japan and Korea. In recent years visas have become a real problem for F1 journalists because we travel so much and there is no time to do it all. So we juggle like crazy. I personally think that any country agreeing to host an F1 race should have special arrangements for us because we are there to promote their countries, but not all of them see it like that. I will not get into too much detail let’s just say that when it comes to visas, countries that talk a lot about freedom and liberty fare pretty badly alongside countries that are supposed to be restrictive. I have missed races because of visa problems, but that was back in the 1980s when the Czechoslovakian authorities made life very difficult when I wanted to go to Brno, behind The Iron Curtain. It does not really make sense though as motor races are designed to attract people and the journalists are there to tell the world what great places these are.
Anyway Singapore is a great event, apart from a few too many security checks. There are also cab drivers and policemen who do not know what they are doing. The circuit itself runs very smoothly and there is a really super atmosphere with night racing that makes this race unlike any other on the F1 calendar.
There was a fair bit of gossip in the paddock in Singapore but nothing wildly revealing. There was talk of new calendars but no-one seems to be sure whether the draft proposed will actually translate into the calendar, or whether there will be more changes. Singapore re-upped for another five years although the local politicians did not give any assurances about the track layout. I think a change would be a good idea, to help get better overtaking. What was interesting was that the Minister involved came up with numbers about what the race was costing. He said that the event currently costs $120 million to host each year and explained that the government picks up 60 percent of the bill. That is a lot of money compared to similar events elsewhere. Down in Melbourne the whingers get really whiney when it is revealed that the Grand Prix costs the taxpayer $50 million. They always forget to include all the economic benefits in the calculations, but the Minister in Singapore made it very clear that the 150,000 additional visitors each year generate tourism receipts of around $120 million, thanks largely to a mammoth 30 percent levy on all hotel rooms within easy reach of the circuit.
This means that the event costs Singapore nothing and all the intangibles such as image value and secondary receipts come for free. Having said that there is clearly room for cost savings if Melbourne can do it for half the money.
Lighting is expensive, but there must be other ways that money can be saved.
There is also the question of disruption as the current race track messes up the city pretty spectacularly as it shuts down the major traffic artery, known as the Nicholl Highway. The only way to avoid this is to move the track entirely to the east of this road, which would mean that half the track would have to change. We would lose the two bridges over the Singapore River, although you can only see one when you watch TV and it would mean that there would be fewer colonial buildings in the background. However it is a dark race and the background is largely irrelevant so I see no reason to keep that. There is the added problem that nothing can be changed on the western side of the track as the only areas which might offer changes are the Singapore Cricket Club and the War Memorial, and to be honest I am not quite sure which is more sacred ground in Singapore. The cricket club pre-dates the republic by almost 100 years and has rights that even the government cannot challenge.
I suspect that in the future the circuit will change with more of the action in Marina Park, to the north of the current pit and paddock area, where is also room to put the stage for concerts (thus replacing the cricket ground) with the track also zipping into and out of Suntec City. That would retain many elements of the track as it is now, but would also allow for better overtaking places without moving it too far out of town. It would also mean that more of the track facilities could be semi-permanent (and therefore cheaper).
We will see.
joeblogsf1 
Good call on the Red Bull dark horse blog
Roger Benoit in Blick says Massa has signed for 2013 with Ferrari, do you give this report any credence?
Yes. That would not surprise me at all. A one year deal.
His confident, battling, drive in Sg backs that up due to “composure” about his future.
Sensible choice by Luca.
Makes sense, as they have Vettel coming for 2014 . . . (according to your protege: http://willthef1journo.wordpress.com/)
He’s not my protege, I have helped him a but along the way, but he is much more DT’s protege than mine. And Vettel is not going to Ferrari in 2014. So you had two ideas in your comment and both are incorrect.
Dunno where these “Vettel to Ferrari in 2014” stories are gathering so much attention. Would have thought it a no-brainer that Alonso veto’s such ideas. I’m sure he is Massa’s biggest fan in the team. Why on earth would he want a hotshoe in the other red car?
Ok, I was being a little mischevious with that one! 😉
I’m glad you enjoyed yourself.
Personally I find it a boring race to watch. Zero overtaking and endless safety cars – who would of thought that would be the result of putting F1 cars on a street circuit.
But what do the fans know anyway.
Matt, I tried to watch the race twice….Live telecast and repeat.. Both times I gave up halfway through. Its not like Monaco that has some tradition.
Roll on Suzuka.. a proper race track.!!
With you there Matt. A lot of the boredom comes from the black.
Smaller paragraphs would be awesome Joe, but maybe im just to lazy to read it. Im sure whatever you wrote was very whitty and insightful though.
Witty even
Perhaps Tom would prefer if you wrote in 140-character bursts. I, however, would not.
Please do not turn your blog into a piece from The Sun….Paragraphs are there for a reason, they aren’t full stops!
You must be knackered – thanks for looking after us as always.
The time zone thing certainly confused David Coulthard: his endless repetition of the phrase “this afternoon” is strange enough in broad daylight, but when you know it’s after nine at night you really do wonder when he’ll be getting his tea…
“I personally think that any country agreeing to host an F1 race should have special arrangements for us because we are there to promote their countries, but not all of them see it like that.”
Austin and New Jersey are the recipients of the promotion,not the federal govt.
“I will not get into too much detail let’s just say that when it comes to visas, countries that talk a lot about freedom and liberty fare pretty badly alongside countries that are supposed to be restrictive.”
Because everyone that can fly,drive,swim,or crawl wants into the former and nobody wants into the latter.
“Because everyone that can fly,drive,swim,or crawl wants into the former and nobody wants into the latter.” not exactly, there is also a great deal of paranoia involved. and better qualified officials wouldn’t hurt either.
Ok. What ever, It doesn’t seem like you have been at the receiving side of visa shannanigans enough. Even though Joe is extremely lucky in having two passports, it is not ideal having to send your passport to embassies and have them return it on their own time.
I have to admit though, The US embassy is usually really good at returning them back within a couple of days at most.
Having said that there is clearly room for cost savings if Melbourne can do it for half the money.
Lighting is expensive, but there must be other ways that money can be saved.
>> Maybe they should cut down on those sandwiches, ice cream, energy bars and coffee that is kindly provided by the Media Centre.
Singapore may be a great event for those in attendance but on TV it’s made me change my mind about shortening races. Perhaps, the FIA should look at a 300km or 90 minute time-limit, which-ever comes first. Nothing exciting about Singapore, after the novelty, as it is turn after turn on a dark featureless track. Regardless of the action it makes for a real snore-fest. Maybe, LDM was on to something after-all, as Alonso also hardly seemed excited at the podium (more like exhausted). What are we anyway without our ability to compromise?
Did we watch the same race? Singapore was fantastic this year – so much action midpack, seeing Alonso claw his way onto the podium, 2! safety cars, the tough conditions making you wonder who might have car failure (I was wondering the last 1/3 if we’d see another lost alternator by RB), Kimi and Grosjean holding the line, the tight walls awarding those who really take risks, and of course the wild play of light by doing a night race.
I tried twice to watch it on TV here in Australia.. Live telecast, and the repeat later on Monday night .. Gave up half way through both times.
A dark boring circuit..
Interesting stuff. I’m happy as long as turns 10 and 11 are axed. Don’t get the point of it.
No room for a run-off area, hence turn 10 and 11 are done that way to make the entry speed to the corner a lot lower. I remember hearing the track was originally planned to be run in reverse and that 10/11 chicane would then not have been there.
We’ve arrived back in the UK via Paris (might have been the same flight as you Joe, Grosjean was on it as well) and thought the Singapore GP was a fantastic event. Moving around the circuit was a little difficult in that trying to get from the Bay grandstand over to the Padang stage on Saturday took well over an hour due to the sheer number of attendees, but I thought that overall the organisation was excellent.
It was our first time on Singapore and we came away very impressed with the cleanliness of the city and the friendliness of the locals. We have vowed to return, either for the GP again or just as a holiday. So I guess that for us at least, the GP has achieved its purpose of generating tourism.
But, we witnessed first hand the traffic chaos that the road closures cause when trying to get to a dinner reservation in the Marina Bay area on Thursday evening, so I can understand the locals concerns. It will be interesting what track changes, if any, are made in the future.
Joe,
I was very pleasantly surprised at my recent interviews for a US Visa at the London Embassy. I needed one as I was flying into the US to do a classic car rally on a private plane. Both the staff who did parts one and two of the interview, were pleasant, chatty and welcoming. The whole thing took about a quarter of the time I had expected and I had my passport back in a further three days. The only problem is that you are not allowed to carry a mobile phone or any electronic device (iPad etc). Maybe the staff at the Embassy should be seconded to train some of the Border Control staff at US airports in people skills.
Wilson
Being media makes things different to being a tourist/ businessman
Pre-apologies for the grammar-pedantry.
Similar To: Different From.
Shouldn’t that be a semicolon?
No. Semicolons mark a list, whereas colons mark a contrast in phrases, and must have accompanying capital letter. Hence a colon is correct here.
Gah, I have to renew my US Visa every two years. It’s an absolute abomination. They make everything unnecessarily difficult and then on top of that when you arrive at customs in the US they’re awful.
It makes me sad because the people I’ve gotten to know in America over the past 12 years are wonderful people, it seems that the bureaucracy here does everything it can to make Americans look bad
“we are there to promote their countries, but not all of them see it like that.” Count me as one who doesn’t “see it like that.”
When, where and how is this promotion of countries taking place? Not on the TV broadcast. Not on the AP and Reuters wire service race reports, which form the basis of most print coverage. And certainly not in the articles I read on the Internets. In each case, it is all about the race itself with little regard for the local environs.
Seriously, if anyone has any substantive proof, I’d love to see it.
The reason for a race is to promote the venue on the global scale. Thus the media is there to do that. It is not rocket science.
I’m guessing you don’t see the BBC coverage of the races, which usually has plenty of shots of the local scenery / nightlife / wildlife in their pre-qually & pre-race features. That’s in addition to the world feed’s vanity shots of the city backdrop itself, which I must admit quite make me want to visit (if only I had the money).
You are correct in that I do not see the BBC coverage. Neither does most of the rest of the world.
A quick Google search shows BBC’s delayed telecasts attract approx 2-3 million viewers. (SKY’s live telecasts draw a mere half-million viewers.) Combined, that’s a microscopic fraction of the world’s population.
Is there another example other than the BBC?
Could that be 120 million Singapore dollars instead of US $?
If so that’d be US$97.3million.
On television, the track often looks quite dark.
Good point! Yet they claim it’s as bright as daylight.
Wait for those “creative thinking” Chinese betting syndicates to dig-up the chicane floodlight power-cable, and cut it at a crucial juncture, as they did for a Premier League football match a few years ago.
Made a killing.
I agree on the dark look, either feed, on a carefully but not obsessively calibrated telly.
But the challenge was, with the lighting, to get the cutoff angles right to eliminate glare distracting the drivers. I never found any real detail, how they achieved this, at the circuit, but eliminating glare in photography means colliminating the light, straightening it out. You can stop unwanted reflections by many means: get it colliminated – focussed output is parallel and the reflection is at a not annoying angle, or go for super diffuse light which starts to have a similar result. One is a ricochet back into your eyes, the other is scattering so the light is reflected more evenly. Both avoid straight glare.
Portrait photogs will use anything that has logic to it (strobist is a great blog to peruse how you can mix up light) but the standard desire is for soft diffuse light. Studios put banks of very high powered lighting as far away as they can. The natural soft box is a overcast sky. Compare with midday sunshine. I think most humans like something in between. Because of the inverse squared rule and there’s a lot of track to illuminate, soft boxing the venue likely was never a option. Obviously focussed light increases the amount falling on a specific area. When you want to drop contrast, a photog will use lots of fill lights. But whether they have a impression or not depends on your exposure time and that is less flexible on broadcast HD cameras. The outdoor portrait photographer deals with fun phrases such as “overpowering the sun” when they want a darker backdrop. So what you want to do is constrained by the maximum amount of light falling. In the SG GP, they had to start with some immediate difficulties. Lighting has to be well out of the way, enough to light up not very sensitive broadcast cameras, and make good with the darker paints such as the RBs, and not blind the drivers by being at specific angles. Then you have the further need, that any track side ads or points of interest must be balanced.
Basically speaking, they were probably stuck with the contrasty look, and if you’ve been in a studio where the flash diffusers are 20 by 20 feet, or more, many of them, and basically dominate the space, we might not get much view if we wanted to soften the lines. Incidentally, small balloon sized diffusers, like blimps, are regularly used in car adverts in studio even when the intention is to be all contrasty and glossy. That’s because otherwise you don’t appreciate the curves or metallic paint, since you get too stark a transition if everything is shone straight on.
I don’t think the lighting job at SG is bad, merely they are doing a good job with a tough problem.
There is another thing, not many camera sensors are any good at separating low light tones well. I’ve not been there, but there may simply be a falloff right at the camera, whilst there are clear distinctions on the track the eye can make out. Then allow, we are getting a processed feed, and it is likely lots of adjustments are made. The best way to look at this is search for “linear scan” and see how you fairly warranted won’t like straight output from film or chip.
I do see, however, how dull it can look, depending on how exposed you are to car advertising. It looks like a studio shot, and a little artificial as a result. My general moan about ads, particularly with cars, is they tend to the extremities. Either high contrast, lots of dark and bright, or everything pushed up in a white out effect. Those are easy visual cues, you want who looks to think either they are night life fiends or in the soft summer sunshine. The only ad I liked, made by The Mill, in IIRC 2002 for MB C Class, shot in Prague, I think is my favourite because the amount of CG work required far less dynamic range and contrast. It looked more believable despite little hearts popping out of the street scenery in amorous response to the passing new model vehicle. But per minute, adverts like that are more expensive to produce than a GP.
It’s not my favourite look, at SG, on the telly. I grew up firmly in the film era, and much of that “look” was deliberate in a almost 180 degree different way. I learned to use what is called veiling flare and I believe many serious lenses were designed to take advantage of that. In particular a Angenieux zoom which revelled in a different property called micro contrast, (localised small differences, not the whole white to black range) so you could still be tons of capturing engaging detail whilst your belle is aflood with sunshine. For some very dry and complicated technical reasons, film worked very joyously with that, and digital sensors spoiled that particular highly refined game.
General moan is that people have become obsessive about “HD” TV, and yet is is better in only some ways, and has pushed out many other subtleties in favour meeting specification goals.
Simpler moan in photography, usually when a picture has genuine impact, it is when the lighting is right, and fits nicely within the ranges our brains pick up as “normal”. Hollywood films of total class have been shot on very simple gear, but the attention that goes into lighting lets many aged flicks knock the socks off anything else. Old one, girl compliments photo, “You must have a very good camera.”, guy at girl’s place after dinner “You must have very good pots and pans.” Okay, happened to me, and fortunately my comment flew too high to be noted . .
Just a little thought: maybe whilst the SG GP is the only one to offer a look not very far from how the car ad people often like, it’s pretty secure. Hadn’t thought of that when there was talk about the renewal.
John,
Would I be correct in assuming that SGP use SON floodlighting? If memory serves me correctly, this has a somewhat odd spectrum with some very noticeable peaks. I think the human eye copes with this a lot better than camera sensors. Now I don’t know if these cameras use auto white balance, but again I am wondering if the less than stellar images on TV have something to do with the AWB and auto-exposure struggling to cope with the characteristics of the lighting. In a studio as you know, if you don’t like the results the first time round, you can always re-shoot with different diffusors or colour gels in front of the lights but that obviously is not an option for the GP. I personally would rather revert to a day race, which although less dramatic, would produce much better pictures. The TV stations can always show it again at a later time.
Wilson
I think it is not Sodium, but filtered metal halide lamps.
You can’t auto white balance if the projected illuminating spectrum is uneven. Or, it’s very hard, because you have no reference frequencies.
SOM / Sodium lamps are to my mind the precursor to “eco” bulbs today. They are more efficient in only one part of the spectrum, leading to efficiency and output claims. That little compact florescent that says it uses 10 watts, but puts out 20 or whatever, well those are comparative ratios to a full spectrum (“black body” type) illuminant, which clearly consumes more energy to eject a broader and more even spectrum, and all you get is the light that is known to pretty much make people depressed. You’re just saying, well, I can have more in that frequency than if I made it evens all around, so sure you can get more output in a narrow band.
Thing is with halide lamps, when you shoot, bear in mind their recycle times. Like florescent tubes, they have a recycle time, and during that cycle they do shift white balance. You or others like the bernievision lot might cut the light with a UV filter and – well all this is bunk unless I knew more – I expect the reason pros walk out with a D3s or D4 is the frame rate gives them more chance to catch the right lighting, as much as it does to catch the right picture.
It’s somewhat a fallacy that you can reset white balance in post production, because if you have a predominant blue or red light, at a certain point, that is so much that you are exposing for that intensity, and by doing so, not capturing enough of the other channels. So when you go to adjust, there is not enough range of data from the other colors to make the adjustments without causing banding or other unpleasant looking stretches of too little data. Optical filters still rule the roost, in difficult lighting.
Agreed, it certainly does not look vibrant. FPs 1 & 3 certainly looked better
Fastmann – agreed, but I think it is also rather a question of contrast than light because there is so much overhead lighting (which is understandable to make ‘filmable’).
My problem, apart lighting, is why a night race at all? Joe makes a very good point in that the background, at night, is largely irrelevant anyway only revealing itself in wide panning shots of the city and a short burst of fireworks at the end. I’m speaking now as a TV spectator. Bearing in mind the disruption the city and costs generally why not just show Singapore in its full glory, in daylight, and the teams can then go about their business in ‘normal’ time?
Q/…why not just show Singapore in its full glory, in daylight, and the teams can then go about their business in ‘normal’ time?/Q
Try spectating around noon in Sg., and you will get your answer.
Alternatively, glance at a map, and notice where the Equatorial line runs.
Malaysian spectators envy the night-race concept.
Sorry, but I’m well aware where Singapore is. I’ve spent a lot of time in the tropics – you’re confusing the impression of heat with actual temperature. Singapore is less humid at mid-day for example but hotter than at night (although that is marginal really) – depending on which day you choose and season. Do you realise that here in France we get up to 40º (104F) in the summer (as we did this year) – Singapore is around 30F at the moment? But it’s a drier heat so it gives the impression of being less hot than it actually is because it’s more comfortable for us. For the drivers it’s always hot in the car in summer. I don’t think arranging the race at mid-day would be any worse than at night – maybe changing the date would better, who knows? As a spectator If you don’t like the sun, get a hat.
Steve.
.
SIngapore @ 30F ?
And they tell us we have Global Warming. More like Global Freezing:-)
The English autumn time brings heavy weather to places like HK and SG, they often have intense rainy seasons, and anyone with any connection to HK knows well of the tragedies of floods. It’s not a straight topical zone, because of the exposure to the sea. The sea is fierce in ability to either eat or puke out heat. My sciences teacher first clued us up as to global warming theory (long-standing family friend, so interesting to look back when we chat) in the mid 80s, when I was at prep. I find it curious it is a conversational meme 20 years later, and what we talk about is more the question of how long something takes to be accepted as new theory (consider who sacrificed their life – or did not – in different eras, as to the idea our planet revolves around the sun) and I still re-quote my friend with his quip, “In ten years, it will be in Scientific American.” I guess I enjoyed growing up. At the same time my father was a religion geek, I was taken (aged about 10) to early Richard Dawkins lectures, and nobody thought the worse of each other. I remember quite extreme weather in the 70s, as much as the 90s or today. Girl I fancied, yup, was chatting up the barmaid, not very long ago, sadly said to me she’d not stick around as she missed the distinctive seasons in Russia. That rather trump carded my approach, because it made me nostalgic for something similar. (the thought blew out, revelatory, the obvious approach that I identified with her feeling, oh well. .) But I recall being stuck by sweat and heat to the leather of my father’s Humber motor in ’76, a freezer that bestowed snow on our seashore home town that rarely froze because of the Gulf Stream in ’80, and stuck in Westminster with 2 feet of snow in ’91, a great friend of mine and I wading through it, the city a desert of cold, because we had run out of provisions and the nearest food and a grog was Bayswater. London empty like that might not be repeated. It was the greatest of lonelinesses, with my friend.
I’m not dismissive of this global warming idea, but sceptical that scientific method may be trumped by ideology and the personal need to secure academic tenure. Far too much of the discussion has been (pun intended) polarised, and too much on either side smacks to me of a ad campaign. The day we apply – hush now, I must say this sotto voce – *reason*, to life, is the moment we may learn. If you wish to be inquisitive, the trick is to abandon or retain no preconception. That is the reason I wonder whether there is a true debate as to environmental subjects.
Anymore driver market insider knowledge Joe, or do we have to wait till the rumoured big announcement(s) tomorrow?
You refer to the rumoured Mercedes pull-out of F1, leaving McLaren, Lewis, and Mr. Brawn scratching their pates?
Rumoured is the key word. It is not going to happen.
Good Man!
Hopefully Benz has leaned on Lord Biggin to make 2013 his testimonial year, in exchange for their continued presence, and to install a more “corporate” Bod (clean and dependable) in his place?
It may happen without the Lord’s choice. German newspapers yesterday suggesting indictments imminent…http://wp.me/p2HWOP-4x (translated – paraphrased)
Here’s one for treating the Journalists well.
Companies bend over backwards to look after journalists if their image can be improved. Heck, they’ll even extend hospitality to their ad people, something which always surprises me. When my mate was doing the Ryder Cup magazines, everything was laid on for him. Hot and cold running et.c. Moreover that was the norm. In the crux of the 90s recession. For a ad sales manager. (Okay, a very good one, so the title was a bit too modest, but then I would big up a pal..,) Not merely the big events either. Right down to trade mags you can find this going on. There’s always feedback to be had, if that’s your job to seek it.
You think the Singaporean _Government could put a hand out. Plain PR101… little things, like allowing accredited writers to slip through the channels at the airport, a meet and greet point. Having a block of good hotel rooms booked resale a modest sum. At least _one point of contact concierge style.
Actually, I don’t think those are little things at all. If you have a good story, you might be inclined to amplify the positive. By amplify the positive, I mean increase dynamic range of writing., not succumb to bias. (Yet still if the story is a filler for a disinterested master, fans won’t care much if a pump piece is tossed in to something they won;t read, but maybe someone new to F1 might ..) If the story is not so good, at least who reports it isn’t going to be in a sweat stressed to high heaven and in a mood to knock out a frustrated piece.
Hmm, to be honest I rather think that this is more a matter of old fashioned good manners. You spend a gigabuck on a track and all the other demands, and somehow not only Bernie and CVC, but to a recognisable extent the fans as well, seem to want their dedicated press to be slumming it, all devotion and not even a dinner date.
With the perpetual silly season of recent years, not to mention rumbling scandals, my mind boggles that CVC never thought to do a Bernie transportation pool for who covers their precious money puker. It’s as if they silently argue that doing so would be detrimental* to them and the reading public would think it’s all money, hospitality and bribery. Ahem. Oops :~)
Whilst it may be a dream to imagine states reorganising their ports and visas system for a small number of journos, I’ve often used specialist visa and arranger agents, and they fulfil something like a good IT man does: they do nothing visible until they aren’t there. Hmm, advertising brain kicking in here . . regulars will likely guess what I am thinking . . .
*I first wrote “detrimony” and without a real dictionary to hand, am unsure that is a word outside of World of Warcraft game, based on a quick search, in which case, not being interested in that sort of thing, how did it pop into my head? Maybe I was thinking how divorced Bernie is becoming from the troupe, my perception of how less like a travelling village F1 has become. (Not being there, take that with a pinch of salt, but I am always wary of corporative corrosion.) Recalling the time to time studding of comments asking Joe about how passes are dealt with, and if BE has everyone in a headlock, there’s a aspect due some PR overhaul. People who ask aren’t silly, but they have had to get the impression from somewhere. If I were in the position, I would think hard how much that sort of oft imagined fallacy (that BE has everyone kow tow) devalues a sponsorship.
Have to say, Joe spoiled the weekend for me. I wanted more how his Great Uncle chased down spies!
Anyway, a fun few weeks. We seem to have a nice “set-up” going into the last six for the WDC. What bothers me is whether I have been distracted (certainly) or have been out of touch with main stream media in general (positively, for a few months, to get work done) or whatever is going through my head, because I think the storyline where we’re at in F1 is crackling like a ember log. Yet there seems to me (and it may simply be me) not enough use of the circumstances is being made. Tons of tension, long built up, from Lewis to new regs to Bavaria, and somehow my broad sense of how this is being relayed by the wider press is unduly hum drum. Rather, I perceive it’s all tense as a drum.
I enjoy reading the comments to Joe’s excellent blog. Then I see your missives and stop dead.
Why do you not start your own blog?
Rather than stopping dead, why not just hop over them?
Myself, I enjoy reading them, 9 times out of 10. J(OJ)’s taught me quite a bit about various diverse subjects.
Thanks, Ambient. I actually aim for a high eight out of ten, on a good day, but I wish who didn’t find me to their taste just said so, and moved along. I don’t know who they are, so if my comments aren’t rubbish, I’ll go with the flow. I simply don’t get this thing, how people transfer their worries from one person to another — and that’s general life, not about here. The reason I am a bit sensitive I describe in my reply above. I find it rather appalling a intelligent reader cannot work out the difference between Joe and just me commenting. If I really had a tin foil hat, I might imagine that was cleverly directed. I’ve seen sillier things go on. But, hey, no worries I hope, and maybe I can relax my style a bit, and so on. I got bogged down in a lot of thought which got me quiet and away as it were, but still I can’t suss these reactions to me. Ugh, well, anyhow, best from me ~ j
Rodger,
I disagree with your use of the word “missive”, and as for the majority of what I write, during the day, it makes sales in my own business, entirely disconnected with this blog or F1, but is effectively paid for.
You are conflating two things: Joe’s blog, and me. Please don’t. We are obviously quite separate entities, natures, and heck, this is the comments section, so I am not going to take it on the chin that somehow you misconstrue all this and berate me that I, in your imagination, despoil the work of someone I admire. That trick has been rather too often present in comments howsoever unhappy that I commented.
There’s a lot I have learned from Joe and this blog, by reading. But not one jot has enlightened me by berating another person who comments.
With regards your “start your own blog” idea, I only came here because it’s a exceptionally nice place to discuss thoughts. It’s the only place I have bothered with, as a result, and my memory is longer than any version of the modern internet. Since it’s not a constructive thought – or do you presume I am some wastrel without work to occupy me? – really all you are saying, by suggesting i start my own blog, is “I don’t like you, please go away”. Which is kinda funny since you don’t know me.
Whatever you do, please stop thinking that whether I make a comment or not has any effect on your appreciation of what Joe writes. There should be no such connexion, just as a well man does not feel his bones, and though I exhort you to heed that, and mean well by that, I think that your conflation is a passive aggressive blackmail. I am not responsible to you for your enjoyment of Joe’s writing, not to anybody who of their sound mind chooses to ignore what I write. You are saying to me “stop ruining the work of who you admire”!, well I have not despoiled it, I might easily feel that the insinuation is insulting, and all of this is the apotheosis of irrelevancy. ~ j
Keep writing John, I find your contributions erudite and entertainign, in a stream-of-consciousness kind of way.
I must at some time put my finger on this stream of consciousness style I am perceived as delivering. It’s a phrase used critically both positively and pejoratively about my scribbles, but never a pitch I really aimed for. I’m usually racing to finish a scribble, because I am looking here during a break in other life. Yet that doesn’t explain enough of it. I’ve checked, occasionally, because I write comments at all stages of the day, and there does seem some consistency in what you point out. I appreciated your reply because it nudged me to think, hmm, yes, my scribbling is detuned a little bit. I guess I would like to scrawl more deliberately, certainly sometimes try, but it’s pretty cool of you to comment at all on that. One gets bored pumping out dry things (gah, the perennial repetition of fact in life . . it probably gets no better if you point to a book you wrote) even your own company probably barely reads (until they are forced, dear me, there’s a tyrant in the making there!) to try to amuse a bunch of customers. (you wonder, if they read, or whether it’s just a “hello we’re still here”..*) Hmm, I think I’m going to get my biz partner to go read back to me some of my “pre him” letters, see what he makes of those. Oh, I’m describing my real life now, so had better stop that . . Help! I am locked in a literary prison and the my dad stole the heart of the judge’s girl!
Thanks, RMM, for a thought provoking observation. Heavens, I can be dense sometimes. But FWIW, I never set out to scribble in any way at all. Maybe it wouldn’t be any fun for any of us, if I did. all best! – j
*Not so bad, but I feel the whole thing is nobody pays attention, then when whatever I was banging on about the other year suddenly matters, I get the call “why didn’t you tell me” all I can ever say is “time and a place, fella” because there’d be no crisis unless you are feeling one. Not dissing my customers either, it’s a human frailty and I trip over not heeding my own self advice regular enough.. Right, anyhow, as they say, normal service shall resume . .
You’re welcome. I intended to be positive and encouraging, rather than pejorative or negative.
Much of what I type is mis-typed, as I am typing in a hurry, so I try to take other contributions in a similar light.
I was instructed by my original business partner to write as I would talk. That has always been a fair guide, so rushing things is not always a bad idea. My father wrote a lot, published quite a lot, but that was a kind of 1930s to 1950s moral analysis of affairs long out of print. I have a great and unexpected friend who has their share of best sellers, yet has had a very difficult life. What you say, “typing in a hurry” sounds to me like a good thing to do. Think first, measure twice, and all that. I just realized my new friend put me through a kind of finishing school. Hopefully you and others might see some results! My point is please enjoy writing. It’s a absolute privilege, unprecedented in history, to wander across, to stumble over, another man’s work – Joe, in this case – and be able to catch the coat tails of his efforts. I learned a tremendous amount, also, by scratching here. Let the tolerance make it even better! ~ j
Silly Q, Rodger J, do you just think I am out of context? Honest question I’ll leave open to anyone, as I don’t fancy to annoy. Obviously for some I add a bit, and others are mostly indifferent.
I have felt bad any time I distract from the main thing here, but in so far as it may be possible I add some color to the public sections, I’m very happy to be directed. I personally enjoy spending a little time here because it feels comfortable to my interest in discussion. But consider this: if it was all about me, or a imaginary party line, why would Joe publish your comment, assuming he was so agreeable to me or vice versa? I’ve never seen this as a confrontational blog, either as Joe writes the real stuff, nor in the comments. Rather it’s been a place to offer up ideas and experience. To me, that’s a ideal. But I can’t say that’s what Joe intended, or anyone else intended, its just been a style people followed, very positively, in my experience.
The reason I ask is it seems all to easy to mess up a blog. I’ve seen quite a few internet things go downhill fast and become a shadow of themselves. So if you, or anyone else for that matter, think I am missing something, please tell me. I think, on reflection, you are upset I may have too strong a tone when I write, and my rebuttal to you may have falsely confirmed that. Since this is supposed to be polite and open discussion, do let it rip if you have a criticism of me. Joe doesn’t censor such things. It has become a hobby interest of mine, to post here, and it is certainly not work, but anyone who thinks I am a bit off, please don’t hesitate. I’m only here because it’s the most interesting place, and has a openness lacking throughout my favourite sport.
Detrimony: The debilitating effect of paying alimony?
Detrimony: The offence of bringing the company into disrepute?
Yes I am also looking forward to Joe’s next book.
I still feel that Bernie will retire from F1 once he has all the loose ends tied up. Mrs E 3 might actually want to spend some time with him.
The Singapore will be coming up Sports Arena which will be ready by 2014 and going by the speculation around there might be a complete alteration of the circuit.But in my personal opinion the present Marina Bay Street Circuit is a the perfect one.It runs beside every major part of the mesmerizing Suntec City.When I went on this circuit in 2008 I felt that it is only natural circuit after Monao which offers tremendous speed,thrill and test the racers potential at its best.
The difficulty with any analysis of the cost of a GP is that the numbers are so rubbery. Governments tells us “look how much money it brings in” while the opposition look at the raw cost only. Both sides take the opposite end of the scale, if or when, they measure “economic benefit” or they simply measure only the items that suit their claim. When looking at what to measure, should you for example include disruption? If so, how do you measure it?
The ministers says that 150,000 people generates $120M. That equates to $800K for every person attending the race. Really? Even including the hotel room levy, isn’t that rather big?
Jokingly, if these numbers are to be believed it would pay one of the struggling GPs to fly those 150K people to their event!
My maths was never much good, but $120,000,000 divided by 150,000 is 800 and that is a sensible average spend.
Seriously Fred France – you need to think before you write!
I live I. Singapore and $800 per head is nothing.
You would be doing nothing to spend that.
The Melbournians also have no clue how wonderful their event works for them.
You only have to watch the television coverage to see a wonderful promotional platform that conveys such a positive message.
JP
The next question is : how much of that $120M would be brought in by a “normal” weekend/week/fortnight of tourism in Singapore? That was the issue with the London Olympics, the normal tourist trade died off because no-one wanted their normal holiday to clash with the chaos caused by the games.
I’d investigate but my computer is in bits under a pile of all my other stuff right now.
That’s actually VERY reasonable factoring in hotels etc. I spend that much in Melbourne easily and I stay with my brother!
Joe, I don’t buy your economic argument of “no cost” Additional visitors generate receipts of $120 Million. This is not profit, it is revenue. You would need to examine the tax revenue component of this additional revenue and then offset it against the 60% of $120 Million? I’m convinced that the government perceives the value in the event but can we avoid simplified economic magic to justify it? Sorry, its early here in Bne. cheers O
Not my argument. I’m reporting it.
Fair enough. The way it reads it sounds like you are commenting that there is a zero cost from what the minister has stated in terms of the additional receipts. 30% tax on hotels sounds a lovely way to raise revenue if you can. Always enjoy and value everything you read Joe, keep posting anything and everything, I’m a big fan. O
Fun things with ads and brands. The only time you value a intangible is when it hits you in the face. People put values on logos, names, but what is Coca Cola without the fact they exist? Accountants put that as a asset, and how I understand it the idea is to cost at least how much time it would take to gain equal recognition.
Singapore is obviously going to be very keen to compete for business coming in. But they have a tricky sell, even since 1997, against HK. HK still benefits wildly from the English company law, and historical laissez faire of many Governors. SG instead had much of its market economy law done in a deal with Walt Wriston of Citibank in ca. ’77. Just suggesting one obvious regional rivalry. Suck things can translate into soft power for small regions or states or cities.
You just don’t know what value can be gained. Austin was a boom town twice, once with a delay, after the war, and then when semiconductor companies fell for its charms and low seismic activity. Geeks plus F1, oh, never heard of it!
Often as not, pols and local mayors and what have you, assume any halo they might get is a function of who did what before them, not the incremental steps they take to impress upon the world they are a great town to live in. Invoking history is a readier sell, than invoking than save the vaguest municipal dreams for the future. It makes it a tough call. You’re likely not elected by the time the dividends come in.
I went to Singapore for the first time this year. Really enjoyed the event itself and it was great to see a GP under lights. However I don’t think I’ll go again because I found the humidity oppressive. It was bearable on the nights where there was a breeze, but not so much fun sitting in the stands when there wasn’t.
Taxi drivers aren’t that bad compared with the thieves in Bangkok. Although I had a few refuse to take me to particular locations because “the traffic was too bad due to the GP”. Traffic didn’t seem that bad to me. Must be a relative thing I guess, because it’s much worse in Perth in peak hour than what I saw in Singapore.
“Taxi drivers aren’t that bad compared with the thieves in Bangkok.”
Only naive tourists use BKK taxis. Get a bus-map, and use the cheap and efficient bus services, or get a folding bicycle.
Really??? I live in BKK and have never once taken a bus and would consider using a bicycle as close to suicidal!
” “the traffic was too bad due to the GP”. Traffic didn’t seem that bad to me. Must be a relative thing I guess, because it’s much worse in Perth in peak hour than what I saw in Singapore.”
I thought the same thing (Cabbie refused from Gardens to City) – they were bitching and moaning about standstill traffic – which must never ever happen for the rest of the year due to the high taxation on licenses/cars – half their luck
“I suspect that in the future the circuit will change with more of the action in Marina Park,”
The best change would be to move the Marina Bay grandstand (I know I know – its a permanent stand – but its not like Singapore is short on cash )
I enjoyed the Singapore GP – but that grandstand is in a horribly compromised spot for viewing. (I took plenty of photos of the bay and the view – but photos of the F1 from that stand were a waste of time)
Basically one of the biggest stands faces the most boring part of track.
Access was a bit of a nightmare getting out on the Saturday might as well
You cant see the cars through turn 16/7 – you get to see them for a two hundred metres in a straight line – and you cant see any of the corner/barrier where they disappear underneath the stand and all the mistakes are made.
The only way you could see a car going through a corner with attitude was to watch a partially obscured turn 17 from underneath the grandstand when visiting the mens.
Much better to make a temporary stand on the soccer pitch facing backwards from the bay to the track – or angle the stand and have it back from the track (eg: 45 degress watching 16/17, 45 degrees watching 18/19)
Or leave it where it is – and have the track head out for a little detour on the soccer pitch 🙂 (Which would also allow photography over the top )
I suspect the track designers/VIPs in corporate boxes don’t really care what the cheap seats are like – but theres a lot of room for improvement
Exactly! I sat in that stand for the three days and wished it was on the other side. Ended up in the bar above it which had a good view of the screen and air-con.
A delightful article that fills in the blanks.
You may also consider…
Flying your Jodel, or Robin, from suburban Paris to Singapore, or nearby Malaysia, seems much the better option than racking up expenses and bonus flight-miles with your favourite airline.
It’d also have perks besides economic benefits.
Carry a four-man igloo tent, and sleep, under the wing, on the airfields where you choose to land. Hose-pipe shower in the hanger, coffee-machine in the Flying club.
Sweep that sweety, bespectacled, lady-librarian, and part-time spy, at the National Library off her feet, and transport her to your rent-a-pad in Penang Malaysia for a fortnight between races. You both need the relaxation and break.
Get shares in a time-share apartment in S.E.Asia, reserving the weeks you’ll need it to cover the annual fly-away races. Using the rest of the time to ensure it pays for itself.
JoeQ/
Lunch at the Swiss Club was very pleasant.
/JoeQ
A well-known haunt of Euro-spies for generations.
Singapore Cricket Club: I was shocked when they allowed Chinese members to join.
Joe,
Thanks for the insight, I personally like the glimpses of the buildings on the route which does assist in setting the scene for the circuit and turns.
Over a typical weekend how many article and deadlines get in the way of a good nights sleep.
Steve
PS, GP+ Best headline yet… very Witty !!
“The Bay City Rollers”
Brought to you courtesy of the almost sincere Hughie Green, sawn-off tartan trews courtesy of Sir JYS clothing Ltd.
If you don’t “get it” you’re under-age for this blog.
“Singapore re-upped for another five years….”
Watching The Wire on the flight were we Joe? 🙂
Fantastic race
Fantastic venue
Fantastic scribing
Now… where my gel caps?
Joe, How is the time difference in Singapore any worse than the other Asian races or Australia?
You don’t live on European time zones in other Asian races.
Maybe someone at FOM should set up a full-calendar visa service for media. When you apply for your passes / accreditation / whatever, you opt for their visa service and they do the leg work. Happy days.
Oh, and like the Wire reference.
Meanwhile, VJM is playing arrogant fool trying to sell shares to Diageo. The quotes from him are stunningly stupid. They’ve provoked Diageo to release a “joint statement” pointing out no deal is done or guaranteed. e,g, this one, “When asked about the reason for the stake sale he said, “No reasoning that I should give to anyone.”” Hmmm. You rarely see people shooting themselves in the foot so accurately, but experiences of mine suggest it’s a desperate man who gets dismissive middle of a big deal. Likely they wanted to look at the books, got colder, and lowered their in principle offer. I mean the guy is supposedly selling? This often happens with who thinks business, not at as a person but as a remote thing to be played with. On that account, I worry I’ve got a deal out there with someone who is going down those lines, out of legitimate frustration for sure, but who is forgetting how to operate his humour. Rumour is he’s selling, but does not want to loose control. Diageo don’t play like a playboy, and having none of it. I hope a more honourable or at least reformed playboy out there is wanting to buy a F1 team . .
“Down in Melbourne the whingers get really whiney when it is revealed that the Grand Prix costs the taxpayer $50 million.”
Actually it cost $56.7 million to host the 2012 race. And whiney for a good reason. A 2011 economic impact statement estimated the event generated $32 to $39 million. The maths doesn’t add up.
I’m a fanatical F1 fan, but if I had to choose between a decent health care system, an efficient transport system that works, and other essential government services, or spend my tax dollars on a car race that lines the pockets of Bernie/CVC investors….. the choice is easy. I’ll stop whinging now.
I don’t believe the economic impact study. It’s total rubbish. Melbourne is very expensive these days. Anyway how can you take any government seriously when it does not factor in ANY intangible benefits. It is just politically-motivated poppycock. They all know the GP is good for Melbourne – hence why the different governments have kept it – but it is a great political football to kick at the opposition.
thanks for the response. The govt is not keeping the race because it is “good for Melbourne”, but keeping it to save themselves from political suicide and risk being tagged as the party which mismanaged the event resulting in its loss. That’s worse. So they pay the exorbitant cost, grit their teeth and hope to get through the media cycle every year when the costs are publicly released. That’s what you call in political circles as making the most of a cr@p sandwich.
As for the claim about “intangible benefits”, that old chestnut about vague, immeasurable benefits regarding branding/promoting the city to the world are always trotted out when the audited accounts paint a different story…. that’s my view.
If you do not think the race is good for Melbourne then you are living with blinkers. And the old chestnut about intangible benefits is true, whether you like it or not. The audited accounts do not allow any intangibles and of course these do exist.
I have personally spent thousands of dollars in Melbourne which are intangible results of the Grand Prix, so don’t tell me that these things do not exist.
“Melbourne the whingers get really whiney when it is revealed that the Grand Prix costs the taxpayer $50 million.”
“Tourism Minister Louise Asher said on Wednesday the government had subsidised this year’s event by $56 million despite an increase in the number of tickets sold.
“I’d love to have the race beyond the 2015 contract, but the contract that we discuss has to present value for taxpayers and I’m not comfortable with this level of subsidy,”
This is a very, very expensive race and I personally am not happy with this level of subsidy.”
“You can reasonably expect that without significant further cost-cutting from the (Australian) Grand Prix Corporation, the subsidies will go up,”
Its just a shame that a great race like Melbourne will eventually be lost – for the next try hard country like Korea, Russia or Turkey to massively outspend – then disappear and be forgotten when they get bored or broke.
Double the dollars does not equal double the grand prix.
Fortunately Singapore has more than double the dollars – but how many other tracks do?
Singapore is a tourist based country and going by the facts 80% of their revenue is because of tourists.The Singapore Govt. is familiar withe consequences of loosing such a huge revenue generating machine so retaining F1 will always be the top most priority. The extension of the contract till 2017 was Inevitable and not only the Grand Prix ticket sales that adds up millions but tourists who aren’t able to resist shelling thousands of dollars at various luxury outlets,hotels,entertainment parks etc.
On my first visit to Singapore in 2008 a few months before the inaugural Singapore Grand Prix I came across various criticism about the race from people affected by it as the track runs through the Suntec City which comprises Singapore’s various business houses. But I was told by my uncle who is Singapore resident and he himself had an office there that the Govt. had easily suppressed all kind of resentment by acquainting the Hotel and Mall owners with enormous profit that would be generated.As a result prices of Hotels and various destinations are five folds unlike usual prices. Having strained relations with Bernie will only land Singapore on the loosing side.
Joe, I went to the Singapore GP in 2010 and thought it was just brilliant! The whole place from uptown to downtown to circuit has an amazing vibe running through it. I was warned about the costs but actually I found a very nice modern hotel in the Little India sector with pool etc for US$100 per night, room only. This I thought was good value. For breakfast I walked around the corner and had a wonderful fill up for just $5 per day.
I was lucky to get a paddock pass due to knowing a senior FIA employee, and of course this helped the experience greatly. I met all sorts of luminaries from Bernie to the Singapore PM to having a very pleasant chat with Niki Lauda, who said to me ‘what shall we talk about women or racing?’. All in all Singapore was a great experience and is a city like no other. I would recommend anyone really into their F1 to book now and have an absolute ball at this fantastic event.
Have been to the race for all 5 years now, I’m a big F1 fan that lives in Singapore. It was said that they are looking into revising the circuit for the next 5 years, I really hope so, as the circuit is truly rather dull, and too lengthy while having a slow average speed.
Sector 3 is especially poor and nothing really happens, except for cars crashing beneath the bay grandstand (Karthikeyan’s crash this year)
I would suggest removing turns 19 and 20, and connecting 18 and 21, making 17 to 22 another decent straight to follow onto the main pit straight. Anyways, there are no grandstands at 19 and 20 anyways, so no loss in admission ticketing. This way, cars can close up and maybe attempt a move into turn 1.
It is also possible to modify turns 7, 8, 9 – remove turn 8, and simply push turn 7 backwards, and into a left hand that merges onto the padang straight. This would make the longest straight even longer, and significantly increase the opportunity for overtaking.
Btw, love your blog Joe, read it all the time.
Taxis in Singapore are a no no. Too slow and expensive. The way around is of course the tub/subway which is fantastic fun and value. The song they sing on the p.a. when a train arrives is a hoot, ‘the train is coming – the train is coming…’. Overall I couldn’t fault it, though I was living in asia at the time so the flight time was short and the heat I was already used to.
I’ve said it before, but any attempt by Melbourne to walk away from the GP would mean it would snapped up by one of the other state capitals. Bernard would have his choice of Adelaide, Sydney, or Perth. Even in these tougher times, all would find the money to host the event. Mr Walker knows this well and is an astute businessman. I’d imagine, despite the difference in height, he and Bernard see eye to eye on this.
Slightly off topic here…. I keep hearing about the long association between Ferrari and Shell, going back to 1950, and that Singapore was their 500th together. What about all those years when Ferrari carried Agip logos on their cars? Were they not their fuel/oil suppliers during that period?
Should read ‘Singapore was their 500th GP together’
I hope Joe will be able to do an evening with Joe at next year’s S’pore F1. If one of the readers offered to use the Tanglin Club (likely due to his membership), I’m sure they can make a nice arrangement for all parties’ benefit. We the fans will not mind to buy a ticket that includes some drinks, grubs and interesting insights from Joe.
Second that. I have just bought ticket for 2013 and I would be very interested in attending an Evening with Joe as well.