I am anything but a good businessman but, in my favour, I love Formula 1 motor racing and I am passionate about it and so when I see rampant profiteering going on at the expense of the sport, I get annoyed. I want the best possible Formula 1 and so I naturally object to what the financiers have done to the sport. Suffice to say that if I was a multi-squillionaire I would buy the sport and fix it the way I think it should be. A lot would stay the same but distribution of money would be very different and no teams would get an advantage.
From a philosophical point of view, I don’t understand the super-rich. If you are comfortable for the rest of your days why is there any need to screw every penny from every deal. Yes, there is ego and the pleasure of doing the deal but I don’t get the need to keep score. Once you have enough money it ceases to have any value beyond being something than can be used for good. If you are earning money just to be richer than someone else you are no better really than a mouse on a wheel. F1 is just a game and irrelevant in the history of the world, but it nonetheless gives pleasure to millions and inspires people. It is their escape from the drudgery of everyday life. It puts a smile on their faces, and that is its sole real value. But making people happy is a sensible and tangible goal to have.
Anyway, this is why I do not understand the new calendar for 2015. One does not need to be a rocket scientist to work out that if one twins “fly-away” (intercontinental) in the same region, one reduces transportation costs. Thus a calendar with no fewer than six stand-alone fly-away races cannot possibly be justified as the most cost-effective route to take. There is absolutely no logic in having Australia as a stand-alone event and then a two week break before a Malaysian-Bahraini double-header and then China as a stand-alone event. You would save 30 percent of the cost by moving Malaysia to a week after Australia and then having China and Bahrain separated by a week. In a similar fashion it is daft not to twin Russia and Abu Dhabi, Canada and Austin and Mexico and Brazil. Thus the only possible explanation for such an inefficient calendar is that there is an agenda to try to force teams to accept more races by making the existing events needlessly expensive.
I started wondering if I was running the sport, what would be calendar be, so as to make F1 the best possible marketing tool? The first thing I would do would be to rid the sport of the current circuit designer and put the work in the hands of those who have a better understanding of the science of overtaking. It is a scientific problem that can be solved and built into a circuit. It does not have to be guesswork.
If I had 20 races to hand out I would do them more logically. I believe that there should be a sensible division into three basic zones, allowing TV packages to be created that would get everyone watching enough races to make the TV coverage effective for fans and advertisers. The first race of the season is a big event and it makes no real sense to stick it in Australia, where the TV audience is limited by the time zones, even with an evening race. It makes much more sense to start in the United States where one can build excitement in the US market and still hit prime time European markets if one starts the race at noon. So I would start in Austin in early March and then go on to Long Beach or Laguna Seca. If you start a race at midday on the West Coast of the United States, it is prime time TV in Europe. So it would be good to begin the Championship with an early afternoon race in Austin and then a lunchtime race in Long Beach or Laguna Seca. From there the cars would go to Australia and the people would go back to Europe and then Australia would be at the end of March twinned with Singapore on the first weekend of April before flying to cars on to Bahrain (April 19) and Sochi (April 26). That would get us back to Europe in time for Monaco (May 17), which I would twin with Belgium (May 24). It rains all the time at Spa so May and September are not very different.
After that I would send the teams out to Canada for a Montreal/New York double-header (June 14/21) and then back to Europe for France (why not try for the Bois de Boulogne in Paris) and Britain (back-to-back) – on July 5/12 -and Germany (if F1 cannot fill the Nurburgring then why not learn from Formula E and use Berlin Tempelhof) and Italy – July 26-August 2. No championship would be right without Monza. That would get us to the summer break. I would then go out to Asia for Japan and China back-to-back (Aug 30-Sep 6), with Abu Dhabi (September 27) and perhaps a street race on the east coast of Africa (October 4) if somewhere stable can be found. And then I would end the seasons with a double-header in Brazil (October 18) and a race in the West Indies (October 25).
joeblogsf1 
If I was running the sport I wouldn’t sign tv rights agreements with broadcasting companies where the fan has to buy a bigger package to just gain access to the sport in question.
Smart way to run TV rights is to sign up free to air broadcasters who can do commercials if they choose and then on the internet charge a modest fee per race for no commercial multiple feeds. They can make a killing as the TV rights would be more modest and the internet can be supported by the likes of a Netflix or Amazon video service. Grow the free audiance and lure them to the internet service later. TV companies can be cut in on the deal to make it a win win.
I agree.
shhh, stop talking common sense ::)
Joe, any reason why Singapore in March?
I’m not sure why Singapore is in March either, given that March is the tail end of the monsoon season there.
Maybe a bit of monsoon rain would spice up a usually rather dull race. Anyway Joe’s proposal was for Singapore in April when the monsoon season will surely be over (really it rarely has much impact even in March).
Sprinklers are way to expensive to liven up the racing.
Rotating knives on wheels would work too… But this is not Thunderball.
Death Race 2000 ?
It’s worth considering the parallels…
Or Ben Hur, although Lewis may be wondering given recent events.
More like Wacky Races.
Late March is after the monsoon season, which can’t always be said for September, though they’ve largely got away with it so far
Actual back to back races in Austin/Mexico doesn’t make any sense: probably part of the public is the same. better to have them 6 months apart. Regarding your “ideal schedule”, I don’t share you dropped Barcelona’s and Hungarian GPs. Circuits may be dull (not more than others, BTW) but they are both very good locations to have a GP to attract new spectators. Ok, you live in Paris … not in Barcelona 😉
I suspect that, in Joe’sF1(tm), it wouldn’t require taking out of a loan to attend a Grand Prix, so attending both Austin and Mexico wouldn’t be too unrealistic…
Wrong. I believe that the ticket prices are iniquitous
The world of FOM makes no sense. They live in another world, where they are just out to make money, like you say. They don’t care about the sport.
Everytime I read that someone might take Bernie’s position or buy out CVC I think please come and rescue the sport but I feel I am probably being very naive. Would it ever change for the better, is there even a likelihood Joe?
You never know
The super rich are like drivers who want to get fastest laps. No reason to do so but it pleases them, it’s their little game against themselves. I understand it completely but sadly am not a businessman.
That’s all well and good, but when a driver goes for a fastest lap, he is not doing so to the detriment of others.
Laguna Seca is a mouthwatering prospect for an F1 fan. I’d love to see the F1 cars through the corkscrew.
How about Road America at Elkhart Lake too? I always enjoyed race there (on TV). A bit Spa like?
Is there no space for Austria on your calendar Joe?
I just had an idea… Bathurst…. 🙂
Mmmm. Laguna Seca, Bathurst, Wow. In our dreams.
Or maybe not. With Bathurst, it seems an excuse for the spectators to get unbelievably drunk and have pitched battles between each other, and every now and then, a race breaks out
Thats not far from the truth. You’ll see the diehards now starting to head up the mountain on the Wednesday/Thursday. Theres a limit of (only) 24 beers, per day, per person, so to get around that some of them head up a few days early, bury it, GPS mark it, and then retrieve at ones convenience.
Gee, spot the top gear viewer.
Perhaps 20 years ago when you still had hair. The race has been cleaned up a lot and is very family friendly.
Good points here. I’d choose Malaysia over China though for an Asian race. One problem with back to back Montreal/New York back to back is each venue has the potential to get fans from both the US and Canada (akin to the visitors from outside the States that visit Austin) so could that dilute attendance at both races?
Unlikely to dilute audience because Indy back to back with Montreal never did.
No worries about Montreal and NYC attendance. Regardless of what one might think of American sports, one thing we’re great at is attending sporting events.
Even when so few over here even know what F1 is, the races here still generate much larger crowds than can be found at F1 races in most locations… and that happens with nobody here trying very much to promote them.
It could but I don’t think it would. Non-European F1 fans have always envied the gorging option. Has Montreal ever not sold out? Port Imperial will do nicely too.
Re: Bathurst…. Here’s Jenson onboard lap in the McLaren. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4XVF3jJL5Q
Thanks for that, nice circuit!
I like the turbo V6s, but that’s the first time I’ve ever missed the V8 scream.
As for Bathurst and having watched that brilliant video, I wholeheartedly agree.
For a race in Africa, why not South Africa? I would ditch Bahrain and Russia and replace them with Austria and Mexico, shuffling the other dates to suit.
It is a crime that there is no French F1 race. A street race in Paris would be fun.
One could ditch Bahrain but if that was the case I’d try to organise something in a peaceful place that needs an image revamp in the Mediterranean. Beirut, for example.
re VV, taking Bahrain out of the calendar:
the change of the starting time this year, for a night race, did big for my enjoyment of the race; artificial lighting allowed for optimum showing/viewing of the cars, due to the light source angled at about 45 degrees, not perpendicularly as in the usual midday on middesert sunshine.
It framed beautifully the action that evening, a race that for a number of coincidental reasons – the excellent battle for the lead by the two main contenders this year, the many disputes between other drivers due to different strategies brought on by the new rules added in recent years, and the chance of hearing the different sounds of the cars battling for places thru the corners, sounds formerly overcast by the old loud engines – came to be a TV show close to what I presume is aimed for the F1 spectacle, by its rulers/promoters.
Oh, that was good!
I think this year showed up how plain poor the sound has been on broadcasts all the time. That was a great sound, even on the ‘tube in crawly tablet speakers.
Don’t get me wrong, I genuinely like how it is now, for too many reasons to want to go back… unless a mixed formula was ever permitted, again.
Dreaming now there’s some way to let the exhaust rip open and revs hit the roof, on what we got … I dunno what you could call it.. dullness reduction system, diesel reduction system.. sorry for the lameness,, but taking the exhaust energy back as it is now, it would take some engineering to have a “flap” to open up for noise, but I so want to know how it would be: no recovery of energy so down on HP, but revs limit up to combat that, and we’d have some serious noise again. Might break some things, which is not bad in my book. We get all this trivia to stoke the show, well why not let someone blaze it, loud, if they want to, some kind of rule how many laps they can, maybe… a kind of “screw the machine, I’m coming through”, last resort option.
Jenson is not too shabby is he? still missing the old engine noise although the current racing is pretty damn good. Fantastic circuit for drivers but perhaps not for spectators? Not that I will never manage to get there.
On the mega millions front and motivation once you’ve got it I suspect Bernie has no altruistic tendencies but it would be nice to see him spend his remaining years perhaps turning the whole thing round and benefiting more people than just a venture capital fund
That circuit is on RealRacing3 and is one of my favourites to race. It seems to me (albeit from a video game) it would be a great F1 venue. Feels like Spa.
Do a Kickstarter campaign! I found 30p down the back of the sofa to start it off.
My dear Joe, I cannot agree with you more. Problem is, once you have loads of money, you still want more. It is common in all businesses. Perhaps it is human, who knows how we would react if we were so rich…
For me, the problem is Bernie. I have the greatest respect for the man. Without him, there’s a possibility that F1 would have died a silent death. He saved F1 and made it what it is today. On the other hand, Bernie made ticket prices exploding because ‘money making’ is his goal. Do we love him? Do we hate him? What a dilemma.
I don’t agree. Some people have the ability to say that enough is enough.
True… but such folk stop accumulating well before they have $billions…
Sometimes I think there can be dislike to the limits of resentment and even hatred, by businessmen of semi elected government QUANGO fat cats. I wouldn’t rule out some of that being in play: wanting to make the bigwigs look bad regardless. Or just plain contempt. It can be a dangerous thing, to think “why?”, as opposed to “why not?” when poised the opportunity to extract exceptional profit. Think it was Henry Ford, who said, “‘I can’, and ‘I can’t’, are always both true for every man.”
That’s thinking more of Bernie, though. It’s far more tricky, figuring out what keeps some businessmen ticking relentlessly. I have experienced the feeling of security, that donning blinkers can provide, and it scared me, or at least shocked me at the time. Too complicated to try to précis, but if there’s another moment and context, i’ll try to add some non obvious factors that came to mind, which need a bit of mulling over, before scribbling down. In short, though, I think those who experience a Damascene moment are quite blessed, though it’s my belief such moments can come in quite a variety of guises, and not all are comforting experiences. Hence the blinkers can feel so reassuring… little story, whether apocryphal or not, I never sought it check it, my mom liked to tell me, was Pavarotti, early in his career, would insist being paid cash, before he walked on stage.. he’d finger the notes to combat nerves..
Being paid cash before the show is not uncommon, especially with older artist. Many had been screwed over by the industry in their youth and have done business up front since. It is a lot harder to collect after the show. Until Arthur Fogel changed the way tours are run, many of the biggest acts in the world got paid upfront.
My late biz partner so nearly made a name for himself in that game (did so in a smaller field) – taught me much, steered me well clear of it. With small bands and pub gigs, the bands just beat up on their manager, though, as if he’s some kind of guarantee. I’ve had that experience, dear me.. just p****ed none of them made it, so I could wander up, and say, “hey, you can give me that guitar back, now…”…
Thing is, this is really close to what Bernie was hired to sort out. Teams got money to turn up, and prize money, and so on. If my dear friend had had floppy hair, he could have pulled a good Bernie mimic… he was brilliant, but for sure, after a watering, would trot out grudges from decades past, in perfect detail, exactly how he’d been turned over.. I asked why he bore the grudges: “nobody else gives up keeping score”
I’ve just got a bit of a warm glow tempering my thoughts now, of how business can be just silly. You know, I don’t think Bernie has actually grasped any different way of dealing with things, it’s just still a lark. And instead of figuring that out, everyone gets more shifty, more corporate, more dead pan dumb, and plays themselves out of the game. So who’s being smart? At a certain level, business always makes great entertainment. Never forget that may be the reason why someone keeps their hand in…
Like yourself Joe, if my name was Jed and I struck oil I would buy the sport, forgo the opportunity to maximise the wealth for the sake of saving the sport. Yes, I am that passionate about it.
We are good at identifying the problems – but what is the solution? CVC selling F1 isn’t going to solve the problem as they will sell it for the highest premium to another hedge fund – profit maiximisation all over again. The sports current purpose is to serve as a vehicle of revenue for a financial institution – how sad.
The only solution is to get the ownership of this sport out of the hands of bankers, financiers, guys that ties real good double windsor knots etc.
Whoever ends up with it – not all KPI’s need to start with a $ symbol.
I love so much of what you’re saying here Joe! If I may, I’d suggest that if there were three races in the U.S., one should be on an oval. It would ad the charisma and racing culture of the U.S. to F1. Pocono is a great east coast track, where race speeds should be in the 215 – 220 MPH range, or a shorter track where the speeds would be lower, such as Louden in New England.
Should we have 500 lap races as well then? I’ve never understood the allure of oval racing. It seems to be an excuse to bunch cars together and wait for a yellow to come out.
An F1 car is viewed at its best when it changes direction at speed. Turning left all the time doesn’t really showcase it well.
NO! Not an oval! Joe already said he’d ditch the sport’s current circuit designer…I know you folks in the US love your ovals, but for the love of God, I can’t think why. Sorry mate.
I agree
plus 1 boring beyond belief
I went to a NASCAR race at Talladega in 1994. I sat in the stands and was falling asleep. Talladega is one of the ” Prize Events ” in the NASCAR calendar. No rush to ever see a race again.
Forgot to mention, that Suzuka Circuit had a ” Mini Nascar Race”, back in 1996. It was on the short circuit….. Wasn’t impressed. I think Suzuka didn’t try to repeat the effort..
Actually, gearsau, there was a repeat of the Suzuka NASCAR exhibition event with a slightly longer race in 1997. For 1998 it moved to Motegi, then in 1999 there was instead a NASCAR development series finale also at Motegi, and that was the end of NASCAR’s foray into racing in Japan.
Just as many Americans hate oval racing. We’re the size of Europe and our interests are equally as varied.
Oval racing is a specialised sport. Cooper, Brabham then Lotus took funny cars to the Indy 500 and their recipes were right. It took them a few years, with great support from technical sponsors, to last the distance. Even the first Cooper to race was significantly modified from its F1/F2 origin following trials on ovals.
Later in the 1970s, USAC brought their teams over to the UK for two fascinating races at Silverstone and Brands Hatch. The experiment was not 100% successful but CART pursued the strategy, so that cars similar to those in the Indy 500 raced on USA and Canadian non-ovals. An oval racer can be safely tweaked for non-oval racing; it doesn’t work so easily the other way around.
I’d love to read a book, “Why Ovals Don’t Work [For Us]”
There must be all manner of fun with suspensions, steering, braking balance, different stresses. And things like mechanical grip a function of mass, not aero, and so on.. oh, and mass v tensile strength, ouch, that’s a nasty equation..
I’d love a annual take the mick out of each other event, or feature. Or race…
Try the Len Terry (recently deceased) book. He asks many of those questions too.
Thanks, Phil! I’ll look him up, I feel in need a infusion of fresh thinking, lately,
Just a thought, I wonder how many F1 people are members of the Society of Automotive Engineers, prior to the Institute of Vehicle Engineers merging. Former US based, latter UK. I’m lining up some off season reading, and
Formula SAE, very much a American effort, is interesting, with students developing cars along the lines we’re used to. That suggests to me, that there could be a generation of auto engineers across the pond, who might see F1 as a career.
Postscript: on reading, formula student classes have clear design goals, whereas I understand the SAE competition had wider aims, which might explain why the latter seems to produce more car looking cars..
The formula SAE competition seems to have merged with formula student, but looking about, I spot much more interesting designs for the SAE entrants, some real albatross wings, a RB inscribed longer WB, generally things that look more like racers and not mickey mouse pods or aero planned karts.. SAE aligned a lot more recognizable names, to judge and advise their student formula, but it seems the merged game has been won more by European entrants lately.
I hate to think it, how when I was younger, I had the sickening feeling always that no matter the exceptions, the rarities, the suit generics boffins we can produce, Brits plain don’t ever do things if they cannot first make them more mickey mouse. In academia, at least, where I felt the attitude I was presented with was “well, one day you might just grow úp and maybe if you’re the very cream of the cream, some accident of a grant will let you do that, and ẃe shall laugh as you lose tenure”, meaning do anything that looks like it has been touched by the outside world of design success. I’m either bringing my career sub-boffin brother into this, or else imagining the team who put on those wings the size of sails, and imagining the satisfaction of the idea.. but I really felt a cold stiff breeze of disdain around much of my student experience, which was obviously not a long one, mind you. Whereas now I think Brits pay lip service and fashion some kind of “yeah, go for it buddy” into a different lexicon, but with none of the meaning remaining. The exceptions are of course, amazing, but just search up some formula SAE prototypes versus formula student, and see if you can forgive me…
Yes Phil, I saw the CART races at Rockingham, and Lausitz, unfortunately, neither showed CART at it’s best, as the German event had to be stopped for the awful accident that happened, and Rockingham had track problems, but what I did see, while it was in action, was a great racing series, which at that time was at least the equal of F1, and many thought was actually better. They knew how to look after fans too, unlike Bernard.
Leaving aside whether or not this is a good idea (I’d love it – few would agree with me!) you couldn’t run F1 cars on ovals without significant strengthening of the survival cell, a new aero package, special tyres and a redesign of multiple components. In reality an oval F1 race, if it was a standalone, would have to be run in a current Dallara chassis, since they are the only cars with the necessary safety cells. That means a tie up with IndyCar – don’t hold your breath!
I wish you ran the sport Joe. The absence of France is madness. Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of a tumor, which sums up the current owners pretty well.
You would drop spa?
Read it again
Now that schedule would be a true world championship!
Ironically, when the calendar was announced everyone was slamming the Austin-Mexico double header as bad business sense, despite the fact that it provides a nice easy (and cheap, I presume) back-to-back fly away for teams and journalists alike.
I think believe (rightly) that one will damage the other
Would many US citizens be willing to go to Mexico for a GP when they have their own? Would many Mexicans want to travel to America if they have their own? I think this may hit Austin more than Mexico.
Hard to be sure, I see it as a great opportunity for European fans to fit 2 races into one trip across the Atlantic but it’s fair to assume that local support might suffer.
You know much better than I the demographics of the fans in the stands so I’ll defer to your wisdom on this one.
On purpose. This is the first step to getting Austin off the calendar, for a track who’ll pay a few dollars more. “The attendance numbers at Austin dropped off, so the race had to go….”
Laguna Seca would be fantastic, but the infrastructure at the track, and of the surrounding area is just not up to it. I’d like to see an F1 race at Laguna Seca *so* much I’d be happy if they closed it to the public and just broadcast the race on TV…
And Bathurst. C’mon, that would be be fantastic. Bathurst or a boring flat loop in the desert somewhere?
I didn’t suggest Bathurst. Love the place, but not for F1 cars.
Well, whatever you think of Tom W, when he left F1 I felt there was something missing. Here he is, explaining why Bathurst would be so brilliant a venue for F1, and so crazy a proposition, and, aside, making me think he did not get a fair hearing in contemporary reports, not for all he did:
Can you expand why it’s not for F1 cars Joe?
Common sense.
“Can you expand why it’s not for F1 cars”
It wouldn’t pass the stringent F1 safety standards for a kick off. No run-off areas etc. Too narrow in parts. No obvious way to extract crashed cars.
And that’s before we even consider the kind of clientele it attracts……..
Sounds just like Monaco, no? Right down to the iffy people who attend yet aren’t really interested in car racing 🙂
At least there’d be no arguing about tarmac covering the “run off” areas, at Bathurst. Catch nets might do the trick, or maybe big bouncy castle style arrangements, down … down down down the hill 🙂
Surely F1 would attract a different crowd to the V8s???
Does it not make sense to just have a single bloc of races in the Americas, then another in Europe and then one in Asia/Australia? So, Brazil, Mexico, the US and then Canada. And then on to Europe. Or am I missing something?
You don’t want two races back to back in an area that is within reasonable travel of each other – if Singapore and Malaysia were together for instance (where you can get a bus, train, plane or just drive between the two places) people would likely just go to one.
This is why they are not together
The problem with that is the north-south dimension…. weather means that a good time for racing in Canada/NY is a terrible time in Mexico/Texas, and vice versa…
The weather wouldn’t work out. March in Montreal, Austin, Mexico and Brazil is completely different. Europe is a smaller entity so it would be fine. Wouldn’t work for Asia/Oz or the Americas.
It would work fine
No, I think not. You correctly put Montreal in the summer along with NY… which is when they need to be. March in those places isn’t necessarily frigid but it’s not exactly pleasant either. You can have F1 races there then only if you don’t need the tires (or crowds) to be warm…
I can’t be the only one thinking we made the calendar annoyingly shy of precipitation. Almost without exception American friends have been impressed first by wet running, then by pit stops. Cold weather makes for challenges for tires and so on.. and I’m sure some drivers appreciate not sweltering in the cockpit. It seems disingenuous to have such a long season, and not entertain variety even a little of the extremes. Maybe the worry is about turnout on wet weekends, but that if that’s the worry, it accentuates something else entirely. I think we could do away with gimmicks like DRS, if there was deliberate choice to make use of the extremes possible with such a varied season. Maybe it’s just Bernie, more inclined to cocoa and slippers by a fire all cozy, just a inadvertent bias.. but please let’s not forget how downright impressive F1 is, in variable weather. Shouldn’t this be considered a little more? Joe’s placement of races at the fringes of seasons seems to intelligently reflect what I’m on about, and what I think many if not most fans would enjoy.
+1
The race in Australia can be any time of the year. Melbourne gets cold in Winter but no colder than we’ve seen in other races like Spa
I’d love to see Aussie Race at Bathurst, it might need a fair amount of change to make it safe e.g. replacing the sand with asphalt at the caltex chase (on conrod straight to slow down a car doing Spa/Monza type speeds in a crisis
One track I would love to see back on the calendar is Turkey, ticket prices should be 10 euros to fill the stand and the GA areas. I bet F1 fans would travel from all over Europe for a 10 euro entry.
+1
Turkey would be a good one to have again, and even a once off cheap pricing could put it firmly in the calendar. It’s a pity that with all the subsidy going into these tracks, the vast expense to build them, there’s not the will to see just what the impact is, if you effectively guarantee full attendance. I just boggle at making white elephants of such things.
Joe for FOM CEO!?
Joe,
Have you seen that Ferrari have now been given a 0.25% stake in F1? Are they that much more important than the rest of the teams?
Look at the source…
Ah yes, I see it now.
The Daily Telegraph?
Read the name
Wait scratch that. Just looked at the piece again and seen that it says a source close to the Italian marque. Do tell who it is!
I saw that. What is there to gain out of this non-news though? Stirring up the teams? BE rexerting control? Raising the IPO subject again?
My guess is, it could well be just BE showing he is back in full control and will use his powers as sees fit (even if only to put down any thoughts he might not be).
Joe – is there any limitation with the scheduling as far as the race tracks are concerned, in that can they feasibly say that “no, we can’t have a race on that date, due to x y z?” Do they have any input as far as deciding the race can be held at their venue?
It depends on their contracts
Sadly, the truth about the super rich is probably that they are super-rich because they squeeze every last penny out of every possible deal.
A few minor suggestions about the schedule: Start in New York (or even Laguna Seca/Long Beach and then head to New York), pair Canada with Mexico, and have the final in Texas paired with Brazil.
There also seems to be a few other races missing: what happened to Spain/Barcelona and Austria? I’d also like to see Malaysia with Australia, but that leaves the question of where to put Singapore, which is unique enough for me to warrant a place in the schedule.
Who exactly makes the schedule? Is Bernie still involved in that or is it just CVC?
Forgive me if I seem daft, I have just learned not to assume anything in the world of F1.
It is just Bernie
Just Bernie makes the schedule? Wonderful.
I was going to ask the same question – surely it can’t actually be Bernie, but one of his minions?
There is a lot of sense there. I think the only points I would chuck into the hat are that I think Baku would be better than Africa and I quite liked the exotic Delhi trip.
Baku is a city, whereas Africa is a whole continent to choose from. I’d agree with Joe that East Africa would be great if somewhere stable enough (and not subject to Al Shabaab attacks, and rich enough to afford Bernie’s prices tag).
What about a return to South Africa, Joe?
Not safe enough
Worse than Mexico City and Sao Paulo?
Not safe enough in what way? Circuit wise, or environment? They did host a World Cup, so it can make it safe enough…
Moving Monza from the first half of September, where it’s always been, would feel like sacrilege!
I know Belguim, pre-late-80s, used to dance around Monaco as it skipped about, always six weeks after Easter, so that’s all good, buy how about moving both another week earlier and preceed Montreal with a return to the World Championshp of the Indy 500 in its traditional slot? It would also give the teams a once-a-year opportunity to run a guest third driver to make up the 33 car grid (as for engine rules, give each driver an additional Indy-only engine to their allowance).
Indy cars and F1 cars are sufficiently different that I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t work. I haven’t watched Indy for years, but they run on alcohol, not gasoline, and at pretty much full throttle. So, completely different engine, fuel tank, chassis, tires, brakes (that don’t get used as much and will cool down a lot between usages)…and no doubt other things.
He’s not talking about mixing cars from the 2 series in 1 race, he’s talking about F1 having all 33 slots (ref: 3rd car & driver from each F1 team to fill the grid).
Mixing cars from the 2 series in one race (or more) would be fabulous… they’ve done it before… too bad they won’t do it again. Easy to find tracks where each series would smoke the other, but one can find tracks where they’d be comparable… which is why F1 wouldn’t touch it, as they’d risk having the world watch F1 cars getting smoked by cars costing only a couple pennies on the F1 dollar.
The people who own the Indy 500, plus the TV network that shows the race, plus the couple hundred thousand who attend the race, plus the millions of TV viewers all might find the idea of F1 waltzing in and confiscating their race a bit amusing. (And that’s being generous about it…)
What would you think of NASCAR taking over the British Grand Prix? Or the Premier League adopting NFL rules?
I’d certainly watch NASCAR at Silverstone … but i’d pay, pay handsomely, to see some of our premier league dolly boys play by NFL rules!
If anything, your calendar is better than the official one. I wouldn’t do Sochi though, it seems a very stupid street track but, hey, so was Phoenix and we had great racing there. In France I would consider Paul Ricard or even Le Mans before inventing a track in Paris. I don’t get people saying events like Mexico and Austin will rob public from each other. First, there aren’t so many American F1 fans willing to go to Mexico for a race and the Mexican fan needs a visa to enter US, making the whole process much more complex. In US, I would also consider Elkhart Lake, which is a “real” race track with challenges that Tilke couldn’t even imagine. I hope you become a gazillionaire someday so that you can save our souls!
It is the market…
What matters for Sochi, is how the city develops, after absorbing all this new infrastructure, and the corruption and mindless rush to profit that’s damaged much of the infrastructure that was there. Because the place is indeed beautiful, and has long been a sort of attractively patinated paradise for all sorts of unusual characters*, it’s also expensive**. If there’s a more affordable side of it, fed by supply of interested tourists, including for sports, it could end up a very good destination. I hope it will work out, but I think it’s a gamble still.
What I like most, about Joe’s calendar, is the proposition of “exotic” locations. I think some adaptation and learning is required, to make use of them, and Sochi is part of that process. I keep thinking that no one really knows where the next big fan base will come from, and as such it’s all experiment. Which is fine, provided no one either believes too much of the sales pitch that’s greasing the politicians. I have strange visions of tracks in once boom town tax haven islands like Nuie or just a track on a atoll, but then I came home early with a temperature, today… it’s a odd sport, when you squint, and i’d love it to find a new very unusual “home”, maybe somewhere motorsport is not well established, and, in my dreams, somewhere where a aspirant population can afford to come see. “loss leader” is probably two of Bernie’s least favorite words, but they make a point, of themselves. We just need to find that spark of interest to justify it.
* just geography plays a significant role in this, if you consider the politics of the region.
** In theory, there’s no shortage now of accommodation. In theory also it is not headline expensive to stay there, but Russia and theory are never bosom friends. Here’s a look at some of the development: http://englishrussia.com/2014/03/20/sochi-becomes-almost-deserted-after-the-olympics/
No Budapest Joe?
I would have political objections, to Hungary, considering the media laws they enacted. Looking at any of their politics is unpleasant. Before Bahrain is mentioned, Hungary is supposed to be a part of Europe… I think the dichotomy is unsustainable.
F1 is not about racing though. It’s about everyone creaming as much money out of sponsors, suppliers, clients, employers etc as possible. It’s a circus of dollar bills where occasionally some cars drive around.
If F1 were about racing then they wouldn’t bother going to the crappy tracks of the world like…Bahrain, China, Barcelona, Hockenheim (post 2002), Singapore and of course Abu Dhabi.
These tracks are all pretty rubbish on race day, so rubbish that the organisers need to ‘spice them up’ by doing daft things like running them at night or doubling the championship points.
Tracks need elevation, fast and slow corners and genuine overtaking opportunities. They also need concrete walls and gravel traps to help inspire drivers to take risks and make mistakes. Surprise, surprise, that’s when you get overtaking.
The rules on circuit design are very restrictive but Austin is a superb example of what’s possible. It’s just a shame that a certain German is so determined to create boring tracks.
Surprised you included Abu Dhabi in there. Is the glamour worth it for the worlds most boring track?
One needs to play to the markets, within reason. They have a viable race. India, for example, does not.
Agreed. For as long as there is a source of not just money but considerable influence that F1 might use, say if it gets targeted by silly eco arguments unreasonably, pragmatism and the stability of alliances with middle eastern investors, who do not think short term, is important. Wish they’d break tradition and out who is behind this Caterham deal, though…
For that matter, having a serious influencer interested in the sport, might help with nuisance euro investigations. Not saying there’s no merit to some aspects of competition debate, but it is not what we need right now. The last investigation did no good.
Well the program is unlikely to change, unless something very dramatic happens, so we, or rather you and the F1 folks, are stuck with it. We, or most of us, can sit on our backsides and watch or comment from home and wonder at the vast unnecessary expenditure on world travel and how much of it is profit for FOM.
Still it could be worse, Todt could have given way (or sold out) and passed the press accreditation over to Bernie. Then you would be tied down. No doubt your accreditation fees would include conditions that specified what you could and could not say in print and maybe specifying the airlines and hotels you had to use. Then journalism would be stood upon its head with the direct version tightly controlled and the bottom feeders perhaps taking on a different role.
When Bernie reveals a program like this one, it is plausible that he is somewhere laughing his head off at the dance the gullible fools will perform for him? Knowing that the chances of all the teams and th eFIA agreeing to challenge the program, is practically zero.
If only the teams could organise a united front . . .
Or even a disorganized one. Organizing any kind of front would do…
All this assumes the circuits are happy to have any date chucked at them. Which I suspect in some cases they are not.
That’s OK. I would use Bernie logic. Take it or leave it.
This is the perfect reason for the teams to stand up and say “NO!” Can’t understand their inability to work together for common good.
“So I would start in Austin in early March and then go on to Long Beach or Laguna Seca.”
A man after my own heart.
Excellent post Joe,
I’d like to see Adelaide return to the schedule – the last race in 1995 achieved the highest ever race day attendence at that time (not sure if still holds the record).
That is arguable as some of the races in earlier times did not reliable means of counting crowds
I’d love to have both, just once. I know, near as darn impossible, unaffordable etc. But that was a wrench of a decision when it was made, and a lot of bridges might be rebuilt. Just look at how many dream of Bathurst. (no point pointing out the biases of the sample, though!) I’d send a invitation to get themselves ready, and leave it open a good while, so thought could be out into it. Maybe it would be more a test of demographics and nostalgia. But I think it is a track worthy of a run again.
It does seem to me that the idea is to go about in search of some new angle, some new fan base, something really fresh. That’s a fine idea, but unpredictable at best. How long can we keep on ding this? You have mist of the answer, in retrenching the historic European races, as a safety, and of being serious about America. That mostly does it. France? I feel a pang. But I think it must be different and new, now.
Myself, I wouldn’t include Sochi until the Russians no longer pose a threat to their neighbors. I will not be watching the race from Sochi this year and I know I’m not alone.
CVC/FOM’s complete contempt for fans knows no bounds, forcing one of the few voices in the US that promotes F1 with legal action, utterly pathetic. Sums up their attitude to new media and social networking perfectly.
http://www.formula1blog.com/f1-news/changing-our-name/
They are wasting their time. I went through this 15 years ago with insidef1.com. Formula One can go on throwing legal challenges at you from the the NY legal firm of Shyster, Shyster, Shyster and Cohen as long as they want to do that. They can afford it, you cannot afford the lawyers to defend yourself. They know that. In the end the only sensible thing to do is quit.
You can’t have an F1 race on the same day as Le Mans.
Why not? It has happened time and time again in the history of the sport. In any case, work it out. If the Le Mans 24 Hours finishes at 4pm on a Sunday, what time is that in the United States/Canada. 16 minus 4 = 12. F1 in Canada starts at 1pm.
Joe, you forgot to include Hungary…oh wait…never mind.
I did not forget Hungary. It has served its purpose and frankly offers little to F1 these days
As a resident, I can tell you that Austin in spring is glorious. You have my full (and admittedly value-less) support Mr. Saward.
Thank you. My thoughts entirely
So, the calender is a governance problem
Doesn’t matter how smart and well-informed Bernie might still be – most organisations would have a TEAM looking at this to ensure a broader perspective!
Joe, did you just put the last race in the WI so you could knock off and winter in the Caribbean?
No, the logic is simple. It is the perfect time zone, the weather would be great and the image would be just what F1 wants. And yes, afterwards the poor F1 folk could have a few days off somewhere nice without needing to fork out more money to fly there. It would also help drive tourism revenues in the Caribbean. Whether that is cost effective would depend on the fee charged, but I think it would be perfect for the F1 image. A lot better than Azerbaijan.
Berlin Tempelhof will never happen, the people just voted against _any_ development of the area. It is a huge park and it will stay that way.
Formula E will probably use the comparatively small concrete area in front of the old hangars which are currently onyl used as temporary extension areas to the annual fashion fair.
There is also a long-running contract with the fashion fair organizer who managed to kick the International Garden Show 2017 off the Tempelhof area.
Plus, there is no money to build a proper track in a city always on the brink of bancrupcy.
Someone had better tell Formula E
What about Monaco you idiot?
What about learning how to read?
I do hope Mr. Saward ejects you from the blog. It’s one thing to ask why he omitted a race. Perhaps there is a reason, perhaps it’s an oversight. However, to spit in the face of YOUR HOST, with an insult like that, is cause for ejection, in my view anyway. Mr. Saward’s extensive record of thirty years in F1 speaks for itself. Joe, there’s no reason to put up with insults at this stage of the game.
I must have missed the insult. As I have explained I get the comments in chronological order not in threads so sometimes I don’t know if people are being rude…
I keep thinking, really, there’s been so much change, there’s about to be more, that Monaco could get dropped. I would not be in favor of that, I can’t think any argument to drop Monaco, but I think things are in such change now, that even this event could get lost in the noise. Rather like the rude comment, above.
To be clear, I am merely looking at what is possible. Nobody would come out and say Monaco is no more, or anything like that. There would be a major upheaval of the concessions granted by prior administrations (measured in the mini epochs of emphasis since FISA / FOCA) aligned with the problem of fair representation and reward.
FIAT are changing their plans, and I think this time the red tail will not wag the dog. I think they may not care so much for having their race team subsidized, if they got other things they wanted. Then, other affordances, such as Monaco’s control over track side advertising, will be in play. Frankly, that has to be in play, if there’s to be any viable future for venue and race promoters, and the gap to public perception bridged.
I would, and I think lots of us would, vote Joe for Prez, but I think Joe might be conservative, compared with the amount of hard ball I think is necessary to play. I don’t here question Joe’s instincts, just shaking this up will not make for a attentive audience to the pleas of love for the sport we all support. Something has to happen interim. Look at the names that have been rumored to replace Bernie. Risible. Straw men jokers. No, those were more likely Bernie teasing everyone to grow a pair, than real propositions, if they were not the most naïve hopefuls. Yes, there are naïve hopefuls sat on prominent public company boards. Making this game fair will tread on many toes. There’s just one interesting gambit not yet in motion: the red team’s owner seeing a bigger picture they care for. Then, the shibboleths will crumble. Then, we can vote for Joe to settle things down.
MInd if I ask why Monaco would not be on possibly last May as usual and another race just a week earlier (Monza would be a better fit from logistic point of view, while Spa would be perfect as a pairing either for Britain or Germany)? Also, why West Indies and not Argentina, rather before Brazil than after?
Even in perfect world, there are some things everyone is used to.
Wouldn’t it be more prudent still to have a North/South Anerican leg, then European, then a Middle East/Pacific leg in any order.
Surely this will be cheaper?
*American
I would probably reduce the calendar to 14-15 races maximum, and dust off some old favourites like Clermont Ferrand and the original Nurburgring….revisiting the Oesterreichring would be good too…..but more importantly, I wouldn’t continue with this view of F1 being a ” stand alone ” sport, I would reconnect it to the other classes of motor racing, and down to the grass roots of the sport, and get the fans back again.
Your suggestions would do the opposite to getting the fans back.
If you want to get fans back I assume you mean attracting a younger audience? To do this you need more races and probably shorter sprint races possibly with reverse grids and other gimmicks.
Now I don’t want this either but that is the reality to attracting a younger audience.
No, gimmicks are not the answer.
This is my first year following F1, I’m their ideal target demo and I do not want a dumbed down product.
Double points and the engine freeze are idiotic.
They are a solution looking for a problem. The people who run F1 need to have a little more faith in their traditional format.
I’m with you on all of those thoughts. Clermont Ferrand would be a nice getaway. I’d like more series at the same track in short succession, but I think what that would do, is strain the hotel supply, and that’s a problem enough already*. However, around Clermont Ferrand, there should be adequate, within a short drive. Incidentally, a well chosen location for a underrated Chabrol flick, Rien Ne Va Plus* you might find more enjoyable than the saccharine taste it is criticized for, but actually sends up as a, possibly overdone, comment on sentimentality. Good fun, whichever way. Imagine Bernie in the final scenes, if you will.. it has a banker in it, also…
Since Bernie gets to say what goes, I think the FIA ought to do a public service, and publish some up to date statistics. Plenty of data on local economy, hotel rates and capacities. I gave up trying to prize this data from Eurostat, who are the only surveyor of accommodation information that includes all lodgings, down to spare rooms. In theory, Eurostat is obliged to furnish any citizen with their data.. I never cracked it, and commercial hotel databases are awful. I suppose the search engine maps are often better, but not by default inclusive of everything, whereas Eurostat is a census.
The most useful thing would be to have a yearbook of economics in and around F1. I know there are some efforts, one commercial one might come to mind, but that’s… lacking. If we had proper data to support our arguments, I think as fans, we could influence much more positively, what we get. I would do this, if I could afford to, the aim would have to be making it open.
* Do you think there should not be more attempts at “group buys” or block booking? I can hardly ever get friends to agree to go to one race a year, lately, but surely something can be done. Why some entrepreneurial travel agent doesn’t see a chance, to advertise here… going to be tight margins, this is doing a service to get the PR, but I would hazard I’m not alone here to think a good travel agent is worth their weight.
**http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120018/
Can we vote Joe to run F1?
Pure common sense Joe…..which guarantees your idea will never cross the minds of the powers that be.
Yup, just read that the FIA has sent out 2 pages with nearly 50 items on them, that teams are no longer allowed to talk to the driver about.
Given that the FIA has created the most complex F1 series ever this year, one which relies on information exchange between driver and team, to the largest extent ever, this latest brainwave from Paris must surely be one of their most stupid of all time!
From what I’ve read, the chances are that a lot of cars will just run out of fuel or have muffed starts, or ERS & brake issues, halting them….it looks like chaos coming….good ole FIA, they always know how to screw things up, but not how to run motorsport effectively.
I still believe that the biggest threat to motor sport is the green lobby and the current calendar plays straight into the hands of the ”emissions” brigade
Eh?
Not directly related, but it still feels like F1 went hybrid, to meet with complaints about green issues, instead of taking the initiative, with the emergent technology. That’s a stance issue. Is there anything else that’s being missed? You don’t want to be in the back foot, with lobby and special interest groups who’ll clamor and wave any bent stats until they feel they won. I felt it about right, to be dismissive, initially, because some lobby groups need to be told where to get off, but there was a kind of silence about the fact we went hybrid, that I think lost something. It feels as if none of the cool things are ever sung about, and that feels bit quite right at all. Wish we could unleash a car or a few, forget recent regulations, to drive some tracks just to put down what performance they can achieve. That would get headlines in mainstream media. Possible, though, we’ll see a quick set of step improvements, despite restrictions, that will be striking… just will anyone be laying attention outside of the fans? I think in any other year, MB’s 2s/lap advantage would have been hailed far louder. Will we be silent if Honda does the same, next year? I don’t obviously know if that’s possible, but please let’s not be modest about it, if it happens. These cars are awesome. Tell somebody already!
JoJ: “Not directly related, but it still feels like F1 went hybrid, to meet with complaints about green issues, instead of taking the initiative, with the emergent technology.”
The old V8 rules had been static for a few years. KERS was a bolt-on technology with limited potential. The new rules — too restrictive for me — are an improvement.
Multiple energy recovery systems — old fashioned exhaust turbo, exhaust turbine to accumulator system, brake shaft to accumulator system — open up possibilities which engineers have been discussing for 40 odd years. None of the “new” is directly transferrable to mainstream road cars, but stuff filters through over time. Before we pass over, it will become standard technology in lorries and buses.
PR people mangle the concepts, but we should separate the technological and sporting elements of F1 rules.
F1 cars have manual gearboxes to “maintain the sport element”, even though engineers know that automatic gearboxes are better than human beings at changing gears. For F1 cars, the restriction on automatic gearboxes is correct, possibly too liberal with regard to electronic clutches and paddles. If the driver can’t accidentally over-rev the engine, the rules are too generous to electronics and control engineers.
Hopefully, F1 tech will deliver us road cars with more efficient automatic gearboxes. Hopefully we will return to the days when an F1 driver pulls up in the pit lane dragging engine innards, proclaiming “Ignition failure.”
I absolutely support your view that the rules are too restrictive.
F1’s biggest emissions would come from the 747s that freight the planes and teams to one off fly away races e.g. Australia and Malaysia
No, like all sports the biggest emissions come from spectators driving to events, sitting in queues etc. this for low emissions one needs transportation by public means, trams, metro etc
Actually just two 747s produce 50 times the warming gases as every person at a European track driving for 10 hours in an individual car. Flying is ‘short term’ the biggest impact – especially as it releases vapour trails high into the atmosphere.
I’m sure if you did a proper analysis of this point you’d find that the Australian GP would be amoung the most environmentally efficient events.
Unless you are a VIP you cant actually drive to the event – pre-existing mass transport is the way to get there.
I agree the Trams etc are great, however Bernie lease’s 747 aircraft to move team and FOM equipment from the UK to Melbourne. These are additional to the scheduled flights into Melbourne at the time and AuraF1’s comments demonstrate how harming that is. For what it worth I’m not a greeny, just making a point against the original post
The biggest threat to racing is our fast coming resource depletion.
the green lobby is a threat that goes way beyond motorsport
The threat comes from those that deny we need to lobby for some sanity when dealing with our environment. Motorsport is irrelevant to most of the citizens on this planet, but human survival isn’t.
I guess in a perfect world we wouldn’t have to worry about the weather. If we didn’t then I’d like the first part of the season to be in Europe, where the teams are all based. With the limited amount of pre-season testing any team that didn’t quite get it right has to suffer through several remote races before they can incorporate major changes.
Holding the UK GP on the Wimbledon men’s final day is just asking for rain, almost guaranteeing it!
F1 is being run like it is because the current zillionaire owners lack any sense of Nobless oblige.
Their let them eat cake attitude is what is truly to blame for the current state of the sport, and it can’t be fixed by the FIA’s silly rule meddling.
Instead of the West Indies, how about finishing the season in Adelaide again?
Adelaide had its chance and blew it. Blame the politicians
Ah yes, an f1 race at laguna seca, that’s a 55 minute drive from my house. Let’s do it!
Joe, I am on board with the main concept but would like you to reconsider Austin in early March : way to cold with possibility of ice -> try Mexico or Brazil.
California will be much warmer but still much colder than Australia that time of the year. If you are for entertainment , impose that no country be allowed to run at the same racetrack two consecutive year.
I second the suggestion of Elkhart Lake which combines one of the best road course in the US with the proximity of 2 great cities ( Chicago and Milwaukee), but it would have to be during the US Summer.
Austin too cold in March? Possibility of Ice? Really? It must have been that one record-breaking day…
Joe for prez!!!
I love this plan- makes huge sense, although as a fan there is something about the madness of getting up in the middle of the night for the first race. The tension of several months of waiting, ready to be released…
If Australia fell later in the season, the excitement and urgency for European fans might be reduced to sleeping in, planning to watch it later on catchup, accidentally hearing a spoiler, and not bothering to watch after that.
Beware when scheduling France / Britain / any races in early July that Goodwood Festival of Speed takes place then. Even if the teams have enough staff to go along with an old car and their reserve driver, the fans might want to attend both.
Goodwood moves to avoid a clash with the GP!
I think Formula One is like a lot of things these days, i.e., an enterprise defined by greed. Without being moralistic, it simply seems as though rapacious greed dominates much of business life in the Western world today. And, Formula One — like, say, health care in the U.S. — won’t change anytime soon, because too many people are making too much money from it. Accordingly, they will vigorously defend their turf, and obstruct any efforts at substantive change.
The only time significant changes do occur is when the folks in power finally do something so foul and so egregious that the common folk are repulsed and wake up from their lethargy, rebel and demand change. But, that seems to happen less and less. The money people operate the public relations machines, after all. Or, they buy off the judicial system.
I say all this, because I’m, unfortunately, quite pessimistic about Formula One’s future. I see a long period of stagnation and not-so-benign neglect ahead. Opportunities to expand the sport lost to the unending quest for ever-larger profits. More teams having to resort to “pay drivers.’ Thieves fighting amongst themselves for preferential treatment at the expense of others. But, then again, maybe I’m just getting old and cranky.
Not a recipe, though, for a golden age of Formula One.
The constant greed and selfishness of our society makes me cranky. It’s obvious F1 is in decline, just look at the places Ecclestone has to go to stage races and how many teams and races are going broke. All empires crumble.
Bernie has ill advisedly built a moat around his castle. He’s found he’s lacking a few knights at his table. There’s a lot of empire analogies that fit, sadly, and they are hurting those within the walls.
Before Paul Volker caused interest rates to float, as part of forgetting the gold standard, and in recognition that Bretton Woods was a fix that was bleeding Airstrip One dry, nobody wrote about bonds. Think of .. I remember the name Nick… the narrator in The Great Gatsby, who bemoaned his nonentity life as a bond salesman. Nobody wrote about bonds. People look down on businesses which are not storied. When Salomon Brothers’ iconic chief, Jon Gutfreund, wanted to recognize a momentous change in their company, he had to commission a book to be written. Even then, even allowing it was a beautification unappealing to any writer, there were few books about bond men. Consider, therefore, the few who write about F1 seriously. There are not many in total, counting all together. But of serious men, there are … I don’t need a whole hand. And of those with ability… well the attempts to write contemporary history lack so much, not to detract from what things are done very well. It matters, to be covered beyond this, desperately, things feel stifling and insular lately, though my impressions are long overdue. All the GP+ ever downloaded do not a Vanity Fair feature article make. Obviously. But the acceptability of anything is defined by the coverage thereof, and I do not mean to be cold about the sport I love, but highlight with a wince of very sincerely felt pain in my heart, how far we are from the acceptability required for even a big takeover guy’s wife not to admonish him, “Oh, Darling that is just not us!”. And this is not entirely fictional illustration. Does the F1 crowd look like they belong in The Armory, on Park Avenue? This is a very small deal, with outsize fleas, not the gilded faire of the real deal men, and their wives, neither party to be singled out for the accumulation of status they achieved.
Real exposure to the world not interpreted by Bernie, is healthy for F1. Too long have we been minions, and talked as if he were the Sun King himself. A shake up by outside interests could yet be a saving grace, in the end, profit will come from betterment for the sport, but I believe the immediate future is going to be grim, facing up to realities that we all know ought to have been averted. The King will pass, but then there’s no excuse.
Joe… Your schedule shows ” common sense “. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be that much in Paris..
I agree with the basic idea, but concocting races out of thin air (Long Beach, NY, France, West Indies, East Africa) to support your argument strikes me as ineffective.
Sure, it would be great to have races on the West- and Eastcoast of the USA and in France, but as a former Kenyan resident I can assure you that an F1 race in East Africa is at least 20 years away. On the continent, South Africa is currently the only option.
Not sure about the West-Indies (which country, really?), but I’d think an extra race in South America (Argentina?) would make more sense.
Do you not have an imagination?
If F1 is going to Africa, it only has to return to Tripoli, a short boat trip from Italy. If F1 thinks that it can manage stuff, it should deliver a GP in Libya.
Oh, and I know about your dislike for India, but I think a GP there is important, if not inevitable. They are the second largest nation in the world.
The calendar is create for viable events. India does not have one. If it did we’d be going there. I go where I have to go, and India is OK but you need to get your house in order before throwing stones at me.
Not sure what you mean by throwing stones at you? I have no ties with India, but I think it is a more important market for F1 than any country in the West-Indies I can think of? If viability is a yardstick, I’m not sure how the latter slots above the former.
For whatever reasons, India just can’t-or-won’t do it properly yet… which is a shame, but there you are…
Interesting discussion.
I agree with the sentiment that in terms of money the sport makes, how much is enough.
The problem Bernie faced was that the great older tracks just didn’t spend any money improving on and off track facilities. Things like parking, toilets and food facilities are things that annoy most F1-goers and spoil the overall experience. Brand new tracks can build in all these facilities and appear spotless and clean – things Bernie likes. We know Bernie rarely watches the end of races, so perhaps he is less interested in the racing and more the event. To F1 fans, these are one and the same thing.
If the F1 power unit and aero and safety regulations can be changed, very significantly at times, I see no reason why the F1 business model doesn’t change likewise.
He’s done the new-build and mega bucks tracks, and the result is these races are falling off the calendar as well and people simply aren’t attending the races.
That requires a change in approach. Work with the traditional tracks, build more city circuits where practicable and ensure every race weekend is full of people. With the lower engine noises we should be able to hear the fans cheer.
Filling circuits, great racing, great presentation (TV and on track) will make the broadcast options valuable again and thus ensure the future revenues for the sport. The technology being used in F1 is simply amazing yet noone really knows about it.
The calendar is “all over the place” – literally and figuratively. But in reality that doesn’t matter for the vast amount of fans watching on TV. It’s highly wastful for the teams but they’re capable of wasting money all on their own. Wasn’t Bernie’s introduction to F1 management running the transportation – presumably that central transportation of team and equipment still exists. It does seem F1 should organise central transport for additional team and media personnel who *have* to attend races and charter a 747 or 777 to depart from Amsterdam, Paris or Frankfurt for the long haul races.
Perhaps if BCE didn’t charge such extortionate fees to host a GP, the classic tracks would survive and be able to afford to upgrade the facilities without going cap-in-hand to the local government.
Funnily enough, those glossy new circuits are shiny and new precisely because the builders had government money!
Joe, I agree with all you said here apart from the Austin and Canada part. It’s physically impossible to twin them without running a high risk of adverse weather conditions in the one or the other. And the same about Canada and Mexico is true as well.
Montreal was for a very long time a standalone flyaway event in the middle of the European season and it should stay that way. It’s the only date suitable for it. They should eliminate the other 5 standalones, one is not that big of a problem
All of the above refers of course to the calendar as it is now, with minimal changes. Your proposal, while it makes a lot of sense, is about as likely to happen, as CVC offering more money to the teams of their own free will. Or pigs flying over Brackley for that matter
I wonder – from a global travelling spectator view, do you help or hinder grand prix attendance when they are too close together?
If I live in Australia, I’ll go the Aus GP in March, and I wouldn’t mind travelling to Singapore a few months later when I can afford it. (And when I’m due for a holiday)
I cant afford to do both GPs in a row, its just too expensive, and takes too much time/effort.
Likewise in Europe, why put France and Britain back to back, when spectators from either country are close enough to go to either GP?
If you separate them the average fan might be able to do both at different times of the year and maximise attendance, but not many fans could stump up for two GPs (And two weekends) in a row (Particularly expensive ones like Silverstone)
Canada/New York- Fans would surely skip one in favour of the other being that close together.
Not many fans can afford one GP per season let alone multiple.
Paul: “I wonder – from a global travelling spectator view, do you help or hinder grand prix attendance when they are too close together?”
In the 1970s and 1980s, the GPs of France, UK and Germany were always held in quick succession, with a breather before Monza. The order did not matter to me — my family could only afford to go to one, the closest, if lucky. The build up made a difference. If a popular driver or team were on form, people bought tickets and queued. Renault and Ligier and Ferrari and all the great Brit teams brought out patriotic crowds; I never understood why Germans turned up at their GP because they had little to shout about. A few folks in ATS appreciated that German dignity resided on their shoulders, but there must have been a lot of genuine F1 fans in Germany to make a crowd.
—
On the map, it looks like France is close to the UK. Belgium, Holland, Germany and Scandinavia are all close after a longer boat trip. Clermont-Ferrand is most of the way to Spain.
And most of ATS F1 (of the era in question) was staffed by x-March Brits at Telford Rd in Bicester 😉
Joe’s OP: “I started wondering if I was running the sport, what would be calendar be, so as to make F1 the best possible marketing tool?”
To whom would you be marketing? If you were marketing to the rich people who run the sport (usually paying with other people’s money), the calendar would be about going to places where rich people go to play or to top up their safety deposit boxes.
Monaco would be guaranteed a race on current low financial terms; you certainly wouldn’t want the Monaco authority to ask for more property tax from exiles. Singapore would keep its race, maybe paying a bit more, because ordinary people “invest” their tax in the race’s success.
You’d need a race for Switzerland, for which Imola would be suitable. I don’t think that you would be daft enough to deny an Italian GP at Monza; there’ll be a local GP2 driver looking to show off at the home event, and you don’t want the front door blown off your London house.
Macau has hosted its street GP for years, so it is time for a track upgrade to F1 status. Chinese money launderers there need more foreign currency to keep up with business.
Nassau in the Bahamas ran a series of sports and single seater races in the 1950s. The race there would be the last of the season, with a free extended holiday as a “thank you” to the men and women who kept F1 afloat all season — preferably holidaying on a different island.
South American races or locations with a harbour would be encouraged. Staying rich is an expensive business; powdering noses is expensive.
Nonsense about identikit circuit design should be disregarded. Rich people live in identikit Five Star hotel suites, travelling in identikit limos to identikit hospitality suites; if they like it, it should be fine for us plebs to look up admiringly at their good taste.
You will never be rich, Joe: the attraction of having ever more money without doing much with it seems to be the same instinct that makes boys compete in how far they can pee.
Car Magazine ran an article on a certain track designer a while back and concluded that half of his tracks (Malaysia, Turkey and a few others I can’t remember right now) worked well and half didn’t (Bahrain and Abu Dhabi and again a few others). Your assertion about overtaking is bang on and most drivers would probably be able to tell him how to design his tracks to enable it more.
Incidentally, I just read the interview of Andrew Benson with Toto Wolff and I can see why you speak highly of him (I didn’t know enough of him before: appearances on television can be deceiving). I like the way he compares the management style of the triumvirate at Merc with Lewis “wearing his heart on his sleeve”. To me, this is a much more relatable way of running a team than many other’s and should actually go a long way to getting people to relate with the sport. Sport is supposed to be a sort of microcosm of humanity and Merc delivers on that front. However ironic it should be that a German company provides this. Probably helps that the team is essentially British. The way he speaks of Lewis and Nico makes me think that – should it come to that – it would be Nico who left and not Lewis.
Tom V: “I like the way he [Wolff] compares the management style of the triumvirate at Merc with Lewis “wearing his heart on his sleeve”. To me, this is a much more relatable way of running a team than many other’s and should actually go a long way to getting people to relate with the sport.”
Indeed it is very different from Ron’s team management at McLaren. Ron created a team that briefly was capable of winning everything but won a quarter of the cups.
This season will show whether Toto Wolff is up to his job. He has to win two cups this season. It might be better if the miles faster bloke, Hamilton, beat smart Rosberg. It might be more interesting if the battle was resumed next year.
you get my vote for f1’s new project manager of schedualing….
I like your schedule. It makes way more sense to group races as you get a sense of rhythm to the season. I’m still getting used to the idea of 20-ish races. I’d be happy with 12 “Big Events”. What about regional championships — Europe, the Americas, Asia, and Australiasia? Could some of them be “majors” that had inherently more prestige (and more prize money, or God-forbid, more points)?
Unfortunately, it’s not a perfect world which makes this, regretfully, a fruitless exercise. Sorry, a cynical moment after reading 181 comments in our favorite echo chamber.
Joe, you make too much sense.
I do love the idea of a Grand Prix in the West Indies. Perhaps that could be it’s name and participating countries could put tour packages together that would fly fans from wherever the race takes place, let’s say Jamaica, to their islands, say Martonique, Barbados, Cayman Islands,… For a few days, or a week after the race, as a a mate deal. Love it!
Typo: as a package deal.
I like the schedule – it should just have 10 more races. Joe – you are going nuts saying NO! I don’t want to go there – but us fans who only get to go to one or maybe two love the idea! (and it would still be less than NASCAR). And we hate August – not having a race for three weeks is insane!
On Bernie – I don’t think people give him enough credit. Not only did he make himself rich, he made a whole lot of people involved in the sport rich. Ron Dennis was a mechanic, Frank Williams worked out of a phone booth, Eddie Jordan talked. and a lot of other people have made a lot of money out of sport that very easily could have gone the way of CART. He’s even managed to keep a lot of Journalist employed one way or another. What’s even more amazing is he has provided the opportunity for some of these people to be creative and get rich when they had a lot of things working against them. Take Ron for example – he was hated by the guy who regulated the sport. Frank had a terrible disadvantage – yet he has made it and endured.
Bernie has provided a canvas for artist, be they team owners or drivers to paint on; and the artist have succeeded. Corporations – not so much – except Ferrari. But Jaguar, Honda, Toyota, BMW, Renault – I don’t think they made a lot.
I think people will miss Bernie when he is gone, and I think the same about LdM at Ferrari. I liked Martin Whitmarsh , but I missed Ron – but hey I miss Flavio – and that takes us back to upsetting Joe!
great article Joe, agree with you
Really?
If people did not pursue profits (a return on capital) once they had “more than enough money (capital) to live out their days”, then where would you buy your food? Who would make your food? Who would make your cars? Who would build your home? Who would manufacture the airplane on which you fly? Who would explore and produce the petroleum for your car, your house and the airplane. Who would sponsor your beloved Formula One?
Every single one of these activities is financed by capital from “people who have more than enough money to live out their days” and yet choose to pursue more profit, or as you put it, “screw every penny from every deal”
Ok, I’ve had a few minutes spare this afternoon. For what it’s worth, here’s an ideal calendar. 20 races, spread over 34 weeks, with plenty of back-to-back weekends. And ignoring the minor technicality that some of the circuits have been butchered or don’t exist any more…
Australia, Adelaide
Malaysia, Sepang
South Africa, East London
Turkey, Istanbul Park
Spain, Jarama
Canada, Montreal
USGP East, Watkins Glen
France, Paul Ricard
Britain, Silverstone (pre-1991)
Germany, Nordschliefe/Hockenheimring old circuit (alternate)
Austria, Osterriechring
Dutch, Zandvoort (pre-1990)
Belgium, Spa (full circuit)
[4 week break]
Italy, Monza (full circuit with banking)
European, Reims (1953-1966)
Japan, Suzuka
Brazil, Sau Paulo (original)
Argentina, Buenos Aires (full circuit)
Mexico, Mexico City
USGP West, Long Beach
Reblogged this on bobespirit2112 and commented:
As usual, Joe makes some great points here. Of course, his ideas simply make too much sense to ever become reality in this era of unbridled corporate control, with their greedy executives, boards and big shareholders (other greedy corporate types) driving the sport for their own agendas, certainly not the fans or ticket-buyers.
Joe,
Absolutely love you underlying thinking here. Any chance we might swap the boring Abu Dhabhi circuit for the much better one down the road in Dubai?
As for a US West Coast race, it’s definitely viable, but not sure US can support back to backs with Austin at the current ticket prices. Probably 20-30% of Austin crowd are from West Coast, but if ticket prices were lowered as you’d suggest, then it could work.
Laguna Seca would definitely need some costly improvements, and, of course, Tilke and others would object to the corkscrew, so that’d require changing. Sears Point raceway in Sonoma is probably a better layout for F1 (Indycar circuit not Nascar), but it would require even more $’s than LS to fix up. Long Beach recently re-upped with Indycar, but if F1 got serious they could take it away and that’s probably a better option than either LS or SP. Of course, it’d be sad for Indycar to lose as it’s their 2nd best race after Indy, and as a local Indy guy and fan, that would hurt badly. But it would definitely be F1’s gain to race in the populous SoCal area.
As for those proposing Road America; clearly, RA is North America’s best road course, but I don’t think it can ever draw the crowds necessary due to its rural location (think Magny Cour) and would require big $’s to meet F1 standards, so I don’t see how it’d ever be feasible (maybe $10 tickets would bring enough Chicagoans).
Hope you win a gazillion $ lottery somewhere!
BobE
I have a feeling Joe accidentally overlooked Monaco.