Just imagine

i don’t want to sound like John Lennon, but there is no harm, from time to time, in saying “What if?”.

What if things were different? OK, we can all understand that sport will inevitably be commercialised and that those who do this are not much bothered by the damage they do, as long as the money keeps coming. We can all understand that international sporting federations are generally filled with the wrong kind of people in search of power or money. We get that Bernie Ecclestone gets his kicks from doing big deals.

We also get that behind Ecclestone is some smug city suit and behind the smug city suit is a Texan with a huge bum, who runs a pension fund; and behind the huge-bummed Texan are thousands of normal people, investing their money and looking for big returns.

But what if the sport could be run in a fashion that meant it could be the best it could possibly be, with decent profits, good governance, everyone working together and strategic long-term thinking…

What if the sport was not ruled by the love of greenbacks and the urge to control others? If the fat-bummed Texans went back to buying shares in arms manufacturers, pork belly futures and GE. What would the calendar be like then?

The sport would look at the global markets and say, “Right, this is a consumer business and therefore we must have a strong presence in the world’s largest consumer market.” If you don’t know where that is, get a map and look at the big land mass that lies between New York City and Los Angeles. This is where the money is for sport. Yes, you can pick up the odd tens of millions in ropey places like Azerbaijan, and oil-rich autocracies in the Middle East, but if you are after the big bucks, you need to Go West, as the saying says. You need to have at least a third of your events in timezones that are sensible for US live audiences. And you have to give them someone to be proud of, someone to cheer. In order to get a star or a team you need to have a bigger presence in the country – and you need time to build and money to invest in promotion.

In the perfect world, therefore, you might kick off the F1 season in Australia – in late summer, rather than early autumn, and Melbourne would be a good place to do it. It is impossible for live coverage to be perfect in all timezones but with programmable digital recording devices those who are asleep when an event is on, always have the choice of staying up to watch or catching the event as soon as they wake up. It is important to look to the future and build in developing markets as well and so going from Melbourne up to Asia makes a lot of sense. It is a good time of year for the Asians as the autumn tends to be disrupted by tropical storms. So China is a good second port of call, and if it were possible to have two other Asian races back-to-back at that point in the year, perhaps Malaysia and Korea (or India, with a decent street track) then that would be good. It makes sense after that to go to Bahrain and Russia, back-to-back, while the weather is still cool. After that a couple of European races would be good, in Spain and Monaco, but it would be good to then follow up the buzz of Monte Carlo with a similar race in Long Beach in early June, followed a week later by Montreal.

Then it should be back to Europe for the summer months, picking the best venues when the weather is at its best, so that fans see the best of the sport. I’ve always felt that a race in the Bois de Boulogne in Paris should not only be possible but essential. The first ever motor races were held there, the first post-war motor races were held there. The industry began there. And, of course, in July Paris is delightful (and I live there, so I am biased). Austria is pretty but a million miles from anywhere, while Germany, Belgium and Britain are essential to F1. Spa struggles to get crowds and so needs special care and attention while Silverstone continues to pull in big numbers, despite its remoteness. If they could get a light railway in there, it would be brilliant.

You cannot have a World Championship without Monza and then the modern classic in Singapore must be retained, although the track needs to be tweaked to reduce congestion and to allow for better racing. That should be back-to-back with Japan, before the autumn storms get heavy.

I would then go west again to New York in October for a street race in New Jersey and a week later I’d go somewhere in the Caribbean or Florida so as to keep the F1 “Jersey feel” alive as autumn closes in. Mexico and Brazil are both good markets and in a good time zone, so they would be a good double-header to follow and then I’d go back to finish the year with back-to-back races in the Middle East/Africa. Africa is great for time zones but not easy to achieve because of political instability/crime/poverty in lots of countries, but there has to be somewhere that would work and allow F1 to be a driver for growth and to give the sport another exotic location. They used to race through the streets of Luanda in Angola, back in colonial days, and from photos it looked fabulous, maybe that could be an option. If one is going to Africa, however, one needs it to look like Africa, rather than a Tilkedrome outing the bush somewhere.

Having the final race in Abu Dhabi works pretty well if it is in the evening, so why not?

When you look at the 2016 calendar you can say that actually F1 is doing a decent job with the calendar in many respects, it just needs more in the West and less in places that will never be very significant markets for spectators, sponsors and manufacturers.

56 thoughts on “Just imagine

  1. Joe, you should consider taking over from Jean Todt. And Bernie. However, as you have a good understanding of sporting and commercial issues and a strong sense of right and wrong I guess you’ve got the wrong characteristics.

  2. Joe. Great debate but I can’t believe that you left out Austin and Circuit of the America’s after NJ. Great place to showcase F1, good weather, great flexible spectating, friendly people (almost as friendly as the Aussies), cold beer and a live wire place all up. And if we’re not after sanctioning fees, what about a return to season closure in Adelaide !

    1. Austin is nice but strategically I feel it is a minnow compared to the markets of New York and Los Angeles. Yes, if there was room for a third F1 race in the US then it would be good.

      1. In a tv market based world, a race in the Chicago area would make more sense as a third USA race venue. Especially if the politicians could agree to run it along the lakefront in Grant Park or further south in Jackson Park, near the proposed Obama Presidential Library.

      2. I think CotA is one of the best modern circuits. It seems to have some character compared with most other identikit Tilkedromes, whilst the 3 races already held there produced some decent racing.

        Would leaving that circuit off the calendar not send out a wrong message? The track was built by enterprising private investors, which surely ought to be encouraged over oil-rich despotic regimes who seek to merely use F1 as PR to distract from their questionable records on issues such as human rights?

        Also I’m impressed by the fans it seems to attract, who from anecdotal TV evidence appear happy to pay to watch a weekend of racing they don’t necessarily understand. However I take the point regarding the potential market size on the east and west coast.

        Austin has a proud tradition of attracting folks to interesting events. “Levitation” (previously called Psych Fest) is in full swing right now. Likewise the SxSW (South by South West) event annually attracts a great mix of artists, music industry bigwigs and huge numbers of visitors.

        I think F1 fits in well there, plus I wouldn’t want to punish a circuit built without state subsidies.

  3. Hi Joe, If F1 fans got to vote on the next FIA president you would surely win by a landslide! Alas the Green party have a greater chance of winning the election than F1 fans have of getting their sport run by someone who gives a s*@t about their feelings. ps any news on the next audience with Joe in London???

    1. Ihope to have an Audience around the time of the British GP, but I am still looking for a venue

  4. Joe, where your quest is flawed is the fact that you are looking for logic and business sense. With Mr. E at the helm, it is greed that is the focus, certainly not logic. The start here is actually founded on what is known as “The P.T. Barnum Philosophy” which is “There’s a sucker born every minute”. Interestingly enough, Mr. Barnum and Mr. Ecclestone both run/ran circuses, so I’ll go out on a limb and call this a “Circus Mentality”. With this Circus Mentality, everyone you deal with must solidly qualify as “A Sucker”. The Sucker must be in a position of controlling hundreds of millions of dollars and be willing to throw them in the air with the caution in the wind. First, they will spend $400M on a facility utilizing a design firm partly owned by Mr. E, naturally. Then once the race is held, there is no room whatsoever from the “Ecclestone Vacuum” which allows the facility or The Sucker to make one cent. The problem with your theory is that in New Jersey and Long Beach there are people that say “Woh! What’s going on here? This is not a two way street. This is one enormous financial catastrophe! Pull the plug on it!”. So, as long as the prevailing wind blows from Ecclestone, you’ll be looking at more Suckers from places like Azerbaijan and Baku and the more places like that which displace races like France and Germany, the more it evolves from “The World Championship” to “The Third World Championship”. That’s not an opinion, that’s a fact. The only flaw I saw with your proposal was that I seemed to miss Austin? Dropping Austin’s $400M investment in F1 would greatly aid those who are against races in New Jersey, California, and perhaps as you suggest,here in Florida too. ” Look what they did with Austin! Dropped them like a hot potato, leaving them holding the bag for hundreds of millions of dollars!” A bad rep takes decades to change. I think it best to keep Austin.

    1. I do understand why we are not going to these places but that does not detract from the fact that we should be.

      1. I agree. The bottom line however, if we are to imagine, is a major restructuring is required. The sooner, the better.

      2. Why would you include Abu Dahbi and Bahrain in an ideal world? Maybe if they used the ‘Outer track’ in Bahrain it would be nice, but I’m not interested enough in illuminated hotels to care for Abu Dahbi. I think Italy deserves two grand prix’s and I would like a scandinavian GP. But. Never from mr Tilke again.

  5. I wonder about having an F1 race in New Jersey in October since the site is just a few miles from the 82,000 seat NFL stadium, and they play on Sundays at 100PM Traffic will be bad. Perhaps some cooperation could get the NFL game that week on the Monday evening slot. But you are always going to have conflicts with other sporting events.
    But Mr Saward’s proposal is quite good all-in-all.

        1. No, he meant that Alonzo, Seb, and Ricciardo would be racing each other in NYC subway trains…

      1. True, and if there is one, I’ll be taking public transit. But even Citifield, the 42,000 seat baseball stadium in Queens, has a parking lot capacity of 8,300 cars.
        Of course you could try an F1 race in October and if it too many problems arise, move the date.

  6. Wow, a modern-day race in the Bois de Boulogne! I’d be there. To succeed in America, F1 must have a race in California, and in or around NYC. South Florida would be a bonus.

  7. Given the popularity of floodlit races the Indian GP could be rescheduled for the evening at 20:30 which would suit Europe, US East & West coast TV viewing in real time at 16:00, 11:00, & 08:00 respectively.

  8. Just a thought, and it has been done successfully in the past, why not have race cars that could interchange between F1 & Indycar? Same cars, different races, but F1 could come to the Indy 500 and race in front of 250,000 or more fans, together with Indy drivers competing alongside…..Montoya-Hamilton anyone? Yeah it would be difficult unless one had similar rules for each series, they could divert in some small ways, and keep their own identity. It would give F1 great coverage overnight, and there could be return matches at places like Silverstone & Monza……now that would be something to get excited about!

    1. The very last thing F1 will allow to happen is to let people see how zillion-dollar F1 cars fare against sane-budget Indycars… F1 won’t even hold a race on a track that lets Indycars race there… they don’t want the comparison of lap times in front of the public…

      As for the Indy 500, F1 people are too scared of the wall… one non-negotiable feature of the F1 track at Indy was it would not permit cars to approach the wall at speed…

      1. It is about the rules not the technology. Indycars are agricultural machines compared to F1…

        1. I agree that modern F1’s rules make good lap times incomprehensibly expensive. (I’ve never understood why they’ve done that, but they have.)

          However, saying that Indycars are “agricultural machines” doesn’t change the fact that F1 goes to great pains to ensure the track performance of cars from the two series cannot be compared… and that’s despite the fact that Indycars must perform in more varied environments than the narrow window to which F1 cars are confined.

      2. Yes RShack, I know they are too different now, and that works against Indycar as same spec racing isn’t ever the answer for exciting motorsport imho. However, what I was suggesting was F1 against a revived Indycar, where the likes of Penske & Ganassi etc, could build their own cars, or use Dallara’s that are more like the old CART cars than the ugly things they use at present. At the same time, I’d have F1 revamped, so that the 2 types of cars could race against each other, as Lotus did against the USAC cars of the 60’s. That way we could really compare Hamilton/Vettel/Alonso etc, against the Indy stars, as our parent’s could do when Clark,Hill & Stewart raced there. And if someone didn’t want to run, like Amon didn’t ( and no one could say he was a coward, he just didn’t like the hemmed in nature of Ovals it spooked him ), then they could opt out and just let people run who were happy to do so.
        Not only would it answer the F1/where to race in the US where one can get a sell out crowd issue, but it would also reduce, at a stroke, the insane costs of F1 and provide answers as to who are the best Open Wheel racers on the planet! Frankly, if F1 wasn’t so scared of any unfavourable comparisons, it would be a total no brainer!
        These days the drivers may claim to be greats, but those of the past were happy to be compared to all others, whether in F1, F2, Sportcars, Indycar etc etc, even BTCC! It’s really only when one can see drivers in different circumstances other than F1, that one can truly tell just how good they are. This is because F1 is now so constricted that there are never more than 3-4 decent cars available, so there are never more than 6 – 8 possible race winning seats. The best gravitate to the best seats, and tend to dominate from them. Therefore no one has any real idea, spectator or journalist, of exactly how good F1 drivers are. If one put say Grosjean in a Merc, he could probably win races regularly, as Vettel did for RB. But what does that ultimately prove? I knew just how good Stewart, Rindt, Brabham, Rodriguez etc were, because if one of them had a poor F1 car, as Rindt used to before he got the works Lotus drive, you could view their abilities in other formulae. Rindt was the undisputed King of F2, even against Stewart and the others, which tended me to believe that as a driver he was most likely to be the outright fastest F1 racer. I can’t say that about Hamilton, Alonso,Vettel as anyone can be dominant with the quickest car. Back in the 60’s Rindt was using an off the shelf F2 car, so anyone could race him in the same spec machine.

  9. And move the Canadian GP to Calgary, perhaps twinned with hi-tech Seattle? After all, Calgary is home to a dozen current F1 sponsors. Montreal? Well, they had that circus thingee but they sold it recently. Bombardier? Right, it’s up for sale. SNC? Right, it’s being investigated left, right & centre. I say Calgary!

    1. It’s fine with me to have a race in Calgary… but don’t mess with Montreal… it’s one of the very few non-pasteurized F1 tracks left…

  10. Joe, I think your idea to resurrect the Angolan GP is brilliant. I get to drive the winner of the 1962 GP from time to time, which is in perfect condition and still very original. The Lucien Bianchi car.

    Wilson

  11. I hate to say this, but I don’t think USA-friendly time zones is enough… it needs to be USA-hosted races. If you want the US market, then some significant number of races must be there… minimum of three, and probably a few more…

    ‘Not saying this should be necessary… just saying I think it is…

  12. Don’t go to Florida in late Sept or early October as you are in the hurricane season…but a race in Miami would be a wonderful option in late October as the humidity drops away. Orlando could also host a race as it has huge hotel capacity.

    1. A race in Miami would have to be a speedboat race. It won’t be long and the water level will have risen enough to make it unsustainable.

  13. Hello joe, Just adding a little info. People always claim Spa doesn’t get a decent crowd. I invite anyone to follow the race in Spa from anywhere outside the paddock as i have done the last two decades. You cannot get more than 65.000 spectators in there unless they are willing to look at a tree or the hair/back/bottom/umbrella of the person in front. Still, give me Spa, Monza, Silverstone any time, any day, even in the rain. The shabby grandstands have more soul than the vast and sadly empty grandstands cum billbords of Shanghai, Yeongam,…Anyway, great idea about Long Beach and Paris BTW.

  14. I like the season being started in Argentina, followed up by Brazil and South Africa as the third race. Australia to conclude the season in late november would appeal to me as well.

    1. Anyone who wants a race in Melbourne in November doesn’t know its weather. March is its only reasonably dry month and once you hit the middle of the month the temperature begins to fall away.

      Weather in early April in Melb is very unpredictable.

      BTW, do you remember the unpredictable weather in Adelaide in November? Well that’s Melb but it’s even more unreliable at that time of year.

  15. If we’re playing the ‘how things should be game’ I wish the FIA would start trying to make F1 an actual sport with participants selected on merit, not sponsorship, and feeder formula that travel with the big show (like motogp). Motorcycling is just about a fringe activity on the road, but their sport attracts relatively huge numbers. Imagine being able to see a drivers progress through the formulas rather than have them land from unseen Renault 3.5, Formula 2, GP2, Formula 3 and god knows what else. And always working out the calculus between cash and talent when working out who gets which drive.
    /rant

      1. Yes on merit but with money too. I now accept that the skills required to drive in F1 are that they must be extraordinary drivers with fabulous networking and marketing skills but that has been the case since the fifties. Almost all F1 drivers retire (if you can call it that) to a lucrative career in business. They learn those skills on the road to F1. Look at Irvine, Berger, etc.

        I don’t reckon that is a bad thing. If it is a bad thing then Sir Stirling, Eddy, etc among others should donate their fortunes to promote hapless drivers.

  16. Hey Joe,
    If I counted correctly you propose a 23-race season. That’s ambitious, but we could make it a nice round 30…

    First of all I would drop the following races from your calendar: the 3rd Asian event (India/Korea), Bahrain, Russia and the 3rd USA event (Florida). Then there’s 19 left. The 20th race of the world championship would be a different one-off event every year.

    Furthermore I would have a sort of “winter series” during February/March on the tracks in the Middle East (Bahrain, Dubai, Qatar, Turkey). Practice and qualifying on Saturday, a shorter race (“Petit Prix”, appr. 1 hour or so) on Sunday and then testing during the following days. Invite some local race series for the weekend and you have a nice little event. I can see some additional opportunities (sponsorship conference etc.) and maybe you could start off the very first event with a televised unveiling of all the teams/cars. End the series with a similar event in southern Spain or Italy and then it’s off to Australia.

    I would do the same kind of thing for in season testing.
    For instance, here in the Netherlands there is a motorsport scene, but it draws only a very small crowd. Not many folk go to Zandvoort to see a Suzuki Swift cup or some ageing Formula Fords. Now If there were some F1 cars, then the interest would skyrocket. So for in-season testing, choose 5 countries that don’t have a GP and run a “Petit Prix” in a National Championship weekend. All F1 team participating in this event are then allowed to test on the same track for 3 or 4 days the following week.

    So that’s 30 races in total.

    Finally I would change the season ending F1 race in Abu Dhabi into something like a “World Finals of Motorsport”. Gather all the major FIA series (WEC, WTCC, GT’s, F3, FE, World RX) plus the GP2/3-series. Run practice and qualifying in the week preceeding the GP-weekend. Then on Saturday all tin-tops have there season finale, and on Sunday all the monoposto’s, ending with the Grand Prix of course. Make a good package deal for (free-to-air) television and the whole of Europe is glued to the tube during a cold, rainy weekend in November.

      1. Joe, if it’s not 23 races, what were you intending to drop that’s not explicit in print? Your calendar is a little unclear to me through the haze of your European summer!

        I read, from 2015’s 20-as-was, you’ve maybe only dropped Austria and Hungary, plus Austin. yet adding:
        * Korea or India [street race?]
        * Long Beach
        * Bois de Boulogne
        * New Jersey
        * Caribbean
        * Africa [e.g. Luanda of old]
        would make 23, all in pairs except Germany, and room to amend the latter to make 24 without losing the three weekend summer break and yet still all within the same 38 weekends as 2015’s actual calendar.

  17. Joe,
    F1 needs consumers and the fastest growing markets are China, China, China and China with India, Russia and South America coming on stream. Get in early and start counting the profits. Consumers equal income from Advertisers … all the way down to t-shirts and hats.

    Also it goes without saying that the States *is* the biggest market and F1 is not where it should be there that needs attention. I reckon the European stuff is OK but not important. Sorry but **** Europe.

    1. [edit to above] We do need European races. Monaco, England, Italy and another one or two that goes without saying as Europe is a big market but not as important as the biggest market or the emerging markets.

  18. Just to disagree with one aspect of your article Joe regarding Singapore. I’ve not seen it live but on TV, to me, I find it too contrasty due to the artificial lighting employed. I’m sure it works for spectators but as in ‘all night’ races it’s almost confusing at times on a screen due to the amount of refection caused by the lights – and not just the metallics on Mercs et al, even solid colours such as Ferraris. If it was Monaco it might be a different matter with its interesting topography – but it’s not. The best shots are when the cameras pan out to views of the city, but that’s not really what we’re supposed to be looking at (it’s not the Tour de France after all!). I could be wicked and say BE might prefer some others to be at night where spectator attendance is poor but that would be unfair wouldn’t it….?

    1. I see McLaren have updated their new colour scheme saying it show up better under floodlighting. Can’t see that, all the detail will be lost as with black road car schemes so it’ll just be a dark blob at night. During the day it should look smart.

  19. In an ideal world we would resurrect the following tracks (putting them in the calendar appropriately):

    Estoril, Portugal
    Brands Hatch, England
    Watkins Glen, USA
    Imola, Italy
    Zandvoort, Holland
    Hockenheimring (Original track), Germany
    Nurburgring (14mile), Germany
    Roeun Les Essarts, France
    Clermont Ferrand, France

    Of course Silverstone, Spa, Monza, Monaco, Singapore, Suzuka should remain.

    Ps. I agree we should add more circuits in USA, Asia and Middle East. But we should do this carefully.

    Final note, but – please ask Hollywood producer-director, Ron Howard, to advise on the general spectacle and future of F1. His recent movie managed to inspire both die hard and nominal fans of F1 alike. genius.

  20. I think Joe was going for “ideal yet sensible”!! As great as those circuits are/were, only Imola and Estoril on that list are feasible for modern F1 and they are both a shadow of their former selves.

  21. “Just Imagine” they let teams actually race BALLS OUT!
    “Just Imagine” they had cars that SOUNDED like racing cars
    “Just Imagine” F1 was the pinnacle of motorsport like it used to be
    “Just Imagine” If we left the Greeny racing to the F-E’s and F1 was purely about racing
    “Just Imagine” What is going to happen in a few years if nothing changes

    It doesn’t matter what circuits we race at….. if you take your son to watch and he cant feel and hear that roar and excitement that we used to experience then “imagination” is all we will have.

    F1 is getting boring. I am reading and seeing that on more and more blogs / podcasts / fan sites etc etc…..

    zzzzzzzz

    1. So everything you read and see is true is it? Have you actually tried going to a motor race?

Leave a reply to Wilson Laidlaw Cancel reply