The following is a summary of the rumours and stories that were circulating over the weekend at Monza. There was a lot of rubbish being spouted in the paddock, but some very interesting developments as well. There were two key things that happened off the track at Monza: the first was the decision by Mercedes not to supply Red Bull with engines in 2016. This was no great surprise, although there has been no actual confirmation of the decision, as there is no great PR logic in announcing that something that might happen has not happened. The Stuttgart company has been under pressure in recent weeks from Bernie Ecclestone to agree to provide engines, with Red Bull boss Dietrich Mateschitz making lots of serious-sounding noises about quitting the sport if he could not get a competitive engine. This may be a bit like a kid wailing because the music stopped and he was let without a chair, but Mateschitz’s theory seems to have been that if you scream enough, someone will give in. Mercedes clearly believes in proper discipline for children and so Dietrich has been sent to bed with no tea.
The good news is that Ferrari will happily give him engines for both of his teams – as long, of course, that he has extracted himself from his Renault contracts. Renault is quite happy to see the back of Red Bull. Renault engines won the team four World titles but when things went wrong the team’s first reaction was to throw Renault under the bus.
This will all likely mean that Mercedes will now be free to provide its engines to Manor, which is keen to grab them.
The second big happening in Monza was that Renault and the Formula One group seem to have got into a bit of a barney (a fight, rather than a purple dinosaur) over how much an historical payment should be. The way things are structured in F1, historical payments are as long as a piece of string. You get what you can negotiate from the Formula One group. Renault obviously feels that it has supported F1 long and hard and should get the same sort of money as a Mercedes, but the CVC fellows, who like to lock themselves away in rooms and sniff money, do not want to part with as much as Renault wants. The problem here is that Renault does not just want money, it needs it, if it is going to save Lotus F1 Team, because a publicly-traded car company with a strong government presence is not generally encouraged to sink money into Formula 1 teams. It is a bit like Carlos Ghosn asking the board to be allowed to buy a million lottery tickets, on the basis that one or more of them might come good. Shareholders like more solid plans. Thus to save Lotus from itself, Renault needs to find money from the commercial rights holder and from the Red Bull settlement. After that the company can help with running costs and can encourage B2B action with companies that do business with Renault. Without money Renault cannot buy either Lotus or Force India and it is hard to imagine that the current owners of either team will be giving away shares… If Renault does not get the money it wants there is a danger that it might simply pull the plug and stomp off to sell Twingos in Macedonia, using sponsorship of billion balls, or whatever.
If everyone was treated fairly and we all knew the way that historical payments worked then these things would not be a problem. It would be a case of take it or leave it, but F1’s commercial structures are rather haphazard and very secret, so we must have such problems until transparency is declared. By all accounts, a number of people who value secrecy will have to disappear if that is to happen.
The other problem, of course, is that CVC Capital Partners is a little annoyed that someone wants another part of its golden goose. They have all been fighting over the beast for a while now and CVC is annoyed that its feathers are ruffled and it is not chucking out the eggs it used to. There is somewhere between zero and no sympathy for CVC in this matter because they have drained the sport of cash, loaded it with debt and led it up blind alleys in order to line its pockets and those of its investors. Small wonder the goose is biting CVC’s bum and trying to chase it out of the farmyard…
If Renault can reach a deal with CVC and everything is stabilised, we will have 11 teams next year. Ferrari will supply five (Ferrari, Sauber, Red Bull, Toro Rosso and Haas), while Mercedes will provide power units for four (Mercedes, Williams, Force India and Manor). Renault will supply its own team and Honda will supply McLaren. There is no sign of anyone else, and eventually someone in F1 is going to work out why this is the case, when the technology is what all the manufacturers want and they are all spending unthinkable sums of money on R&D in order to make greener cars. According to Strategy&, the strategy consulting team at PricewaterhouseCoopers, there were six automobile companies in their list of the top 20 research and development spenders in 2014, with Volkswagen at the top, spending $13.5 billion a year. That is $37 million a day, so there is no question that Volkswagen can afford F1. Toyota is spending $25 million a day on R&D, while GM is on about $20 million a day, with Ford, Honda and Mercedes chasing along behind. Obviously, getting better technology from F1 is an option that is quite attractive, judging by what it costs and the advertising you get while doing it, so one does need to ask: what is the problem? Could it be the governance? The commercial arrangements? The transparency problems?
It is a question that is worth asking.
On the driver front the news that Williams has confirmed Felipe Massa and Valtteri Bottas meant that Nico Hulkenberg did not have a better choice than Force India and decided not to join the new Haas F1 team. Force India is very positive about keeping Sergio Perez (and his money) but I hear that Checo might be holding off until he knows what will happen at Lotus as joining Renault would put him in a factory team, which should in the long term be able to compete strongly. With Pastor Maldonado still somehow managing to get $50 million a year in sponsorship, Romain Grosjean’s future with the team might suddenly become threatened. And, if Renault does not come to the rescue, it is probably not such a great idea from Romain to stay where he is. This led to suggestions that Grosjean is the man at the top of the Haas F1 list and indeed some have even said that he has signed the deal. The logic of this is fairly sound. Romain wants to get into a top team and he sees the most likely place for him to be at Ferrari when Kimi Raikkonen is finally sent out to grass at the end of next year. If Ferrari can see all his data by way of Haas, they might be more convinced to take him on. The only problem here is that if Max Verstappen has Ferrari engines next year at Toro Rosso, Ferrari will also be able to see how he does…
There was some talk about Mercedes trying to push for Pascal Wehrlein to race for Manor next year, but I spoke to the various parties involved and there has been absolutely no discussion about that. Perhaps there will be at some point, but thus far nothing is happening on that front. There are several other names that are floating around at the moment, notably Kevin Magnussen, who is looking for a ride. He has hopes of Haas, but he could end up elsewhere (or nowhere) depending on the movement of the other drivers. Right now, it is not a comfortable time for him. The name Esteban Gutierrez has come up a lot and he has been talked about a lot in relation to Haas. He has money, experience and some talent and so might be a good choice. Jean-Eric Vergne is another name that is being heard on the market. If Grosjean does leave the Lotus-Renault mess, perhaps a gap might open up for him. There is no sign of any real rumours about Alexander Rossi with Haas, which would be a shame as the Californian driver in the only US driver ready to come into F1. If the Haas team thinks it can parachute a star in from US racing, they are dreaming, but I think that this is unlikely to happen as the team seems to be doing a lot of good things at the moment. We will see. New team owners usually make some pretty big mistakes along the way…
One point of note, despite George Lucas’s woeful performance on the podium at the end of the race, there was US talk show host Charlie Rose lurking in the Mercedes team areas. he seems to be preparing a show focussed on Mercedes-Benz’s F1 activities for PBS.
There was plenty of chatter about the 2016 calendar, but in the finest tradition of these things. Money talks and bullshit walks. The teams are not going to like going racing in December. Some of them are even rumoured to be adding marriage guidance counsellors to their staff as the sport is wiping out some relationships. This leads to increased staff turnover in all the teams because no-one wants to keep up with a lifestyle that sees them away from their nearest and dearest for more than a few years. So youngsters come and go, but the rat of retention is not at all what it used to be when there are 16 races, with the majority of them in Europe…
joeblogsf1 
I just want to know if you really have a little “green” notebook ? 🙂
That is my notebook!
If sugar-water salesmen are historic entrants, surely a T-Shirt company is?
IPad inside !
Is there a box under your bed or in the attic containing a hundred used notebooks, each one full of old F1 notes?
And are all of them green?
No and no
Excellent summary of the rumours and details behind this GP. Thanks very much! Mercedes parenting style and CVC goose farming analogies especially funny!
Joe, maybe a note book page could be added to each GP+ issue a few days after each race?
Additional marketing selling point for the superb GP+ magazine.
I not suggesting that a form of it should not appear on your blog though 🙂
Joe great notebook . I also have question for you. How long before the FIA alters engine rules in terms of configuration Joe? More than 10 years?
Who knows?
Joe, isn’t there some stipulation in F1 that requires engine manufacturers to supply a percentage of the teams? I thought that Honda received some sort of reprieve for 2015, but that in 2016, they were required to also be supplying their fair percentage of the teams, or at least be set up to do so? If this is the case, I would think they would pretty much have to take on Red Bull and Torro Rosso?… or is this just wishful thinking on my part? 😉
I think the rules are that manufacturers have to supply other teams if asked to do so. I doubt there are many teams knocking on Honda’s door at the moment.
According to the sporting regs no! Only a maximum number of two other teams may be supplied by a “major car manufacturer” vis:
13.3 A competitor may change the make of engine at any time during the Championship. All points scored with an engine of different make to that which was first entered in the Championship may count (and will be aggregated) for the assessment of a commercial benefit, however such points will not count towards (nor be aggregated for) the FIA Formula One Constructors Championship. A major car manufacturer may not directly or indirectly supply engines for more than three teams of two cars each without the consent of the FIA. For the purposes of this Article 13.3, a major car manufacturer is a company whose shares are quoted on a recognised stock exchange or the subsidiary of such a company.
So whether the “three” includes the supplier itself is unclear in the best traditions of wooly FIA definition. The definition of a major car manufacturer actually includes Williams and of course Ferrari.
However the rules also say there is a maximum of 20 races per season not to mention the small thing about not modifying your engines in season after homologation. These have been steamrollered, yet not re-written to adapt to the current situation. Though for next year the homologation date is firmly stated.
I do wish the FIA would adopt some standard of writing dates on its regulations. The title stated is invariably different to that of the actual file and the document itself will very likely have a third different date in its title. The document header for all sporting regs invariably calls them draft 1999 sporting regs. Not only this but at least three different date formats are used, two british and one american.
Come on, how long have you been following F1?
Perhaps too long now Joe!
As an engineer by trade I look forward to designers and team engineers pushing to the very limit of the regs and exploiting the many ambiguities and interpretations thereof.
But what we are seeing now is something different, a crass overt deliberate breaking of the regs for personal financial gain . Not only that but for many teams an increase in cost out of proportion to the simple addition of another race, it may well cause the loss of staff, breaking up of team units, divorce etc. It is in other words the straw which breaks the camel’s back.
Now there is little doubt that the reg will be modified due to the F1SG which was a gift to Bernie from the start, he only need sway (or lever) three members and he wins every time. I have little doubt that he has influential proposals for every member of the F1SG.
Pleased to hear that Mercedes aren’t going to supply Red Bull.
Nice piece, thank you, Joe.
Plus 1 – why would MB want the aggro – strange decision by Ferrari (if true) – who surely may well then be beaten by RBR
+1 from me too.
But I can’t help thinking that at the next race the message on those daft Bernie Says boards will be “Think before you defy me”.
Reading between the lines, it looks like a long distance shot for Renault and Lotus. The fact is, there seems to be a strong chance the sport could lose both in 2016. Not good for anyone.
Joe, the altercation between Ghost and Ecclestone, was it a Barney or a Fracas. I would pay good money to see that particularly if both had missed dinner! ( tongue in cheek).
Love this notebook thing. Bravo!
Joe on a scale of 1 to 10 just how bad was George Lucas on the podium. 1 being not that bad and 10 being the worst of the worst Mind you his performance on the podium cannot be as bad as the quality of the Star Wars prequel trilogy. The original trilogy is great though.
The “rat of retention” is conjuring up some wonderful images. Is he what Bernie sends around with promises of historical payments or cameras that can’t see your cars when the cat of contention is on the prowl?
First class coverage Joe, a great new feature after each race (even if not intended as such). I very much enjoy these insights, much like Ted’s Notebook.
Slightly off topic, but have you encountered an online service called Patreon? It is a ‘crowd funding’ website that helps creators obtain funding from fans of their work. I will admit that I don’t really know what is involved, or whether you need to sign your life away and a large percentage of your monthly patron donations, but I thought it could be another way (on top of GP+) to generate income from your online presence and the blog in particular. I’m sure many readers would pledge $1 (the minimum I think) or more per month to continue reading you blog.
Just an idea, apologies if it was something you were aware of and had dismissed.
I think the problem is once you charge for access, you are expected to provide certain things. At the moment Joe has full freedom to publish what and when he wants on the blog.
Charlie Rose interviewed Niki Lauda when “Rush” was released.
http://www.charlierose.com/watch/60307605
Joe, if there was a Nobel prize for mixed metaphors you would definitely win it!
(this is meant to be a compliment not a criticism – in case you think I live under a bridge and eat billy goats for breakfast)
I preferred it when it started in January in Argentina and ended at the Glen in the 1st weekend of October.
Marriage counseling – that is telling. Why don’t they break up into 2 teams that cover 10 races each…. Oh God forbid it is too costly.
It’s enough of a struggle to organize 1 team over 2 cars , nevermind 2 over 4 !
Look forward to this item now Joe – a great idea.
“With Pastor Maldonado still somehow managing to get $50 million a year in sponsorship….”
Where does it come from and why does it continue? He’s occasionally quick, but more often walking back from a shunt.
Venezuela
I really can’t see how he can be of that much value to a sponsor. Does he really bring them $50 million worths of revenue? Seems crazy to me, never mind the economical situation in Venezuela.
That would buy an awful lot of toilet paper for Venezuelans, currently in short supply (as are so many other things). depending on the price. I see a population number of 31,292,000.
I wonder if his sponsorship comes from the Venezuelan national shoe company – he does more miles on those than in the car …
I can’t figure why so many fans are against him. Maldonado is a very talented driver who has faced a lot of bad luck this season…He perhaps only needs to balance a bit of his energy and get calmer.
No one ever said he was slow. But he is accident prone and never seems to learn
Whilst I complained about Vettel’s tyre outburst the other week, I abhor the heavy handed approach by Bernie in apparently censoring the drivers future comments.
But I wholeheartedly support Paul Hendry in his assertion that he must be allowed to test the tyres on representative cars of the same weight downforce and power. Otherwise he would be quite justified at the start of next season in saying “Here’s some tyres lads, best of luck, we have no idea what they will do, we are not allowed to test them in any meaningful way”
Noted too the arrival of the missive from FIA lawyers in the FormerF1doc’s former letter box. (Surely someone is giving very bad advice to someone)
I must confess to having a certain amount of sympathy for Bernie here, after all sponsors really aren’t queuing up. Martin Brundle’s comment about the lack sponsors on Alonso’s overalls makes you reflect a little.
The lack of sponsors is largely Bernie’s fault, in grasping the much larger fees from pay tv he quite knowingly and deliberately reduced the live tv audience (and attraction to advertisers) to a fraction of it’s FTA equivalent in Europe. I have often moaned about this and forecast the demise of F1 as we know it Jim, on various blogs including this one of Joe’s. Only a dramatic reorganisation of the financial side of F1 can save it.
If you read the muddy piece in the Telegraph you will see that CVC are about to depart. However the gripping talons of the greatest rewarded are clenched tight on the controlling instruments and even if CVC disappear it will not be enough.
2 or three more teams may dissolve slowly and painfully before the final denouement. Lotus and Caterham are just symptoms of what is to come.
So sorry Bernie has little sympathy from me, he is quite capable of making a very lucrative deal on the cabin roof of a sinking ship in a hurricane, he does not need sympathy.
I was really talking about the here and now rather on the overall somewhat problematic situation, created or not by BE. Otherwise I agree with much of what you have written, but I am more optimistic and teams have come and gone before, it was ever thus.
News of the birth of Vettel’s second daughter, two weeks after a blown tyre could have embedded him in Eau Rouge, does make me understand the reason for his outbursts, a bit more.
Now, if he could drive inside the track limits…
Sorry but I was brought up old school, duty and responsibility to your family. If you have regard for your family do not deliberately do things that could get you killed. If you are killed don’t moan about it afterwards, you knew it could happen and you still went. Having kids does not change the risk level but it adds to the consequences, it can affect the level of commitment of a driver. Even Guy Martin now has a girlfriend/partner I remember him saying that you just cannot have other responsibilities or you cannot go 100% on the edge and push.
.(And if you don’t know who Guy is watch “Closer to the edge” )
after seeing what Honda has gone though so far this season why would VW or anyone else would want to spend the type of cash needed to get into F1 and be stuck at the back of the grid?
… and Joe says that Manor may get merc engines. What Honda has gone through may be nothing compared to what’s yet to come, when marrussias leave Jens and Alonso in their wake 🙂
Forget the “may”. They will…
If things really will be as glum for McLaren, I hope they would drop Honda. I know it doesn’t sound realistic, but I guess Alonso and Dennis would already be discussing that…
As things stand nothing seems to suggest that they will be improving next year. For every one step forward they seem to take two steps backward. I still can’t understand the logic behind McLaren deciding to be the test bed for Honda’s entry into F1. Granted they needed manufacturer preference, but this is not taking them anywhere…they seem to be driving around in circles, as Lauda once said!
But if not Honda, what other choice does McLaren have?
The answer is time but modern attention spans don’t seem to take this into account. Mercedes took years to get where it is now
Joe,
As an American and an F1 fan, I’ve been following Alex Rossi’s career trajectory with hope. And this year he seems to be right where he should be: in a top GP2 team scoring wins (two of the most recent four races) and lying 2nd in the driver’s championship standing. Yet, as you note, he’s not apparently ‘in the mix’ at Haas or perhaps anywhere else.
It’s not adding up. All the manufacturers claim America remains under-served by F1 and yet here is an American kid who did it the right way: moving to Europe and racing (and winning) his way up the Euro feeder series and who could now be credibly plugged into a second seat or in the reserve/test driver role and likely be very competitive.
Since that’s not even close to happening, I’m beginning to think I’m missing something (not for the first time!). Does Rossi have even less money than the usual F1 hopeful? Is he a complete jerk in person? Awful body odor? Scientologists lurking in his management team?
Perhaps when you’re looking for a new blog topic, you could expand more fully on The Curious Case of Mr. Rossi.
I too can’t figure why doesn’t seem attractive enough for Haas. Too bad he isn’t going places like that other Rossi.
Because he is an F1 new boy. Haas has probably considered the testing mileage he has done, but wants experience first. In terms of talent compare the careers of Rossi and Gutierrez…
Ah, rumour season… I heard one that CVC may change its name to Parasite Capital.
“….Dietrich has been sent to bed with no tea”. Priceless!! His corporal punishment is occurring on the track, where the team is getting their hind quarters whipped.
Am so pleased that Red Bull will not have MB power next year – good to know that Stuttgart seemingly rebuffed Bernie. Never did see the attraction of Red Bull drinkers to the Daimler-Benz board.
So ‘high maintenance’ RBR will have Ferrari engines – I wonder if there will be any difference in output between a ‘works’ and ‘customer’ power unit? …
That’s kind of traditional with Fezza….
will there be any difference between the factory and customer engines? The answer is no (or as it’s pronounced in Italian ‘si’) ;-D
In theory
I said traditional Riccy. Start in the 50’s and work your way forward. Speciality of Enzo, bless him…..
Fezza supplying engines to those dreadful garagistes ! Glad it’s not Merc though.
Thank you for doing another notebook Joe…….
So RBR to dutifully follow the Ferrari cars? Or to trust the Italian team to supply engines able to beat them?
It seems RBR have reaped what they have sewn. Merc neither want to be beaten by a customeer team or complained about when they are not.
Red Bull give you whinges.
Er … reaped what they have sown.
Or possibly .. ripped what they have sewn.
Raped what they’ve shown.
You know, I never miss a Joe story.
Sometimes I go AWOL for a few days, like when I’m on another event (yes, there are other forms of motorsport than F1).
Last weekend was a case in point, I was on holiday and took my eye off the ball for a few days. Well, I didn’t even realise there was a Formula 1 Grand Prix until I checked back into this blog this evening.
Is joesaward.wordpress.com getting bigger than F1? I, for one, certainly find it more exciting told this way.
Hi Joe
Love your blog – thanks!
Any other news on the potential Williams sponsorship deal you mentioned a few weeks ago?
Bryan
Not thus far
I’m beginning to think that Renault should just walk away. BE and CVC are between them murdering F1 as I love it, and they don’t deserve anything except the wrath of true F1 enthusiasts. Sadly, we don’t really matter anymore as we don’t spend enough money and ain’t manipulated like they want us to be.All I need now is the little green book and granprix plus. Thanks Joe.
Wow, Joe, thank you! Great stuff. Good to see Mercedes keeping their foot down (figuratively after asking Lewis to do so literally) and giving Mr Mateschitz a taste of his own medicine.
I doubt that Ferrari would go for Max Verstappen in the near future, being as conservative as they are. He would be relatively cheap, but so would a few other drivers that the Red Team would consider more ‘established’. They probably feel they’re not in a hurry since most drivers want to drive for them, especially once they’ve collected a few driver’s championships.
I do get the feeling that F1 is heading for some sort of reckoning: all the unsustainable elements (secrecy, octogenarians at the helm, lack of long term policies, lack of governance from the governing body, lack of interest from manufacturers in joining the sport) coming to the surface more and more in a world that demands at least the appearance of transparency. Or am I just being melodramatic and will F1 muddle on like it always has?
Thank you Joe, great stuff.
Please do not let the clockwork (wind up) idiots distract you, you clearly have not, although I confess they have niggled me.
To open an e-mail from you to find it is about F1 should not be a surprise to anyone not even the most self processed.
I believe that you were in the Paddock with Geoff Willis. I was great to see him on the Podium and I was pleased with respect that the drivers showed him during the Champagne spraying. He fully deserves that respect.
self ‘possessed’
Joe, can I ask you to highlight the shameless way in which the FIA and Jean Todt *continue* to treat Gary Hartstein. (https://formerf1doc.wordpress.com/)
They’re trying the old “we don’t like what you say, have some lawyerese threats for breakfast” treatment. As if conspiring to get him sacked from his old job wasn’t enough!
I am aware of the situation. I think Gary is handling it well
Manor with Mercedes engines would be quite good for them and the sport – one presumes then that they’d have access to at least the same engine as the other customer teams rather than being stuck with an earlier model?
Joe, what is it that makes Alexander Rossi “the only US driver ready to come into F1”, as opposed to any idea of bringing in Graham Rahal or Josef Newgarden being merely “dreaming”?
Being in Europe and learning the European ways of doing things is essential. This is why Brazilians come to Europe. Racing is different, life is different.
Newgarden, at least, is not a complete stranger to the European scene — he did have two seasons racing over here, albeit that ended five years ago.
And he did not make it…
Neither did Jacques Villeneuve (three podiums in three years if Italian F3, a DNQ at Monaco in 1991, etc.).
If you get thousands of miles of testing and by far the best car, the discussion is different…
…and I gather was not a fan of/struggled with the politics of European racing at just GP3 level.
Something Michael Andretti never learned!
Rahal and Newgarden were never a possibility (and they don’t have and aren’t eligible under current regs for a Superlicense) and Rossi was only a slight possibility. This weekend Haas was quoted as saying he didn’t find any US drivers up for the task of the race seat and called for a better system to get US drivers involved in F1. Rossi won’t get the race seat, maybe not even the reserve.
Joe and others in the media are the only ones commenting on Haas bringing a popular US racer. Haas has said all along it would be someone with current experience, preferably this season. With Hulkenberg out of the picture it looks like Grosjean or Vergne and probably Gutierrez due to the Ferrari tie in. Contrary to what was posted about Haas being a new team owner, he’s got a great deal of experience owning large scale, championship caliber professional racing teams. Maliya, Fernandez or even Mateshitz didn’t have that when they entered F1.
dave,
I am aware of Haas’s racing team ownership experience. But I had missed the Haas quote about no US drivers being up to the task, and I had likely fudged (willfully so, most likely) his comments on experienced drivers to interpret that as him wanting at least one (though not necessarily both) so experienced.
As for Superlicence eligibilty, you are both ahead of yourself and behind current updates!…
* the much-changed eligibility regulations do not take hold until 2016 and so, under previous and still-current regulations, having finished in the first 4 of this completed season’s Indycar championship standings, Graham Rahal could actually apply this very minute for a 2015 Superlicence he has earned of right. Newgarden would need the old backdoor FIA approved 300km test (in a car built to the 2011/12/13 regulations), but that route is still sufficient until the end of this year.
* the new-for-2016 Super Licence regulations in Appendix L were updated on August 19th (see http://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/annexe_l_2015_-_ml.pdf ) to effectively ‘grandfather’ the right of annual renewal of any Super Licence gained before 2016, thus:
5.1.7 The driver must also satisfy at least one of the following requirements:
a) Have accumulated at least 40 points during the three-year period preceding his application (Championships and points listed in Supplement 2).
b) Have been granted a Super Licence (excluding Free Practice Only Super Licence) in any of the previous 3 seasons.
c) Have been granted a Super Licence prior to the previous 3 seasons (excluding Free Practice Only Super Licence). In this case, the driver must be judged by the FIA to have recently and consistently demonstrated outstanding ability in single-seater formula cars.
d) Have finished first in the FIA Formula E Championship of the previous year.
… tis a shame to come to understand that neither of the aforementioned drivers are at all likely to get to take advantage of all that.
This is not the problem.
So I have come to gather, from your responses and others.
The 2015 [and prior] Super Licence grandfathering does raise another question though — who then really does stand to benefit from this (bearing in mind there is a lesser licence now more readily available for Free Practice Only runners)? Aside from Mrs Wolff being able to continue to dream of being able to maybe stand in oneday as Reserve driver, who might actually race on the back of this?
We read of Wehrlein being wanted (and nobody’s too likely of to get the 40 championship points out of DTM alone, needing to be Champion twice and at least third the other year in three). But who else, realistically? Haryanto if he finishes 3rd in GP2 this year?? Sirotkin if he doesn’t??
I am sure that any candidate who is worthy and wanted in F1 will get the required licence
Ha, then I wonder how long we get to wait before we see who the first driver is that the new licence rule set is broken for.
The issue with Rahal and Newgarden is experience in a current F1 car and the exposure and experience of working in F1. Why get Rahal or Newgarden when you could have Gutierez and Vergne?
If you want to run F1 you move to England, if you want to run Indycar you move to Indianapolis, if you want to run stock cars you move to Charlotte. Regardless of the type of racing, you need to be immersed in that scene in order to get the opportunity. The kids over here aren’t going to forumula car racing over here when they get out of karts much less going to England to take a stab at the F1 ladder.
My point
Time for the F1 doomsday scenario to playout.
1. Renault bows out of the sport entirely;
2. Lotus goes into receivership with no angel to save them and fold;
3. Matschitz throws the finger to Bernie and takes his billions and t teams out of the sport.
Leaving 8 teams (Assuming Haas makes the grid) for 2016 with the minimum 16 car field. This (hopefully) torpedoes any flotation or further sale of F1 assets and makes CVC realize it’s time get the hell out of Dodge, regardless of any losses or lost potential profit.
I’m sure Bernie will gladly pick up the pieces and restructure the assets in a package appealing to new owners who will grow the sport as opposed to raping out the profits
GeorgeK you forget to say 8 teams providing haas make it and Manor don’t fold.
I accounted for Haas but not the possibility of Manor folding; I guess you can add Force India and possibly Sauber to the shaky list as well.
Manor is not going to fold
I do hope you folks east of the Atlantic have seen enough Hollywood westerns to know the meaning of the “get the hell out of Dodge” phrase. (Dodge City, Kansas)
Thought-provoking reports from a well-informed writer…it’s always a pleasure to read your articles. Thank you
It could not possibly be that the tyre pressure fiasco had any connection to the engine supply situation.
That’s impossible isn’t it, even in F1?
I had the same thought myself but I like to think that F1 is more grown up than that.
Well, it back fired, if it was Bernie up to his old tricks. Dieter Zetsche apparently nixed the idea that very evening and it isn’t too hard to imagine him being informed Bernie’s henchmen were up to no good and him reacting accordingly.
Question is, did Bernie know that the race officials would side with Mercedes or actually DQ them.
Surely the Macedonians wouldn’t fall for the Twingo?!?!
Good point about the money being spent on R&D
Brilliant article Joe, a great insight. Any news on Gerhard Berger’s project? Buying into Toro Rosso perhaps? F1 needs guys like Gerhard, racers with personality…
I don’t believe he has a project
Another quality piece, Joe. Terrific work. You have mostly answered a question I have had for a long time. I’ve been following Formula 1 since San Marino, 1982 and have been curious why Renault have come, dominated, gone for a few years, and then come back again. Did I once read where Niki Lauda was to have driven for them in 1985, only to be told that their board would not approve his salary demands? Would Renault have a stronger case for ‘Historic Money’ had they kept their team? Would the year to year costs of being in F1 outweigh whatever money they’d receive? So many questions.
They left because the team was caught cheating. They were embarrassed. It was their fault for placing trust in the wrong people. Of course they deserve historical money but actually F1 deserves a better structure then we would not get this
Surely that was only the last time (the part about Renault getting caught cheating and leaving)? The first time they left as a works team was because they didn’t find the success they wanted, although I think Alain Prost came close to a championship driving for Renault somewhere in the early eighties. After that they supplied engines, most notably to Williams and Benetton, but then left again in the late nineties or early noughties (leaving Williams to drive around with Mecachrome-labelled engines – the beginning of the end of them as a “big” team on the scale of McLaren, Ferrari, or RB). I never quite understood why they did that. Was it because of a “we’ve achieved all we can” kind of reasoning, or was it shareholder (= government) pressure?
From what I’ve gathered here over the years, they decided to leave when Damon Hill’s engine exploded dramatically in the tunnel at Monaco 1996.
Unlike his father – who won Monaco five times in the 1960s – Damon never did. That was his best chance, he was comfortably leading the race at the time, then BANG in the most dramatic way possible. I remember it well nearly twenty years later.
The bad publicity for Renault that followed (so it was said, I never noticed any undue stuff myself) convinced them to pull out, as they were under the impression that by that time, despite the Williams-Renault successes, they only ever got mentioned in the press when something went wrong.
Right, I had to look up the 1996 Monaco Grand Prix, only to then remember that I had indeed watched Olivier Panis win it, with only three cars finishing the race I guess I never noticed the Renault blow up.
The only getting negative press bit sounds awfully familiar… Especially since Williams-Renaul went on to win that and the following year’s championships (drivers’ and constructors’ in both years, I believe)
It keeps me wondering too. It’s the same with Honda, steps in, steps out, steps in, steps out, rinse and repeat. Does this has something to do with whoever is running the company? Marketing funds? Or is it a case of ‘can’t live with them, can’t live without them’?
Come to think of it, perhaps Ferrai rightfully gets a big entry fee every year, since they missed only a handful of races since 1950.
If teams can come and go yet demand a historical payment, would it not make sense for Manor or Force India to buy the rights of Team Lotus and then rebadge themselves as the ‘new’ Team Lotus (assuming ‘Lotus F1 Team’ dissappear as an entity from the grid in 2016)?
Thanks Joe, for another great report on what appears to have been a VERY busy weekend, behind the scenes.
Up front, doesn’t everyone believe that the “celebrity” podium interviews have got to go??!
They never produce anything worth hanging by the TV to wait for…this weekend was especially bad with the drivers totally ignoring George Lucas to mug for the crowd. NBC has stopped showing the world feed post race interviews, which, while not always compelling viewing, would sometimes produce a nugget of information
They should use David Coulthard on all occasions. He gets the right tone every time
Agree about DC being very good, but think alternating it with Brundle would be a good idea.
Can’t say I don’t enjoy Eddie Jordan’s enthousiasm on the podium
E.F. Carson
I very much agree with Coulthard and Brundle as first choices and your comments regarding EJ bless him.
Totally agree – was having the same conversation yesterday. Very professional. It’s a pity though that the post-podium ‘press’ interviews are not televised with a camera identifying the reporter concerned. The current format is very staid now.
There’s hardly a shortage of well informed talent around at every race – they should find someone who’s actually driven an F1 car or run an F1 team to do the interviews, rather than Bernie’s VIP guest of the day.
I’d rather see someone from the country it’s in, wherever possible. It can’t be that hard to find a famous Italian who loves motorsport.
I’d certainly go with the theory that Renault deciding to go back into team ownership would require Romain Grosjean as a driver – probably lead driver. After a very shaky start, he’s become a reliable and very talented driver and capable of winning points, not just taking them by default. A French driver would rekindle a Prost era and France’s interest in the sport generally. That might be enough to satisfy the political aspect of the deal. But even as you describe it here, Joe, and looking back at previous articles, this deal is getting more and more complex. The historic payment adding an even greater complexity.
OEMs aren’t queueing up to support F1 let alone be a full works team. Enstone have been a works operation at one time but it either will be or has become stripped of a lot of the quality that a works team attracts. It may well be cheaper for Renault to let “Lotus” rot – maybe even Force India – and pick up equipment and parts for a works team at an absolute bargain, though once again the team personnel involved will be severely disadvantaged and let down by the F1 machine. If you want to attract the best and the brightest, you cannot expect people to hang around on the basis someone might buy a team. This is again FIA/FOM failure to respect the sport and the people involved in making the whole thing happen.
If Ron Dennis is to be believed, no one is in fact queueing up to even sponsor F1 teams, especially in the title sponsor role. Though that at the moment speaks more about McLaren’s poor management choices and engine woes since Mercedes decided to launch their own team.
F1 needs strong teams in Ferrari, McLaren, Williams. These are the teams what have withstood the comings and goings of OEMs (treating Ferrari as a racing company and not a division of Fiat). Other OEMs, treat F1 as a short term marketing device, like Toyota, Honda, BMW and Mercedes. Of those, only Mercedes have parlayed their investment into championships. Renault is somewhere in the middle, successfully running its own team and even when withdrawing from that, supporting a “privateer” teams, like Red Bull to four championships on the bounce. Renault aren’t newcomers to F1, and the hardball over historic payments is time wasted, damaging to the sport and disrespectful to the people working in the team(s) involved.
Can I edit the last para:
These are the teams that have withstood the comings and goings of OEMs (treating Ferrari as a racing company and not a division of Fiat). Other OEMs, treat F1 as a short term marketing device, in recent years, like Toyota, Honda, BMW and Mercedes. Of those, only Mercedes have parlayed their investment into championships.
Roland – “A French driver would rekindle a Prost era and France’s interest in the sport generally” – I like you would love to see this but I think that it would have to be a winning French driver (preferably a championship winning French driver) in a French team to even register.
It would be fantastic if there could be a ‘Schumacher effect on German fan numbers’ or ‘Alonso effect on Spanish fan numbers’ on France but then Vettels four WDCs didn’t seem to stem the downward trend in German fan numbers and the Alonso effect seems to have worn off also.
I seriously doubt wether Haas having an American driver would make any difference to the fan numbers in the USA unless he (or even better she) was winning races. Even Lewis Hamilton is far better known in the USA for being the (ex)boyfriend of a ‘popstar’ and for hanging out with rappers and musicians!
Totally off topic but I wondered, since you have a notebook, what a professional journalist choses to write with. I’m a bit of a pen geek and use a fountain pen everyday. There is certainly space in this digital age for good old analogue tools (I’m only 30 by the way)!
I have weird pens from Japan that grow when you need to write with them. Very geeky!
Interesting. Is there somewhere one can see these weird pens Joe?
If only Honda could make engines that grow when you need to race with them. 😉
Didn’t Toyota do that in rallying a few years ago on the Celica? (Well, the turbo grew anyway, IIRC…)
Good on ya, i’ve been looking at fountain pens recently too. Dunno what brands are worth spending a bit for though ?! (Sorry.. off topic !)
Now avidly looking forward to your next notebook summary to satisfy the craving for insider information not available elsewhere!
BTW Joe, saw you on the job around the Mercedes trailer, behind Will Buxton as he was commentating for NBC Sports after the race. As if we needed any proof that you are always on-site…
Having met George Lucas (briefly, but enough), I was apprehensive when he was announced as the podium interviewer. Borne out…although It was amusing that the egotism went in the direction of fanboyism rather than rudeness. But perhaps similar egotism is within the normal range for F1 personages? Hmmm…his net worth is in the area of US$5Billion–what Formula One assets could he buy with that?
Speaking of podium interviewers, have you volunteered, Joe?
Wow, this isn’t a notebook but a universe of news!
Regarding the marriage counsellors for team employees rumour, I am not at all surprised that such things could be happening. I love F1 and motor racing but still I would never want to work in such a setting where mechanics and other employees are made to work like machines away from their families for months. I also really feel for the McLaren Honda mechanics who usually have a ton of more things to do than the other teams on a race weekend…
The post-race stuff was an absolute flop. Is it Bernie who decides who interviews or are there other dim-witted souls who pick people to conduct the interview? Vettel totally evaded the question about the new engine by uttering something in Italian – well I do understand the passion of being in Tifosi-land but Mr. Lucas should have got the answer from him. But Mr. Lucas can’t be blamed for this (his presence would increase F1 interest among Star Wars fans??!!), instead the blame should squarely fall on the enlightened individual who decides these things.
In the Sky Sports coverage Brundle said he was the one supposed to be doing the interviews but there was a last minute change. As @Jon in California suggested, why don’t you volunteer for the task Joe and make those answers come out of the champagne drenched men?
The Dutch TV mentioned a possible move to Honda for Sauber. Do you have any info on this Joe? Thanks in advance!
I don’t see that
I had thought that a contract with Grosjean was one of the biggest parts of any Lotus deal for Renault.
In France, he is F1.
He’s half-Swiss
Sauber?
You wouldn’t believe it from the Canal+ coverage though – but then again his wife is one of their lead presenters…
WAS a presenter. Not any longer
She’s still anchoring their studio shows and punditry to my knowledge – I’ve not tuned in for a while but she’s still listed in the role by Canal+.
The Grosjean love affair has cooled a little from the days of Eric Boullier as his team principal when they would interview Eric the instant the chequered flag fell to ask about Romain’s race, seemingly regardless of the actual race. I’m pretty sure when Kimi won in Abu Dhabi they asked about Romain first.
The studio host is Margot Laffite, I believe, who is not married to Romain Grosjean.
Related to Jacques ?
His daughter.
Please can you explain the position with Nico’s new engine. Are the team able to do repairs?
I thought that once an engine, or gearbox, was used, they are sealed by the FIA for the time that they are in use.
I think that his engine will be repaired. The race one is dead.
If the seal is removed under control of FIA, then it’s not illegal.
Having now looked at the Sporting Regulations, you can virtually rebuild the engine under supervision.
Only the crankcase, cam cover and sump are excluded. I would have thought that might have reduced some of RB’s penalties. Apart from the ones that have exploded.
Great update, its sad that so many of these snippets are tied up in the fundamental problems F1 has at the moment.
It would be good news if Manor were to get Merc engines, it looks like they are concentrating on their 2106 car with John Booth being reporting that they have been in the wind tunnel for the past 2 months. A Merc engine and some more downforce would put them up with Sauber, Mclaren (if they can’t sort out their energy recovery issues) and Hass. There is nothing wrong with a good scrap at the back end of the grid!
Is the post race notebook going to be a regular feature in your blogs Joe?
If so, I love it! 🙂 Thank you….
Great piece. Thank you.
If Renault get their historic payments, would some bright spark at Ford (or Cosworth) not wonder if there is an option for them to use that as a basis for a return to F1. I know Bernie doesn’t like giving up money, but he probably would like to see them return.
Sometimes it feels you’re given too much away for free Joe. 😉
This notebook post excited me more then the GP+ of the race. (To be clear: I felt more inclined in reading the notebook, the GP+ can wait). Oh dear, does that make me gossipy?
Thanks for clearing the fog, explaining current situations and providing insight, as always!
speedy_bob (is trying to show Joe more appreciation, as an antidote against the trolls of lately)
For those of us who cannot afford your BMS newsletter there are some interesting muddy figures today in the telegraph.
I did think it would be odd to for Mercedes to supply engines to Red Bull, when they themselves are sponsored by Red Bull’s energy drinks rival, Monster.
Brilliant post! Joe, who would you like to see in the two Haas race seats?
The fastest two possible
There were rumors before 2015 that Grosjean could be with McLaren because he and Boullier know each other very well. Is it real for 2016?
And is there strong link beetwen Grosjean and Total?
No and yes
Great article Joe, thak you. I was an avid follower in your Autosport days and forthwith will become a regular here.
There must be something in it for Ferrari other than the supply cash. If Mercedes are worried about being beaten by RB then surely Ferrari should be more worried? I read the piece including the confident noises from Ferrari about their chassis, but I don’t buy it, I would be very surprised if a big name Red Bull employee doesn’t come as part of the deal.
Joe, with the possibility of Manor getting a Merc engine then this just goes to show how things can change for a team determined to succeed (congrats hopefully) or would you say this also shows Merc covering their bases in case Force India and Lotus disappear.
I think it would be good for the Sport if Manor got the best engine available at the moment. They deserve to succeed.
They are true racers and the sport, if it is not just to a cash cow for those that have no interest other than making money, should help to survive and thrive.
I think that Mercedes have acted entirely properly in their years in their support for F1 and last weekend must have raised some questions.
It must be grating for them to have to deal with the money grabbing idiots that ‘apparently’ are managing F1 and the clown show that emerged at the weekend.
I started to explain to non F1 followers what happened last weekend.
End of story really, or perhaps the start!
Tomorrow…
Don’t knock Tee shirt salesmen. In the 70s we all laughed at Hesketh bringing a truck full of teeshirts and selling them out of the truck…until we did a calculation on how much income they were bringing in out of teeshirt sales.
“…what is the problem? Could it be the governance? The commercial arrangements? The transparency problems?” All three together, and likely some things not mentioned.
Indeed so…
Something is very wrong in F1 when the people at the top have no empathy with the people at the bottom. They seem to not care one little bit for the people who really keep this great show on the road week after week, month after month. Very sad.
Wonder how long until the inveitable ‘teams association’ comes together (again) to push for a greater share of F1 revenue and to ‘improve the sport’ whilst threatening an alternative championship.
I’m going to guess (with the current deal expiring in 2020) that there will be ‘noises’ next year…the organisation lobbying in 2017-19 followed by the inevitable Ferrari defection in late 2019… and then the process repeats…
Joe,
I really enjoy your notebook posts, they are a great way to round up all those loose ends from the race weekend, very informative.
I hope you keep doing these after every race.
F1 is not F1 anymore…. Drivers are just cruising now…. cornering speed , none…. I hope the old formula comes back otherwise F1 is doomed.
What is F1? What it was when you first watched the sport? The sport changes and always has done. It needs to be relevant. Now it is. Secondly, these cars are not easy to drive.
BTW, I need to add I been following F1 and Lewis win/performance at Monza was on the level of the greats such as Clark and Senna.
Joe don’t you miss that WOW feeling at the races… Sound of F1 going through your body… Car flying through corners… Just not the same anymore
….
Disliking F1 because of the noise is – in my opinion – like going to an art gallery and complaining because there are too many pictures that use blue paint. The sport is rich and complex and for me many things make it fascinating.
At my first GP, the noise was amazing for about 3 laps. Then, even with earplugs in, it got a bit tiresome. The first few minutes of experience was great, but then (and I’m sure I’ll get shot down for this) it took away from the experience. I watched the race last year at the same track and found NO difference in the ‘product’ other than the noise being quieter. I didn’t miss it. Just my opinion of course.
But the richness and the complexity is not seen or appreciated by 95% of the spectators. It needs to have an immediate appeal to the casual viewer on the tv, not buried in strategies or tyre choices that you only appreciate when you’re a well read fan.
Thanks for you comments Joe and Steve S. Cars as I see and understand has always been about speed and voice they make , matter it be a road car , top fuel or F1. Man has been fascinated by the sound of a machine , in this case I mean car or F1.. F1 has also been about speed… You have to agree that they have slowed these cars down too much…. Just doesn’t excite on TV , yeah maybe people like yourself are there every race,. much more exciting…. I still love F1 , just disappointing now after every race…the WOW factor just not there for me… Maybe these things will speed up in 2017.. Thanks for your great articles
I think that the TV is part of the problem. The other problem is that not enough fans are convinced these days to come to races because the live experience is very different to the TV experience and I firmly believe that if you get the fans to see these cars once live they will become fans. The problem is that the sport is not doing a good job doing that. And I don’t think the speed is a problem either because no-one can really tell the difference of a few seconds a lap. The key to F1 is that it is at the cutting edge of technology, that the racing is good (and that does not just mean wheel-to-wheel fights, but also strategic battles) and that it is a spectacle. I think most of the noise being made is made by people who have agendas and by those who never seen it live.
“Not enough fans are convinced to come to races…” The trouble is that not enough fans can AFFORD to come to races Joe. All thanks to an unsustainable pricing policy courtesy of Mr E…
Joe
We saw and heard the new generation of F1 cars for the first time at Spa this year. I think the sound of the engines is fine, but it is different from the old V8s – no more high-pitched screaming but similar to the turbo engines of the 70s and 80s.
As for the TV experience, it can never be the same as going to the real thing, that surely applies to other sports, rock concerts, opera etc.
The problem of transferring from being a TV spectator to a real one is surely the cost, and I know this has been debated many times on this blog and elsewhere so no need to go into the short-sighted, money grasping activities etc etc etc.
The Honda engine sounded very different to the other engines. Does anyone know why this is? A different firing order perhaps? Or uneven intervals between firing such as has been used on MotoGP engines?
Martin
Which can also be related back to the ticket prizes and geography (how far do I have to travel to see a race)
Having never seen a race live yet but am considering to visit one next year (if the budget and the Mrs allow it) any suggestion for a venue that has the most bang for the buck? – I need to drive there most likely and come from the Netherlands.
Becoming more difficult to access it on the TV with half the races not available (in the UK) unless you want to pay really decent amounts. Not available online, unless you want to watch some clips on youtube. There needs to be an F1 channel for a sensible price per month available online, smart TV’s, phones, tablets etc.
The F1 app is outdated, barely works (from having read the app store reviews) and you have to pay AGAIN to use the pc based version.
Comically bad.
Why isn’t there a free or very cheap F1 game aimed at 8+ years and up to play online or on smartphones, at least something to make kids wonder about it and then start watching it.
So painfully out of touch with the rest of the world it’s embarrasing and it’s little wonder audiences are dropping.
As for going to see a race live, the atmosphere is the only thing that’s better (and I have seen about 15 GP since 1990) and as for the prices, they are absurd. You can pay a small fortune to watch it live at the track and see a car zooming by 150 metres away. You shouldn’t almost need binoculars to see them close up, it just doesn’t excite *enough* for the prices charged to be there. You get a few support races that may be exciting if you’re lucky.
Watching it on TV, you know what’s happening, but it does sometimes get boring if there is little happening on track.
The highlight of my experience in Canada was cocktails with Joe!
Joe, I’ve seen plenty of comments about watching Formula 1 on television and I’d like to add another perspective.
The majority of F1 fans will only ever see Formula 1 on television. This is a reality. This reality is unfortunately reinforced by the increasing cost of attending races, costs that are out of reach for reasonable percentage of viewers.
The tv fans are still F1 fans, although sometimes I sense an attitude from some commentators (no I’m not talking about you) that if you aren’t attending an F1 race you aren’t a Formula 1 fan. Without the millions watching on television the sport would not attract the money it currently does. The people attending F1 races aren’t enough to provide the overall revenue the sport generates. The prices Bernie charges for the rights to host a race demonstrate that race venues do provide a substantial chunk of revenue, although I’m not sure how many race promoters recoup all of the money they pay Bernie, and how much of their costs are subsidised by govts eager to promote their country. Obviously this varies from venue to venue.
Having attended live motorsport events and watched on TV, my experience is that I get more information, more technical data and can follow every driver better with a tv feed. Live at the track the data is less available and even with apps I am always playing catchup or second guessing what is going on. It might be different for someone who can drop into the pits and chat with the teams but for the average punter who doesn’t have that access data is not always as accessible.
My experience is that television gives me the best opportunity to watch a race, to understand strategy calls as they happen, and to get explanations or work out for myself as to what is going on all over the track. I don’t find tv to be a worse experience than live, it is a different experience. Live brings a more visceral, physical, sensory experience, tv can’t come close in that respect, but I find live attendance can’t come close to tv in terms of following corner to corner, driver to driver, data set to data set.
Television isn’t an issue for F1. Without television or television viewers F1 wouldn’t be anywhere near as big as it currently is. The coverage isn’t to blame, even if TV can’t capture the pure visceral track experience. I don’t think it’s any less exciting now than any others time in the last 20 years, but I understand many people like to view the past with rose coloured glasses.
I think sometimes people can be too dismissive of F1 on television or the concept of watching a race on TV. I agree that live is it’s own beast, brings it’s own benefits, is the original beating heart of the sport, but we also need to understand and appreciate what broadcast brings to F1 and the substantial role it has played, not just in making millions for the likes of Bernie and Ron, but also in taking F1 to the world, and keeping it in the upper echelons of the most viewed sports. If we just relied on live attendances F1 would not be able to claim the number of viewers or fans that it does.
I’d simply sum it up this way. Watching a Grand Prix in TV is the easiest way to follow the race. Watching a Grand Prix live at the circuit is the only way to experience the event! (But this goes for any motorsport/rock concert etc.)
Unfortunately, not many of us can afford (time & money) to even attend our home Grand Prix so watching it on TV is the nearest we can get.
Joe wrote: “and I firmly believe that if you get the fans to see these cars once live they will become fans.”. I of course respect your opinion. But can I ask why you firmly believe this? Would this be a visit with paddock access included? Because personally I dread being at Spa an not being able to properly follow the race, or perhaps not more then seeing who’s first, but not really being able to follow any of the strategies. I sometimes argue Spa simply is too long of a track for a spectator to be able to enjoy much of it.:-) For now, I only see myself returning if I’m able to follow up on tactics, lap times etc via a decent working app.
I go to the WSR at Spa every year and although the average viewer there has much less knowledge of racing then people visiting F1, you can “already” sit in a packed grandstand and have the “wow’s!” and “aaah’s!” when action on the track occurs. Sadly, it is so difficult (well, impossibly really) to zoom-lens a human’s eye like a tv camera towards a particular car/corner etc.
During WSR, i suspect not that many people use the WSR app and are there to just soak up the atmosphere (it being a Renault family weekend, free access). But having to sit trackside without at least a big screen in front of me would not be a very entertaining affair.
So I’m really curious as to find out your motivations to say that a visit to a GP would make people fans.
I hope my wording is polite enough, since I fully intend to have an open talk about it. My apologies upfront if it would come across as rude or inappropriate.
But I generally care to understand why you hold the position you currently hold.
Because in my experience that is what happens. TV creates curiosity, races create fans. Maybe you have a different experience.
Joe, I don’t think that your statement is a fair summary of the many fans of F1 who have only been able to enjoy F1 through television. There are millions of fans out there who have never been to a live race, they aren’t merely curious, they are fans. Many of them spend money on merchandise, magazines, some of them probably subscribe to GP+.
Your experience is based on 20years of going to every race live. That’s great, I applaud your commitment and the sacrifices you have made. I love your writing, your insights, that you have built a career out of your passion for Motorsport. However, whenever you talk about the tv experience I have to wonder what you are drawing on. My guess is that you have very little tv experience of F1 in the modern era and as such are as equipped to talk about it as well as I am equipped to talk about 20years of live events which I have predominately not attended. There is no offence intended in these comments.
Please don’t fall into the trap of treating tv viewers as just the curious and not fans. If these “curious” non fan viewers turn away F1 is going to have some issues. Do you really think the millions of TV viewers are only curious if they haven’t attended an F1 race? Given the amount of stuff that is missed out when attending live vs tv I think there is a strong argument that those who tune into every race without having been to one are fans. They tune in because they love the sport even without the noise and drama. In so,e ways they know more about what is happening during the race than many “fans” sitting in the grandstands.
I am well aware of the fan base of F1
“Because in my experience that is what happens. TV creates curiosity, races create fans.”
Do you think that the fanbase includes people that have only seen F1 on tv or is the fanbase restricted to those that have attended races?
Thanks, but I’m not asking about your awareness Joe, I’m asking for clarification of your opinion. My question is based on your earlier statement which I’ve quoted above. I’m simply trying to understand if you believe someone is not a fan until they have attended a live race.
We would need to define the word fan. But for me F1 fans are those who have seen a race – or have the ambition to see one. Being a fan, to my mind, involves more than quite liking what one sees on TV
Thanks Joe. I appreciate you taking the time to respond, and as always you’ve given me plenty to think about. Cheers.
I couldn’t agree more. I will never forget the first time I went to Silverstone as a teenager. The first F1 car that I ever saw drive past me in anger was Kimi in a red nosed Sauber. That noise, that speed, that experience will stay with me for a long time – that was the moment I became a true fan.
Jump forward a few (more than I like to think) years, and it is the same story for my wife. She ‘tolerated’ my love of F1 for years. Then, in 2010, we were able to go to the Chinese GP, she (to her credit) spent time on the Friday and Saturday with the program open on her lap and asking question about who was who, and what their ‘back story’ was, so that by the time the race came on Sunday, she knew what was going on. Great race. Bit of rain, good racing good overtaking etc. and then a Jenson, Lewis 1-2, the perfect race to convert someone. From then on, she has been (almost) as big a fan as me.
In this new era of engines I have been able to bring my nephews and nieces (and next year my son). They have been just as excited as I was way back when, and we have been able to explain things as they happen because they are not deafened and caused pain by passing cars. But their excitement is not at all reduced.
I seem to have wandered off topic a little – my point was that, I think Joe is right. You cannot fully appreciate how amazing these machines are until you have seen them live, that is the reason I, my wife and my young family and all fans!
Thanks for you blog Joe. And your evenings with… And your sidepodcasts (do more please). Fabulous writing and insight, without the laziness and sensationalism of most of the media.
These summaries are great. Joe, your work is pretty much the only reason I continue to follow F1.
Joe,
Would Red Bull really be that dumb to first destroy their relationship with Renault so openly before having a proper backup?
I find it really hard to believe they would use this playground tactic. Isn’t more likely they already have a deal in place?
Imagine if Honda do a Renault in season 2 and go backwards. They would be beaten by the Manor Mercedes…
I think McLaren Honda could be beaten by the Manor Mercedes unless Honda does a Ferrari in season 2…
Agreed Joe… I did go to Austin last year and loved it, although was sitting in general admission area… For this year I bought start/finish line seats… I fly from California.. Also I believe F1 needs to open up fan to driver interaction w, I did not see or meet anyone… not 1 driver while in Austin…
When Indy car was Cart.. I live 10 min from Fontana, I was able to take pictures with everyone… Paul Newman, Michael A, Dario, Alex , Jimmy Vasser, everyone.. at California speedway/
I dont like Nascar nor have been to any of there races, not my type of racing really… but I heard they cater towards fans first… No wonder it is HUGE is USA…
Drivers in F1 are not allow to speak what they want or feel… Couldn’t get close to any driver , pits , anywhere in Austin to see a glimpse ……
I fear , that slowly F1 will lose its audience on TV and Circuit ..
These guys CVC< Bernie, and whoever, how much more money they need in there pockets before they turn attention to fans……
F1 is like a drug that I can't seem to quit or let go, but want to , as after every race , decides few , boring….
I also can't stand that engineer are giving so much info to drivers… I know they are trying to change that , but Monza was same ..
and then Mr TOTO, scared to give Redbull engines… They clearly have ruined F1 since 2014…
Just Venting as I am so fed up …. thanks for listening… all.
Have a little more respect for Mercedes. Their job is to win races. They have done that. If there is blame to be handed out, blame the others for failing to do the job properly…
If my memory is right, which is not always the case, it was Manor that worked with McLaren and Mercedes in the development of Lewis Hamilton sponsored by Mercedes. Not a bad relationship although ‘some’ would disagree.
If Manor were to get the Merc PU perhaps the relationship may go further?
Agreed Joe….. I just miss V8 and incredible cornering speed , loud screening sound…
Joe, I wonder if we shouldnt start calling ‘Lotus’ Enstone? I even noticed a label on the chassis saying words to the effect ”Made in Enstone”. It would be easy to forget and easier still for others to not even know of this teams fine history, reaching back to Tolman if we go back that far – its where schumi took 2 titles, and Alonso both of his, Button and others have passed through the ranks. On those notes is it even conceivable that this team could be allowed to dissolve? It’s a disgrace to Genai that they have such an asset and be willing to let it crumble around their ears. And there is Renault going cap in hand to the blood sucking leech of CVC asking for some dosh please to help keep it going. If the sport loses Enstone it will be a damnation to Ecclestone and CVC et al and be a testament of their failure to lead respectably.
Where is Todt when you need him?
I posted in an earlier post that Enstone were equal second most successful team of the last 20 years for WDC’s. Second to Ferrari, equal with Red Bull. 1 WDC in every 5. More successful than McLaren, and Williams. That is a selective time frame, but I think the last 20 years is a fair period to make the assessment.
I tend to think Renault threw RBR under the bus. What did Renault expect? RBR kept shtum for the first year and then somehow Renault actually produced a worse PU for this year (comparatively). Of course RBR will highlight their concerns… they aren’t spending peanuts. They expect the same high level of performance that they themselves achieve.
People easily forget that Renault have been the perennial underachievers for some time. RBR’s chasis in the V8 era concealed their poor engine, to the point where Renault required concessions just to be competitive.
If Mercedes supplies Manor with power units, McLaren is doomed. Only half-kidding here 😦