F1 » Neale: F1 teams need to stick together

Jonathan Neale says teams need to stick together over spending in F1

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest

Paddockman - Unregistered

October 12, 2011 4:24 PM

The restrictions on spending should be rigorously enforced. There is no difference between spending over the limit and having a bigger engine.

It's a pity there is not a clear, FIA-enforced cost cap.

Droog - Unregistered

October 12, 2011 4:41 PM

@Paddockman, Agreed.
Although, I would be for limited testing for new drivers.
To me, that just makes sense and would increase performance (and safety) of the new guys in their first races.
A cap would be difficult to enforce, but should be attempted. However, there should be no salary cap for Drivers, just a cap on Team spending (agreed to by FOTA).

Maxx - Unregistered

October 12, 2011 5:15 PM

Having a spending cap is fine, as long as you also set a minimum spending level. If the smaller teams don't have the money to play, shoe them the door. There is always going to be lower level teams, but, at least Sauber, Force India, STR, seem to have what it takes. Before Red Bull was called Red Bull, they were a middle of the road team. They also need to add at least 2 testing days during the year, but, limit it to drivers who don't drive on Sunday.


October 12, 2011 5:35 PM

Inevitably Red Bull has attracted the most attention because of their great success,but that has not stopped them from directly answering their critics and saying they had not broken any budget rules this year. The problem with Red Bull is simply, their just too good.


October 12, 2011 6:03 PM

paddock. there is a very big difference between "spending over the limit" and "using a bigger engine". one (the engine) is otally against the regulations, whilst the other is only a breach of an unenforcable agreement.

now, a question for you. who was the last team to use a larger than legal engine?

Caroline - Unregistered

October 12, 2011 7:22 PM

The top 4 teams all break the RRA in various areas, which of course keeps them ahead of the teams that play by the rules, although to be fair the RRA is just a gentleman's agreement and not a set of enforceable rules, and that's probably why team spend has increased by 9% since 2009.

Mark _

October 12, 2011 7:41 PM

Spending more is no guarantee for success. Toyota spent a fortune with little or nothing to show for it. Well thought out technical regulations will do more to encourage parity than a budget limit. Besides it is near impossible to enforce a budget cap. if anyone here has ever gone through a corporate audit you know that they take many months.

Trying-Yes-Very ! - Unregistered

October 12, 2011 7:48 PM

In any competitive area all rules should be obeyed, any gentlemens' agreements should be forgotten, it's a competition, no space for wishy-washy agreements.

I don't agree with this phoney cap at all, it is false and unnecessary, and probably broken by all teams by using creative accounting. They only have bar-b-ques to cover the smell of cooking books.

This F1 these days is getting tame, lame, and stupid. The emphasis should shift from money and gimmicks to RACING. Although it is most possible they have forgotten what that means.

Paddockman - Unregistered

October 12, 2011 11:13 PM

Obviously having more money is no guarantee of success, neither is a bigger engine. But given equal ability, the team with the most money will win just like the team with the bigger engine. And, of course, with money, you can buy ability.

One of the enduring myths is that you cannot enforce a cost cap. In January 2008, all the teams except Ferrari agreed to a cost cap (FIA Paris meeting, 11.01.08).

The CFOs of the teams then met repeatedly between January and May 2008 and agreed that it could be enforced. They produced detailed draft rules.

This conclusion was supported by the forensic accounting team from one of the "big four'.

Ferrari continued to oppose and, for whatever reason, the FIA did not push a cost-cap rule through.

Mores the pity. It probably needs a team or two to go out of business before the idea is revisited.

Mark _

October 12, 2011 11:27 PM

Paddockman - I can see how it may work with a Williams or a Lotus but how could you be certain that Fiat or Merc are not conducting R&D through the parent company or a subsidiary? Obviously the accountants are not going to be able to look at all of the books for the manufacturers. We have budget caps in sports in the U.S. and it does not stop teams from dominating. Teams are developing right up to the final race so it will take a period of time for the accountants to certify the results. I would be surprised if they could certify them prior to the start of the next season.

Page 1 of 2
1 2  »

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2016 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.