F1 » 16 March 2012
Friday press conference - Australian GP - Pt.2
I was in Western Australia over the last few days and interestingly, WA suffered a 20percent decline in tourism in 2011 whereas Victoria's tourism has grown, and I think the state has a tremendous record of attracting great events and there's no doubt that that puts Melbourne on the map around the world. If having a night race meant more excitement, more publicity, a bigger global audience for the race here, then I think it's something that the state should very seriously consider. As Ross said, whatever happens, we really want to come back, because it is a fantastic weekend, really fantastic.
I agree with the comments made. They've put a lot effort into creating an event for the fans. If you walk around the infield, there's a lot of activity going on and if anybody follows motor sport in Australia, that's something that they do very well. There are other events like the Clipsall which is an amazing event, if you ever get the chance to go there over in Adelaide I recommend that you do so. So I think yeah, as long as it's viable for the promoter and they can make it work and it seems that the fans seem to like it then I think everyone's very happy to be here.
I've been driving in Adelaide which was a nice track and now here where I drove in the Lamborghini Trophy in 1999, fantastic track, the fans and everything, for us to come here is a nice place to come.
Q: (Naoise Holohan – ManipeF1).
Adam touched on Bernie's comments on the budget cap a few minutes ago. I'm just wondering how much consensus there is among the teams to bring it in. Is it a viable option at the moment, and what has changed from a couple of years ago when the vast majority of the teams refused to go with the budget cap option?
I think, to be specific, Mr Ecclestone's comments were about budget capping. The teams have agreed a different process: the Resource Restriction Agreement and the Singapore Agreement. I'm not suggesting that we should change the overall structure at this point. I think there is, however, a very high degree of consensus amongst everybody – the FIA, Formula One and the teams – that we should continue to reduce costs.
Q: (Matt Coch – pitpass.com).
Luis, how confident are you that you've got the money to reach the end of the season?
I'm confident to reach the end of the season, I'm confident of the money. It's secure.
Q: (Paolo Ianieri – La Gazzetta dello Sport)
Ross, with the FIA saying that your F-duct system is legal, how long do you think it will take the other teams to copy the same solutions and do you think that this could be an advantage that you could carry on for a while as was the case of the Brawn with the double diffuser?
Innovation is the lifeblood of Formula One racing, I've oversold that point already. Obviously I'm not going to go into detail of what people are calling the F-duct. I'm surprised they are calling it that, because I don't quite know what that means. We have an interesting system on the car and it's not complicated at all, so I'm sure other teams are looking at it and they need to decide if it's worthwhile or not. But it's not in the same magnitude as the diffuser concept that we had or even the exhaust concepts the cars ran the last few years. It's obviously helpful, that's why we're doing it but it's not a massive performance gain.
That's a relief to hear, so we can stop developing ours.
I would like you to spend all your money on it, Adam, and then we can get on with other stuff.
It wouldn't take long!
Tagged as: Paul Hembery , Boullier , Eric Boullier , Lotus , Australia , HRT , Friday , Pirelli , press conference , Ross Brawn , Adam Parr , Parr , Brawn , Mercedes , Williams
Click on relevant pic to enlarge
Start the conversation - Add your comment
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.