Team representatives: Franz Tost (Toro Rosso), Riad Asmat (Caterham), Norbert Haug (Mercedes), Luis Perez Sala (HRT) and Eric Boullier (Lotus).

Questions from the floor.

Q: (Wei An Mao - la Vie Creative).
To all the gentlemen. As for the economic situation in Europe, do you think it will influence F1? Especially to all tracks in Europe in the future?

Luis Perez-Sala:
We have economic problems in my house - in my team! I think it is for everybody, economic problems, I think not only in Europe. Europe now is focussing on the situation but it's something that we have and of course it's going to touch us in some way. But this is still... I think this is not from this year: it's come in from the last three or four years.

Q:
And is it going to affect F1?

Luis Perez-Sala:
Of course it's touching us in some way. We are getting less money from sponsors; you have less money to spend on the cars, on the team.

Q:
Do you see the effect as well Norbert?

Norbert Haug:
Well, I mean the general issue is that we have to have this - however you call it - resource restrictions, limits, whatever - who does not see that? Who does not see what's going on? We have to have limits, you know the figures of the medium and high class teams as good as I do. There should be limits of how to achieve it: that needs to be discussed but I think there are quite constructive and good ideas but we need to make sure that this comes through. This is an important step coming to the economic situation. I think that is part of the challenge. We have had bigger challenges in the past and I'm sure we will have even bigger ones in the future. You have some ups and downs and I think these times are very good for learning. You will always learn. You will learn how to be more efficient - so there are also positives. We just need to deal with the facts.

Q:
Franz?

Franz Tost:
For sure it's not good, the economic crisis in Europe and we are also working in F1 to come down with the costs but thanks to Bernie we are not only racing in Europe, we are racing in areas where there is some money and no economic crisis: like India, like Australia, like Canada, like Brazil and like Saudi Arabia, with Bahrain and Abu Dhabi. We go to Russia, we are in China and I think that's very, very important for F1, especially for the sponsors to be present all over the world. And this also prevents a major influence from the economic side on F1. Because all over the world, hopefully there is no crisis.

Q:
Riad, perhaps a comment from you?

Riad Asmat:
I think, I mean it's a given, the economic crisis is not just this year, I have to agree, it's been around for the last two years. But the fact is that it affects everyone around the world and business-wise obviously F1. As a team commercially you will be affected because the companies that want to be part of it will have to reduce their marketing budgets, so on and so forth. That being said, I agree with Norbert: we do need to look at what we're doing internally and be more precise and be more resource restricted to a degree. It's a matter of the business that we're running at the end of the day: I have to make it as efficient as possible in the hope that we can sustain our being here. But it's a given, we can't avoid it, it's there. We just have to be smarter - and one of the areas is to manage our own resources, and hopefully with us working together maybe we'll find a solution.

Q:
Eric?

Eric Boullier:
I will do a r?sum?, I guess, of what has been said. We have to be sensitive to this economic crisis especially in Europe. And we have to monitor also us being based in Europe. We have the chance, as Franz says, that Bernie's business model for F1 is global. Our sport is the only global sport in the world, so thanks to this global platform, we, as a team, for example, have been able to bring some big names and new sponsors, like Microsoft, who were never in the Championship in F1. Obviously we don't have to hide behind this, we have to be very careful about the impact of the economy in Europe but we are lucky that our sport is global.

Q: (Dieter Rencken - The Citizen).
To all five of you: a lot has been made recently about the cost-cutting, cost-saving measures in F1. Enshrining them in the regulations was discussed after Monaco on the Monday, it was discussed last week on Friday in the WMSC meeting. I believe you people had a follow-up meeting yesterday. Has anybody got any reservations about enshrining the cost-saving measures or cost-cutting measures, budget caps - whatever you want to call it - in the F1 regulations?

Eric Boullier:
It's true that actually it's a good follow-up after the previous question. If you monitor the economical situation in some parts of the world, you obviously have to consider yourself and think not only that you're plus one, you're plus two but also you're plus five. And it's true that there are some very constructive discussions between the FIA, Bernie and teams today, to try to take conscience and to try to clearly understand what is F1 and what will F1 be in the future and what we want to do with F1. F1 has already downsized its costs a lot but we believe there is some more work to be done and this is why there are all these discussions, but the more people around the table, the less easy it is to take radical decisions.

Franz Tost:
We are discussing the resource restriction agreement. Currently we are mainly only discussing about the resource restriction agreement regarding the chassis. In my opinion, the chassis resource restriction agreement is one point but the costs - especially from 2014 onwards, which will come up and which will increase dramatically - is the powertrain, and therefore the resource restriction agreement for the powertrain would be for me or let me say for Toro Rosso even more important than for the chassis. It must be a complete package. I am really worried that we are discussing on one side the costs decrease, but from 2014 onwards, with this new powertrain and the new engine, with the new ERS system, pick-up batteries, the cost will dramatically increase and this is what we also have to discuss, which is quite important, the development and the research costs which will rise to develop this package.

Norbert Haug:
You need to deal with the facts. The engine lease years ago was twice as much as it is right now, that's due to manufacturers bringing that down. I think that was a big help for all the teams. It's very clear that if you develop a new engine that it costs money and I think F1 has never had an engine formula like today, where basically everybody gets a competitive engine, ten teams at least. That needs to be mentioned. Then there was a process in the past deciding that a new engine has to be developed and of course that costs money. We worked very hard, together with the FIA, and we have the same opinion with the other manufacturers to bring costs down but this is over a period of five years, so the target has to be minus twenty, minus thirty percent over five years and I'm sure the engine lease will, over five years, be comparable to what we have right now, but we need to see that we will have a new engine, an engine that you can market in a very good way, if it comes to sustainable - and so on. We just need to have changes. I hear some voices saying 'delay the engine.' One thing is for sure; if you delay the engine, you run two programmes in parallel one year longer and your customers will pay for that. We cannot have fully subsidised engines, this is not possible. I think the engine manufacturers especially have been very, very fair and I would be pleased to hear that at one stage as well, because the engine lease was in excess of 25/30 million years ago and we brought it down, and I think that fact has to be mentioned. We can discuss aerodynamics and so on and so on. There are lots of areas where we can save money, but deciding and building and developing a new engine costs money - much less money than the last one, the V8, but we need to see where we are. I'm the first guy to support restrictions but then we need to do it in a coherent way: chassis, engine, whatever. Mercedes has always been one of the driving forces. I'm sure the Renault guys do not see it differently, the Ferrari guys do not see it differently. If we all work together we will achieve our targets but one thing is for sure: just listening to voices saying the engine is more expensive than it used to be. Let's deal with the facts and then we know where it's coming from.

Riad Asmat:
We've had numerous meetings on this matter but one thing is for sure is that everyone agrees that we need to reduce costs. I've been in this for two and a half years and I can see the level of exorbitant areas that could be managed better. The points are taken, we have discussed it. There are some ideas bandied around. The groups that are related to those areas will be talking to each other and hopefully soon enough we do come to a conclusion, but we have a position, obviously, and we will support anything with regard to resource restriction, we will support that all the while. I think there has been some improvement over the last two years from previous times, but there is a lot more we can do, I think, going forward. From our side, we will support anything that's positive.

Luis Perez-Sala:
It's clear that for the biggest teams there are going to be clear rules. They are going to reduce their budgets but I'm a bit worried about the small teams like us. To reduce our budget is not easy but even to stay with the same budget, I would say, will be difficult, because maybe next year it will be at the same level but we will need to understand how the situation will be in 2014, as Norbert says, what will be the cost of the KERS, the engine, to have a clear view of the future for us, maybe in five years' time. I'm quite happy with Norbert that the engines have reduced a lot. I was not involved in F1 as I am now but I remember the cost was large, maybe four or five times what it is now but I would like to maintain this level of costs for the future. It seems that it is going to be difficult, or we have to understand what the situation will be.

Q: (Dieter Rencken - The Citizen).
Sorry, the question was - thanks for all the detail - but the question was does anybody have any reservations about including the cost-saving measures in the F1 regulations?

Luis Perez-Sala:
I don't think so. Does anybody?

(General shaking of heads and 'No')

Q: (Sam Collins - Racecar Engineering).
Autosport today is reporting that customer cars are back on the table - second hand cars from the previous year. Is that something that's right for F1 which is supposed to be the technological pinnacle of motorsport? And is it something that any of your teams would be looking at either supplying or purchasing?

Norbert Haug:
I think that's very easy to answer. If you ran this year with last year's car then just guess what happens.

Luis Perez-Sala:
Maybe for a small team it's going to be at the beginning this year, some years, like in 2014. There are a lot of changes, it's not easy because they're changing the engines, it's not an easy thing to do.

Eric Boullier:
The question is easy but the debate is more complex. Today's F1 is based on constructor regulations. If we have to go to customer cars to serve F1 and be the F1 of the future, why not? I think the discussion is open now. I know some teams would like to stay as constructors, some teams would maybe need to be customers to save their budget or their company, but it's a more complex debate and actually together with the previous question about cost-saving, it's obviously crucial in this discussion.

Franz Tost:
It depends how much money a team has. The customer teams can buy the car and can run the car. We at Toro Rosso have started to build up the infrastructure and will build the car by ourselves.

Riad Asmat:
From our point of view, again, we're a constructor. We came in with that particular objective and we've been doing it for the past two and a half years. But again, an idea is an idea. We're always open to ideas and obviously we will have to review things if it does come to fruition then go from there. But we are proud of where we are, what we've built. We came in as a constructor, as Eric mentioned, and we hope to stay that way for now.

Q: (Andrea Cremonesi - La Gazzetta dello Sport).
We are talking about cutting costs, reducing costs and so on, and there is the rumour that the number of Grand Prix could increase. The number on the calendar could be larger. I can understand that more Grand Prix means more money for everybody but in your opinion, what is the ideal calendar for the future: twenty, 24? How many Grand Prix in Europe, because the crisis is deeper here in Europe?

Franz Tost:
The year has 52 weeks. We should have 26 Grand Prix! Some in Europe, yeah!

Eric Boullier:
I think you have two philosophies. Is it going to be like NASCAR with 38 weekends, if I'm not wrong, or staying around twenty. The true question is over 20 Grand Prix we have to reconsider our structure, because we obviously have a team personnel issue, travelling and logistical issue. As you say, we can speak about cost-saving but more Grand Prix means more revenue for F1 and the more countries we can visit is the more countries we can bring F1 to fans. There is no exact number, no magic number I guess, but I'm rather like Franz - more races, why not?