F1 on a tightrope ahead of crunch meeting in Bahrain

Liberty Media will further outline what Formula 1’s post-2020 world will look like in a meeting with teams on Friday in Bahrain Grand Prix that looks set to be decisive in the defining future of the sport.

Since its takeover of F1 in January 2017, Liberty has been laying the foundations to expand the sport’s reach all over the world, as well as trying to making it more attractive to car manufacturers while also appeasing the current grid.

It is a fine tightrope for F1 to tread. Under its previous management, led by Bernie Ecclestone, the name of the game was profit. Now there is a more holistic approach in place, putting a greater emphasis on the long-term. For Chase Carey, Sean Bratches and Ross Brawn, it’s now about years, not months.

But such an approach is not to everyone’s liking. If you’re Ferrari or Mercedes, F1’s current state fits quite well. Both are relatively successful on-track and financially viable off it, all while making good marketing gains. Pre-Liberty F1 fits quite well.

The changes Liberty are set to table are unlikely to be welcomed at Stuttgart or Maranello with open arms. Suggestions of a budget cap and a shake-up of F1’s financial payout structure for teams may work to the advantage of the smaller runners and help the sport become more competitive in the long-term - but it would cut much of the appeal of sticking around out. If you’re winning, why be happy to change things?

The dream for F1 would see costs come down while keeping the sport technically relevant (and therefore, appealing) to manufacturers, as well as still being challenging enough to be interesting, and simple enough for fans to understand. A fairer revenue distribution would appease much of the midfield, yet it would be a knock to the interest of those at the front of the grid. There are going to be significant trade-offs in all of this.

In all of this, there will be no single right answer. But for all of the marketing moves that Liberty may be taking to try and widen F1’s reach and appeal, at its heart remains the product. It doesn’t matter how many new fans Liberty may be able to bring to the table if the racing in F1 isn’t good enough to hold their attention. Ross Brawn has already confirmed the overtaking problem is to be addressed under the new regulations, with the current cars being difficult to follow, as seen in Australia - but a close pack is crucial.

“I think there could be a closer battle, that would be always welcome, but it has always been like that in F1,” Fernando Alonso said. “I remember watching TV in the very old days, I was watching on television last week a race from 1990 or ’89. Apart from the first four cars, everyone was lapped. We remember that year like a golden year with big names etc.

“I think if you see now, other series, you watch a race of IndyCar or whatever, that unpredictable result until the last 10 laps makes you excited in front of the television. Now we can put out the qualifying order right now for this race on Thursday. That’s a little bit sad.”

A cost cap looks to be the simplest (at least in theory…) method of drawing the field closer together. If there isn’t a bottomless piggybank for the front-runners to dive into, there should be more parity. Talent personnel and superior facilities may give some an understandable edge, but the wild gap between the current ‘big three’ and the rest shouldn’t exist in the same way - again, in theory…

Simplicity is another key point when it comes to defining the future of F1. While car manufacturers may salivate over fuel efficiency figures, the intricacies of a power unit are difficult to convey to the average fan on the street.

“Talking with my friends and my family, they have no fucking clue about what we are talking about when we speak about MGU-H, MGU-K and ICE. It is so complex for normal people to understand,” said Pierre Gasly.

“Talking with the team, it is an unbelievable piece of machinery that they have been able to do, but for normal people like the spectators and fans it is probably too complex at the moment.

“We need to find the right balance between making it interesting for the companies for the future but also make it a show and more simple of the people to understand. Hopefully they are going to find the right balance and the right line into it.”

The technology versus entertainment trade-off will be a tough one for Liberty to really strike. Suggestions such as a qualifying race, reported by Auto Motor und Sport to be under consideration earlier this week, may be a quickfire way to spice up races and create more unpredictability, but would likely be met with backlash for being a step too far in making things too artificial.

“No, I don’t think that’s great,” said Esteban Ocon when asked by Crash.net about a possible qualifying race on Saturdays. “I had this in DTM and in DTM we had less fans the day before compared to the Sunday.

“I think you still need to keep the main race, which is the grand prix. Anyway it’s hard to overtake. I think so. If you want to make something more exciting it’s the races, because the speed of the car is amazing nowadays.”

For Gasly, the focus once again lay on creating a competitive field to offer good racing.

“I think the format is pretty good as it is at the moment they just need to make it more racy. If they just make it more racy, as they need to close the pack up, because at the moment there is too much performance difference between all the cars,” he said.

“If you have all the cars like 1.5 seconds [together], it will make it much more interesting for the normal people because it will be more difficult to predict and more unexpected things will be possible therefore more fighting. If you make it so cars are easier to follow which means more overtaking and more entertainment for the people.

“That is the only thing that needs to be done. In the end they don’t need to go too far the only thing they need to do is to make it easier to overtake and probably close the pack together so even if they love it now then they will then love it even more.”

Asked what he wanted from Friday’s meeting, Haas team boss Günther Steiner deadpanned: “That we get a hell of a lot of money! A budget cap! That small teams should get the biggest amount of money because they are smallest!

“Joking aside, I don’t know. I think I would like to hear that we have the budget cap and a little bit more equal distribution of money and the main thing I want to hear is what they actually thing for 2021 so we can make plans.

“Whatever they present, at least we will have some information and something to work with. That is what I want to hear and then we can see if we are happy with what we hear, the numbers – I don’t know if they will even present numbers.

“But tomorrow at this time for sure I will know more about what is presented."

The signs point towards a budget cap as being the best solution to improve F1’s on-track spectacle, but the worst for keeping both existing manufacturers interested. To combat that? Produce an engine formula that is both challenging and road-relevant - but that may require a level of complexity that could push fans away.

There will be winners and losers coming out of tomorrow’s meeting, but don’t expect it to be the last we hear of it.

It is going to be a long road to 2021; a journey that looks set to define F1’s future as it embarks on its post-Ecclestone era - and Friday is just the latest step.