Formula One change in 2013
12-13-10, 05:58 AM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Imagine a bunch of turbo I-4s running along in Texas when F1 comes back here 
. Can't say they will be thrilled in the land where "bigger is better".
Gengar hit it on the head, it isn't a "green" sport but rather an elitist "Green with money" sport so why pretend?
. Can't say they will be thrilled in the land where "bigger is better". Gengar hit it on the head, it isn't a "green" sport but rather an elitist "Green with money" sport so why pretend?
12-13-10, 06:31 AM
#17
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
'green F1' is an oxymoron. 
12-13-10, 07:33 AM
#18
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 3,370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And yes, designing another engine from the ground up is going to be very, very costly. The FIA seems dead set on Killing F1
This.
12-13-10, 01:37 PM
#20
Lexus Test Driver
Just FYI, you missed a 0 here. I think Ferrari cut F1 spending in recent years but regularly spent over $500 million per year through the mid-2000s including their dominant years. Toyota regularly spent close to $500 million per year in during its short foray into F1.
12-13-10, 03:08 PM
#23
Lexus Test Driver
No, they definitely don't. But don't forget sponsorship - Marlboro paid around $150 million a year to be lead sponsor and get their name on the team (hope they're not paying that much these days!), and Ferrari has a boatload of other sponsors like Shell, Puma, AMD, Acer, etc. - and also absurdly overpriced merchandising, which Ferrari has been capitalizing on lately what with opening all sorts of Ferrari stores throughout the world.
12-13-10, 03:10 PM
#24
The tv revenue is also split amongst teams, because if you think about it, running a F1 team must generate income since Red bull's founder is only worth like 2 billion, and their latest cost data shows the team spends 200m+ a year, at this rate it will take 10 years before red bull's founder go homeless
12-13-10, 06:54 PM
#25
Without actually being able to verify this properly, I've read several times that Ferrari SpA make substantially larger profits from merchandise and licensing than they do selling cars
12-13-10, 09:02 PM
#26
quite possibly, as i still don't fully understand the technology behind KERS.
i suppose any method of making additional power without an increase in fuel consumption can be considered "green" (in the most liberal sense, mind you).
but that's just me.
i should've added this to clarify (from http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2009/4/9290.html):
of course, that excludes:
but looking around, the reputed numbers do show an atmospheric level of spending by the formula 1 teams (as i've said in my prevoius post). as such, adding a zero behind the number i posted earlier isn't unrealistic.
however, any move to help cap team spending and the cost of entry is a sign that formula one wants to try to lower the main barrier of entry: cost.
(actually, that's the second barrier of entry; bernie ecclestone is the first one.
)
i suppose any method of making additional power without an increase in fuel consumption can be considered "green" (in the most liberal sense, mind you).
but that's just me.
Formula One racing’s governing body, the FIA, has revised its budget cap plans for 2010. Teams signing up for the optional cap must limit their spending to £40 million per year (£10 million higher than originally proposed) in exchange for greater technical freedom. This will not include driver salaries or, for 2010 only, engine costs.
-Marketing and hospitality;
-Remuneration for test or race drivers, including any young driver programmes;
-Fines or penalties imposed by the FIA;
-Engine costs (for 2010 only);
-Any expenditure which the team can demonstrate has no influence on its performance in the Championship;
-Dividends (including any tax thereon) paid from profits relating to participation in the Championship.
-Remuneration for test or race drivers, including any young driver programmes;
-Fines or penalties imposed by the FIA;
-Engine costs (for 2010 only);
-Any expenditure which the team can demonstrate has no influence on its performance in the Championship;
-Dividends (including any tax thereon) paid from profits relating to participation in the Championship.
however, any move to help cap team spending and the cost of entry is a sign that formula one wants to try to lower the main barrier of entry: cost.
(actually, that's the second barrier of entry; bernie ecclestone is the first one.
)
12-14-10, 08:05 AM
#29
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 3,370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be it so or not, Ferrari, McLaren, Honda and Toyota would have had operating budgets at about $400 million / year.
lol lol.. i'd have lost it if that bike actually skid out of control
