2021 Cost Cap Rumours and Speculation

[langedweil]

The reason other teams didn't go over the budget cap was because it was specifically against the rules irrespective of the punishment not being clear. It wasn't a loophole or grey area, it was a straight up "go over this figure and you're guilty of breaching the cap".

Which they were according to the report and ABA.
But the same time the rules stated very clear that <5% would be considered minor, and would be punished accordingly. How exactly wasn't clear, so there was a risk in doing so, but it was also an opportunity given.
It's fine you see things differently though, is a good thing everyone is entitled to an opinion.

But the reason it happened is not because the rules "allow" it to happen. The team made a decision to take a particular course of action and that course of action put them in breach.

Of which they knew they could expect a (minor) punishment for, and which they rightfully did get. A typical form of a calculated risk ..

[e30ernest]

Of which they knew they could expect a (minor) punishment for, and which they rightfully did get. A typical form of a calculated risk ..

That invalidates the purpose of a cost cap though. I personally think they got off lightly mostly because:

1. Horner said it himself, $280k can decide the outcome of that championship.
2. They get to keep both championships (last year and this year). Don't get me wrong, I am not saying they should be stripped of those titles. They should keep it since it is done.
3. They potentially hold an advantage for the next several years especially seeing how much pace their current car has over the rest of the field. How much of that advantage came from the overspend can be debated, but that amount is part of the cap and is therefore spent on performance. You cannot say it was spent on catering, sick pay, etc because there is only 1 cost cap, and they went over that.
4. The financial penalty is small and not part of the cost cap, so this is something a big team like Red Bull can easily cover.
5. IMO apart from the wind tunnel penalty they should also received penalties on actual testing.

The way it stands, other teams will find it worthwhile to get into the minor breach area. You cannot prove intent, much like you cannot prove Red Bull deliberately went over. So any other team can chalk it up to a "mistake" and get off lightly.

That said, because Red Bull did it during a major rules change, this would put them at an advantage over any other team that decides to do this moving forward.

[diffuser]

You can Kravitz all you want, it's all done and dusted. And that's for a large part caused by poor regulation that set off at the start with an overspend up to 5% considered minor ..
Opinions are clear by now, adding to it will only fuel polarizing. And just for that we have Twitter.

Yep, all that left to see is if everyone goes over next year.

[langedweil]

You can Kravitz all you want, it's all done and dusted. And that's for a large part caused by poor regulation that set off at the start with an overspend up to 5% considered minor ..
Opinions are clear by now, adding to it will only fuel polarizing. And just for that we have Twitter.

Yep, all that left to see is if everyone goes over next year.

Or just make the regulations fit by not describing that <5% as minor !?
1 penny over and you lose last years title, and all your points of the current year. I mean, that would take away any incentive, wouldn't it ?

[langedweil]

Of which they knew they could expect a (minor) punishment for, and which they rightfully did get. A typical form of a calculated risk ..

They potentially hold an advantage for the next several years especially seeing how much pace their current car has over the rest of the field.
...
That said, because Red Bull did it during a major rules change, this would put them at an advantage over any other team that decides to do this moving forward.

To be clear, I'm not rooting for any team in particular, and in this case maybe I'm just the Devil's Advocate ..

But as it stands according to the report there was a 400K+ overspend. Aside from hrs put in, CFD time, that get's you about at most a few wings and a slightly adapted floor, and well let's put in some weight reduction. That's it; it doesn't give you a whole new car platform with a 1s advantage. Even Merc back in the day (when they outspend everyone with at least 20m) couldn't make that happen.

And yet, that 400K gifted the 2021 title plus it gave the team an insane advantage for this year and the ones to come after that?
Like you say, 2021-2022 was the largest major aero change ever .. like ever. But still those 400K on upgrades were carried over as-is to a completely different platform philosophy, working perfectly fine.
Sorry .. I don't buy that, it's silly at minimum, and it's a kick in the face of all teams/engineers that work off their asses to get their package in shape (which some really have done).

Maybe, just maybe, maybe that RB18 was, together with Fer ofcourse, simply one of the best base-solutions towards the groundeffect philosophy? Little to no bouncing, great in riding kerbs etc. Well, maybe it was even better than Ferrari, as they were not hurt by TD39 where Fer most certainly did.
Merc absolutely stepped out of their box with the very unusual zero-pod concept, but they just cannot seem to tame the beast. They're progressing quite a bit, but it will take more time to unleash the potential they still feel is in there. Or maybe they'll switch (we'll learn in five months time).

Anyway, starting with a (very) good basepoint gives you the momentum to develop better and faster as you appear to be right on top of your concept. Merc knows this really well, they were in that same position for years; seasons where they could stop developing the current car by June, and move 90% of the resources to next year. Because of that (PU ánd aero)advantage Merc was able to for instance develop stuff like DAS, which was innovation-wise brilliant in itself ofcourse .. simple but yet so effective.

That said, all future progress will now be hindered a lot by the 10% windtunnel/cfd punishment. In a world without bias one could even think it's quite harsh ...
But as that world is non-existant, I will probably butchered.

Remember, Devil's Advocate ..

[e30ernest]

But as it stands according to the report there was a 400K+ overspend.

Officially, it is £1,864,000. It would only have been £432,652 if the tax credit was included/properly applied. But it wasn't, so the £1,864,000 amount stands.

[DChemTech]

But as it stands according to the report there was a 400K+ overspend.

Officially, it is £1,864,000. It would only have been £432,652 if the tax credit was included/properly applied. But it wasn't, so the £1,864,000 amount stands.

That is correct, but we are talking about development gains here. So an important question is, did other teams apply for this tax break and get it, or did they pay the taxes and include it in the cost cap?

If the other teams did get a tax break and RB went over budget because they did not due to administration errors, one cannot argue RB got a development benefit from not accounting for the tax break - in that case, they had the same developments but it cost them more due to their own sloppyness. Stupid, but not malicious or championship defining.

[dans79]

But as it stands according to the report there was a 400K+ overspend.

Officially, it is £1,864,000. It would only have been £432,652 if the tax credit was included/properly applied. But it wasn't, so the £1,864,000 amount stands.

As I asked before, do we even know if they got the tax credit?

I mean if they did, I would expect Horner would be holding up a piece of paper like Chamberlin, for the world to see!

[ispano6]

I don't buy this 2021 cost cap breach giving RedBull an advantage for 2022 and beyond. 2022 has its own cost cap. Explain how costs that were applied to the 2021 season challenger would go toward 2022 development.

[mendis]

I don't buy this 2021 cost cap breach giving RedBull an advantage for 2022 and beyond. 2022 has its own cost cap. Explain how costs that were applied to the 2021 season challenger would go toward 2022 development.

TBH, everyone knows deep down, it's not money that gives performance. It's the quality of people, greater understanding of regulations and creative ideation that propels a car. But for the argument sake, people throw around that statement when it's not one's favorite team that is violating the cost cap. Shovlin, to denounce Horner said it's not a great loss for Red Bull regarding the aero time curtail. He said, Williams has double the time of Mercedes, but can't produce the performance. They themselves came out with a dud despite spending similar amount (account for Red Bull car damages in 2021) and aero time (negligible difference as Shovlin says). Whatever benefit Red Bull has, is because of getting things right. Ferrari were on par, showing they did similar good job, but TD39 did undo a lot of it. Money doesn't buy performance.
To be clear, I am not defending Red Bull on cost cap breach. I buy whatever FIA has said as the process stands complete.

[Vanja #66]

I don't buy this 2021 cost cap breach giving RedBull an advantage for 2022 and beyond

Yes, there are absolutely no advantages to using extra money for higher early development rate

[DChemTech]

I don't buy this 2021 cost cap breach giving RedBull an advantage for 2022 and beyond. 2022 has its own cost cap. Explain how costs that were applied to the 2021 season challenger would go toward 2022 development.

As far as I know, the budget cap is administered per calendar year and not per season (including preparation).
This really surprised me, in every organization I've worked in, public and private, budgets are administered per project - so I expected 'project 2021' to be separately administered and capped from 'project 2022'. But apparently this is not the case, probably because some developments from year 1 may carry over to year 2 (albeit limited in this particular case, due to different aero philosophy), and administration per year allows to keep one set of books per calendar year making it easier to administer.

So yes, in that sense additional expenses in 2021 can be beneficial for 2022, especially if spent on project 2022. Still, the suggestion that a breach of $400.000 had a decisive impact on the 2021 car and development of the 2022 car hence invalidating two championships, I find that a bit outlandish. It's not that much money.

[Mosin123]

I don't buy this 2021 cost cap breach giving RedBull an advantage for 2022 and beyond. 2022 has its own cost cap. Explain how costs that were applied to the 2021 season challenger would go toward 2022 development.

As far as I know, the budget cap is administered per calendar year and not per season (including preparation).
This really surprised me, in every organization I've worked in, public and private, budgets are administered per project - so I expected 'project 2021' to be separately administered and capped from 'project 2022'. But apparently this is not the case, probably because some developments from year 1 may carry over to year 2 (albeit limited in this particular case, due to different aero philosophy), and administration per year allows to keep one set of books per calendar year making it easier to administer.

So yes, in that sense additional expenses in 2021 can be beneficial for 2022, especially if spent on project 2022. Still, the suggestion that a breach of $400.000 had a decisive impact on the 2021 car and development of the 2022 car hence invalidating two championships, I find that a bit outlandish. It's not that much money.

was the overspend not 1.8 million pound ( 2.2 mill dollars? )?

[MadMax]

I don't buy this 2021 cost cap breach giving RedBull an advantage for 2022 and beyond. 2022 has its own cost cap. Explain how costs that were applied to the 2021 season challenger would go toward 2022 development.

If your overspend bakes in to your car an advantage, that advantage is one that the other teams have to overcome before they can start to out develop you. In a cost cap environment, overcoming an overspend and then out developing all whilst yourself staying with the cap limits is extremely difficult.

[MadMax]

TBH, everyone knows deep down, it's not money that gives performance. It's the quality of people, greater understanding of regulations and creative ideation that propels a car.

In that case, the punishment given to Red Bull will have zero effect on their performance.

One wonders why the lesser-funded teams have been unable to win titles against the better-funded teams for so many years if money doesn't bring performance. Or maybe it's because money allows the better-funded teams to pay more for the decent people and thus monopolise on the ideas. Which means, of course, that money gives performance.