About the F1 Resource Restriction Agreement

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=370349
Williams' CEO Adam Parr wrote: Whatever you say about Max, the only possibility of an independent Formula One team existing is because of what he did.
That says it all. We would neither have the new teams nor would we have Williams or Sauber on the grid without Max Mosley's work. F1 would be down to seven teams!
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

User avatar
ISLAMATRON
0
Joined: 01 Oct 2008, 18:29

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

maybe even less... but then the same idiots who said Max is turning F1 into a spec series would be so happy to see a 3rd and a 4th and 5th Ferrari on the grid... so happy they would piss themselves while waving their red flags

User avatar
JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
Joined: 29 Jan 2010, 11:51
Location: SU 419113

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

This all very well, but why is Max putting all this out now?

Surely he should make mention of how he was part of this from 1998 through 2008 until the FIA-Ferrari axis soured? The informed fan knows Ferrari benefited from some really dubious calls, and who was the architect of it all? Max of course....

It will be interesting to know more of what Max has to say, but Ferrari are right. This "old and past it" man no longer has any gravitas other than tabloid reading.
More could have been done.
David Purley

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

Max has saved F1 from being ruined by the moron who calls himself the horse whisperer and his acolytes like Howett. Adam Parr is well placed to make a call on that. He took it on to negotiate the RRA between the FOTA teams and he ran Williams to the budget that was possible due to the cuts.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

timbo
timbo
111
Joined: 22 Oct 2007, 10:14

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

WhiteBlue wrote:Max has saved F1 from being ruined by the moron who calls himself the horse whisperer and his acolytes like Howett. Adam Parr is well placed to make a call on that. He took it on to negotiate the RRA between the FOTA teams and he ran Williams to the budget that was possible due to the cuts.
Note that he talks in singular, "Formula One team" he says. We also know that his team received some support from Bernie. We also know that he runs Cosworth this year and intends to go somewhere else next year.
There easily can be another meaning in what he says :wink:

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

timbo wrote:
WhiteBlue wrote:Max has saved F1 from being ruined by the moron who calls himself the horse whisperer and his acolytes like Howett. Adam Parr is well placed to make a call on that. He took it on to negotiate the RRA between the FOTA teams and he ran Williams to the budget that was possible due to the cuts.
Note that he talks in singular, "Formula One team" he says. We also know that his team received some support from Bernie. We also know that he runs Cosworth this year and intends to go somewhere else next year.
There easily can be another meaning in what he says :wink:
I know enough English to know that "an independant Formula One team" means any independent team in this context. Btw there was no other private team in 2009 any more that wasn't sponsored by a billionaire brand. The fact that Bernie helped Williams makes the statement even more true. All the other private teams had been crushed by the mad spending race of the manufacturers. The crisis had been brewing so long that only the most exemplary measures could save the series from the megalomaniacs in Maranello, Cologne and Enstone. Howett, Briatore and Montezemolo should be out of F1 for the good of the sport. Monte is long overdue IMO.
JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:This all very well, but why is Max putting all this out now?
I wasn't citing Max. I was citing Adam Parr. And the issue is not Max being contra Ferrari. The issue is the resource restriction agreement and the admission of new teams versus the uninhibited spending of rich teams and the use of third, fourth and fifth cars. Ferrari's president personified that mad policy and needs to be fought every corner until F1 gets into decent shape again.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

User avatar
JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
Joined: 29 Jan 2010, 11:51
Location: SU 419113

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

What is wrong with 3 or 4 chassis Suppliers?

Im all for independants, but when the rules have to change to accomadate them why should F1 be about having 13 teams?
F1 is about racing first and foremost. If a team cannot compete then it should look to other formulae.

If McLaren Ferrari Mercedes and Renault made their chassis available to others, we would have the mother of all F1 seasons. Not only will costs go down, but the "indies" would be able to compete too.
F1 would still be regarded as the definitive series as the Big boys could still bring their fancy tech toys to the party for the world to see.

Williams are a name synonmous with F1, but if they cannot make ends meet they should sell up and F off. Why should F1 change for Williams?
The same applies to any other single team Ferrari(who got the rub of the green more often than not) included.

My objection to little teams is not with their ethos, as we all love that. Its the way that they are acommodated within F1. If they want to build their own chassis and it cost them 50 million to be 2-3 seconds off the pace, let them.
But if they want to build their chassis to budget EVERYONE has to adhere to? That is utter BS and should not be entertained. It will be the end of F1 if it happens.
More could have been done.
David Purley

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:What is wrong with 3 or 4 chassis Suppliers?

Williams are a name synonmous with F1, but if they cannot make ends meet they should sell up and F off.
Three or four chassis suppliers are not a decent competition for a world series. F1 is an up and down. It needs the small teams to provide their own fights in their arena. Small teams can become big teams if the budgetary policies are right.
Dave Richards wrote:Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best organization, not to those with the biggest budget.


To be still exciting and vibrant in three or five years time F1 needs the little guys. Ferrari are just now demonstrating how crappy they are. They are still employing by far the biggest resources of all teams and they are sliding down the slippery slope a second year in a row. In due time we will have them beaten by a team like Lotus and that will be fun to watch. I would not want to miss that by F1 listening to the pony doper.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)

User avatar
ISLAMATRON
0
Joined: 01 Oct 2008, 18:29

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

I remember when CART had 3 to 4 different chassis... then it had 2... then it had 1... but then all the loudest members of this forum hate spec racing... unless the whole field is red right?.... a whole season that resembles 2005 USGP, sounds effing great.

3 teams spending half a billion a year and taking all the sponsors while the other teams cant keep the lights on... sounds like the making of a great series

User avatar
JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
Joined: 29 Jan 2010, 11:51
Location: SU 419113

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

Much to any Ferrari fans chagrin, I would love to see them slumming it at the back for a while. :lol:
However WB, you cannot create a budget limit set to favour the independants, nor infact could you impose said limit unless the team is signed up to it.
FOTA have a gentlemens agreement(no signatures) for the resource restriction. But its very vague and how on earth is it enforceable?

No, the best way forward is for the big teams to be made to sell there latest chassis to "franchise" teams. This way the franchisee can opt for his own powertrain, gearbox etc.
The Competitiveness of F1 would double overnight, All the Chassis suppliers would be making money and we would have a real championship where anyone of 10 drivers could win the WDC.

Currently F1 has been about the top cars winning, itsd almost always been this way with a few expetions. Top drivers do eventually find themselves in top cars yes, But does the general public not want to see Kubica being racey every weekend? Rather than have one track that allows him to appear racey?

Detractors of the idea will simply lambast it as the "americanisation" of F1 with its Indy style of chassis selling.
I would disagree because we still have 4 top sources to get chassis from and in a subtle way we kinda have it already!
McLaren/Force India and Red Bull/Torro Rosso
Not exactly chassis sharing but certainly DNA of one in the other.

Just my 2 cents worth :)
More could have been done.
David Purley

User avatar
JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
Joined: 29 Jan 2010, 11:51
Location: SU 419113

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

Mercedes-Ferrari beating Ferrari-Mercedes, McLaren-Ferrari being trounced by a Red Bull-Mercedes? Renault-Renault killing a Ferrari-ferrari?

Add a sponsors name infront of any one of of those combos and you have a "team".

I think it would work brilliantly and when a driver gets lapped you know he sucks! :lol: Ok or has a really bad hangover...

Seriously from my little fishbowl looking out, I think it would work a treat.
The big boys get their coverage
The field spread is dramaticall reduced
Drivers will play a bigger part
And we would have real diversity with anyone one of 20 different combos possible.
More could have been done.
David Purley

User avatar
ISLAMATRON
0
Joined: 01 Oct 2008, 18:29

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

customer chassis is a whole different conversation, nobody around here was ever against it... but unless costs were contained the 3 or 4 constructors would still dominate.

But that still did not address the lack of technical developement without skyrocketing budgets.... the budget cap did that.

User avatar
JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
Joined: 29 Jan 2010, 11:51
Location: SU 419113

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

But where do you start a cap that would encompass the big boys as well as the little guys?
What is the "magic number" if you like?
More could have been done.
David Purley

User avatar
ISLAMATRON
0
Joined: 01 Oct 2008, 18:29

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

The final number propsed was very workable.... 100 mil to start, not including engines or drivers or hospitality... problem was that Luca knew his team couldnt win with a huge financial advantage(marlboro legal drug money), they would be even worse without it.

User avatar
WhiteBlue
92
Joined: 14 Apr 2008, 20:58
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: Lola reveal 2011 resource cap

Post

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:FOTA have a gentlemens agreement(no signatures) for the resource restriction. But its very vague and how on earth is it enforceable?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motors ... mentw.html
Adam Parr wrote:The agreement between the teams to restrict costs must be legally enforceable. There is a clear precedent on this with aerodynamic restrictions, factory shutdown restrictions, testing restrictions, gearbox restrictions... we must now work out how the Resource Restriction Agreement would look. It needs to be done reasonably quickly - especially for the sake of the new teams but also for a company like Williams.
Sorry to destroy your illusions. The RRA is a legally enforceable contract. It was designed that way. Even more important the 2009-2012 Concord Agreement would have never been signed unless it was legally binding.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 179661.stm
Official FiA Announcement wrote:In addition, as agreed in Paris on 24 June 2009, the Teams have entered into a resource restriction agreement, which aims to return expenditure to the levels that prevailed in the early 1990s.
You can take it to the bank that all teams are bound to it unless they agree to change it! Daimler AG, McLaren Group, Aabar and a bunch of other huge corporations made massive financial decisions based on that contract. It will shape the reality of F1 in the coming years.
Last edited by WhiteBlue on 29 May 2010, 23:35, edited 2 times in total.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)