Formula One's Engine Crisis

[Sevach]

I don't like either choice.

Locking people in (dis)advantageous positions is of course stupid.

Helping the "weak", it happens in many categories, yes (is being used in Motogp right now for one), but i don't particularly like it, seems to go in contrary to the spirit of competition.

Free competition and development is the only choice IMO, it's put up or shut up.

[dans79]

This highlights you didn´t understand a single word...


1- The proposal is not to better entertain me, but to stop the audiece fall F1 is suffering for around a decade (both on track and TV numbers). It´s not me, it´s some millions persons all around the world who think F1 interest is decreasing so much it´s not worth watching anymore.

Actually it shows you don't understand what I wrote.

I said "how can we change F1 to better entertain me" now look at your bullet point above. It's the exact same thing, how can F1 change to better entertain the masses.

2- Manufacturers are first willing to solve this problems. As you said their only goal is marketing. What marketing is Honda getting from 2015 season? What most people think about Honda PU after a whole season without improvement? What average Joe think, Honda is handicaped by a limited token system? Or they think Honda is useless and can´t build a proper engine? That´s the marketing Honda is getting from F1 so imagine how long they will stay in F1 if the token system does not allow them to solve the problems

This is their own fault, they have had plenty of time to prepare and more chances to make improvements then any of the other manufactures had the first year.

4- The idea is not penalizing those with success, but encouraging those with problems so they can see a chance to really solve their problems and be competitive again.

That's the same thing, giving someone less opportunities than the others to make change because they did a better job is penalizing them.

5- Apart from helping those with problems, the system would guaratee some rotation both on manufacturer and team domination, wich is main problem F1 is suffering.

This is social engineering, no currently dominant team is going to stand for this, neither is that teams fans or its driver's fans. It's again penalizing someone for doing a better job than their opponents.

[Andres125sx]

I think we should clarify a point....

We want to make F1 the ideal you or anyone think it should be?

Or we´re trying to find solutions to current F1 crisis?


If it´s first, then I agree with everything you said, but if it´s the second, then you´re ignoring all the main problems that caused current situation.

Of course F1 need to entertain the masses. If masses don´t enjoy F1 then there´s no audience, no returns for TVs and GP hosters, nobody willing to host a GP, no TV willing to broadcast F1, no sponsors, no teams, no F1.


The perfect racing series from the techical POV is very different to a sustainable racing series. See Can-Am, that was as close as you can get to a perfect racing series from a technical POV with no limitations, restrictions or rules. It didn´t last long because that formula is unsustainable.

[dans79]

I think the difference lies not with the cause, but with how to fix it.

IMO, the issues are caused by the following things.

1. the switch to subscription based viewing in EU. Here in the states I pay $10 USD/month for a bundle that gives me like 20 channels that includes the F1 broadcasters channel. As far as I can tell those of you in the EU pay several times that for one channel.

2. the off the top prize money that goes certain teams. (this is all on bernie)

3. social media & the press hyping up every little complaint, issue etc to gain a few clicks ratings points.

4. rules that are constantly changing based on who can complain the loudest.

IMO, the best solution would be a much stronger governing body. NASACAR for example, has none of the issues, but then it rules with an iron fist, and if you don't like it you're shown the door. F1 is a cluster, because it's mob rule.

[r_b_l]

Free competition and development is the only choice IMO, it's put up or shut up.

I don't see how any sane manufacturer would consider joining F1, especially with this token system/concept & regulations. Honda appears to have jumped the gun a year to early and are suffering. Renault are perhaps, only staying to prove Redbull, the F1 community and the world wrong and to get back its respect from when it helped RB win its championships.

The token system is in essence a regulation on regulations on a third party (the engine manufacturer) F1 should not mandate how much a private company can/cant develop their product.

F1 needs de-regulation in regards to engine development. As it see it the strong will only get stronger, with others playing the catch-up game.

[dans79]

The token system is in essence a regulation on regulations on a third party (the engine manufacturer) F1 should not mandate how much a private company can/cant develop their product.

The rules don't dictate how much development work the manufactures do, they dictate when the teams can start using updates. The manufactures are continuously developing their engines, hence why you see merc running a 2016 engine prototype.

[Slife]

The token system is in essence a regulation on regulations on a third party (the engine manufacturer) F1 should not mandate how much a private company can/cant develop their product.

The rules don't dictate how much development work the manufactures do, they dictate when the teams can start using updates. The manufactures are continuously developing their engines, hence why you see merc running a 2016 engine prototype.

It kinda does to a degree, say for example you have a small change that gives 5 hp. You make that small change, and next week you find another 5 hp etc. etc. Under the token system you would quickly run out of tokens doing that, so you only use tokens if you manage to find a large increase. With freer development you do not have to worry about running into a technological cul-de-sac.

[Mr. Fahrenheit]

F1 is a cluster, because it's mob rule.

Poetry.

[Andres125sx]

I think the difference lies not with the cause, but with how to fix it.

IMO, the issues are caused by the following things.

1. the switch to subscription based viewing in EU. Here in the states I pay $10 USD/month for a bundle that gives me like 20 channels that includes the F1 broadcasters channel. As far as I can tell those of you in the EU pay several times that for one channel.

2. the off the top prize money that goes certain teams. (this is all on bernie)

3. social media & the press hyping up every little complaint, issue etc to gain a few clicks ratings points.

4. rules that are constantly changing based on who can complain the loudest.

IMO, the best solution would be a much stronger governing body. NASACAR for example, has none of the issues, but then it rules with an iron fist, and if you don't like it you're shown the door. F1 is a cluster, because it's mob rule.

1- Caused by overinflated fees wich are no longer profitable for free channels. Here in Spain F1 goes PPV next season, all these seasons broadcasted by free channels the ammount of advertising has been (is) absurd, but even so they can´t make any profit from it and rejected the rights. Wait until F1 is well stablished in USA and you´ll suffer the same. Not a EU problem, but a F1 problem.... or Bernie´s problem to be more precise.

2 &3 Agree

4- Not based on who can complain, but based on audience drops. If you look at some graph of F1 audience, you´ll see any domination period has caused an audience decrease. In 2000-04, 2009-2013 and it continues in 14 & 15.

I know you´d ignore the masses, but F1 needs a lot of money, money comes from sponsors and TVs, and they will never pay the big quantities they´re paying if audience numbers are not big enough


F1 main problem is not rule changes, engines, PUs or aero, main problem is when you know the winner beforehand. No competition will ever be interesting if you know the winner beforehand, only hardcore fans will continue watching but a motorsport like F1 can´t be sustained by hardcore fans, it does need the masses, and masses get bored easily.

All the rest, rule changes, PUs, etc. are only the solutions current people in charge found to solve the problem of predictability

Ferrari domination -> rule change: free testing banned.
Brawn domination -> rule change: DD banned.
RBR domination -> rule change: EBD diffusers banned.
Not enough, they still dominate -> rule change: new PUs.
Mercedes domination -> rule change (2017): more power, more aero...



That´s the reason I found very interesting the handicaped rules. Allow a bit more development to manufacturers/teams low in the table (I´ll repeat, a bit) and domination periods will be drastically shortened. No more rule changes needed to stop any team from a too long domination period.

It would prevent F1 from becoming too predictable what has always been its main enemy
It would prevent F1 from contiuous rule changes
It would provide more chances to small teams for fighting with big teams


Maybe not the perfect solution, but you know perfection does not exist

[Just_a_fan]

1. the switch to subscription based viewing in EU. Here in the states I pay $10 USD/month for a bundle that gives me like 20 channels that includes the F1 broadcasters channel. As far as I can tell those of you in the EU pay several times that for one channel.

I think this is the big issue. Here in the UK the BBC had the rights and then decided to get in bed with Sky. The result is we only get half of the races. Now, we paid for all of the races because we pay a TV licence that funds the BBC (in effect it's a publicly owned Sky) but we don't get them all. We get highlights of the other races but highlight shows are rubbish because you lose the feel of the race developing. The last couple of seasons I've followed F1 a bit less than I did for the preceding 20+ years. In a couple of years I think the UK's F1 coverage will be exclusively Sky and thus I won't see any of the races. I might still follow F1 on sites like this but maybe I'll lose interest totally. There's lots of interesting stuff in the world that can fill the void.

Bernie is killing F1 because he's driven it in to the arms of the PPV crowd. The irony is that Bernie saved F1 and made it the huge global beast it is today; now he's killing it by being too greedy.

[dans79]

Bernie is killing F1 because he's driven it in to the arms of the PPV crowd. The irony is that Bernie saved F1 and made it the huge global beast it is today; now he's killing it by being too greedy.

This is the truth, Bernie has literally thrown all his eggs into PPV basket. The F1 website is still a joke, the Camera angles are a joke, they finally got an official YouTube channel this year, and its laughable.

I put all the blame on Bernie, for improperly managing the sport, because f1 has had domination since literally day 1, as has pretty much every other formula series. Look at the Americas Cup, 1 65 year history and almost every contest has been a blow out.

The only thing that has changes in F1, is how the show has been promoted and shown, over the last decade and a half, F1 has fallen way behind the times. for example if NASCASR can make something like this profitable, it makes no sense why F1 can't.
http://www.nascar.com/en_us/ajax/static ... -page.html

[Just_a_fan]

It's mad. If Bernie made it all free to air everywhere then the sponsors would be throwing themselves at the sport. Of course, that wouldn't all bit his pocket which is probably why he won't do it.

You can bombard me with sponsorship logos if you like but if I'm paying tens\hundreds of £\$\€ to watch then I'm not going to be spending money with the advertisers. Unlike Bernie, I don't have a bottomless wallet so I have to choose what I spend and where. So I won't be paying large sums to watch the races and thus won't see any of the adverts. Ah well, perhaps the sponsors will figure it out eventually...

I see I can watch Sky F1 on a short term basis by paying £7/$10 for a day's viewing. I need to buy a set top box to do this, however. So I can watch the year for £140/$200 plus the cost of the box. Plus the TV licence fee of about £140 / year. Will I? Not sure yet...

[Juzh]

Just type "formula 1 reddit" in google. Whenever a race weekend is on people post link to hd sky streams every single time. There's just no point in wasting hundreds upon hundreds of €/$/£.

[alexx_88]

It's not just F1 that went PPV, all the other major sports did. Football did and they are richer, not poorer. Problem is that people don't think it's worth spending the money and that should be rectified. If the only way to attract people to your product is making it free, then the problem is the product, not the prices. If FOM got less revenue from TV rights, then teams would get less money as well. Sky alone brings £25m / year.

[autogyro]

It's not just F1 that went PPV, all the other major sports did. Football did and they are richer, not poorer. Problem is that people don't think it's worth spending the money and that should be rectified. If the only way to attract people to your product is making it free, then the problem is the product, not the prices. If FOM got less revenue from TV rights, then teams would get less money as well. Sky alone brings £25m / year.

Disagree completely your argument is the same as the one suggesting the BBC keep its license fee.
If you are so in support of global business profits I suggest you help them improve their current abysmal marketing concepts.
Most marketing is advertising, so where are the new ideas in that?
The reason is there are to many greedy people fighting each other for a slice of the pie and preventing an open approach to new ideas.
With modern communication the public see all this pathetic in fighting and go elsewhere.
I can think of at least half a dozen new advertising ideas and I am not in marketing.