Formula 1 team payments for 2016 revealed

[bauc]

Well Boys & Girls of this forum, we finally have the projected numbers for 2016. Few things stud up wright away. Ferrari earns more than Mercedes despite finishing 2nd. Mclaren earned more than FI despite finishing 9th. (2015 Results)

Any toughs?

[TzeiTzei]

The favoured ones and the riffraff. That's F1.

[Ennis]

This is possibly my biggest bugbear in the sport just now. I get that you reward winners, and you reward investment, but the balance is way off right now.

The first 'Total' Column seems a relatively fair distribution from a % perspective. When you factor in other payments it just becomes stupid.

Fans of sport like competition. Tension. Skill. A very simple way to add and showcase all of this is to have as close to a level playing field as possible, whilst still rewarding winners. More equal distribution would mean cars closer on track, which would mean more skill shown in wheel to wheel racing, which would add more tension. Of course you may still get an outstanding performer like Merc the last few years, but the chances of actual racing taking place would multiply.

Is there any other sport where you essentially bribe certain teams to participate? I understand a 'loyalty' payment but make it equal distribution for teams after x amount of years.

[Pierce89]

I wonder about "other".

[Fulcrum]

Its that bullsh*t under the headings CCB, LST and OTHER that needs to be addressed.

Translated:

Column 1 = Thank-you for participating; have some money.
Column 2 = Well done on your recent performance; have some money.

CCB = You're still here, even though you might not be winning anymore? Have some money.
LST = La Dolce Vita.
OTHER = You drive a hard bargain. Have some money.

Halve the CCB, and give the bottom 5 teams an extra $15 million.

[sgth0mas]

Its not fun to see, but they pay based on the value they bring to the sport. If manor falls off...not many fans go. If ferrari drops out...the fan base will fall even more.

When you look at the value...the compensation makes sense. F1 is purely about the money.

[OneAlex]

I will probably get some mild hate for this, but...

I know people say "Ferrari are sporting Gods they need to be paid extra", but I still think their bonus payment is grossly unfair, and practically allows them to fight at the top of Formula 1 for relative pennies.

Would F1 without Ferrari be poorer? Most definitely. But I think Ferrari would be poorer without F1 too and that they get as much out of the sport in pedigree as they put in.

Ferrari aren't THE supercar manufacturer anymore, they're just one of many, and without the F1 international showcase and the money to keep them at the top of it they would probably slip down the list of "most desirable makes". I reckon if they lost their special F1 privileges they'd still compete, because the brand needs it as much as F1 does. If they want to win prestigious races they should compete on the same level as other teams.

And if they did leave... well, I still think the sport would survive. And either way who knows maybe one day soon we will have a proper Aston Martin F1 team, or a Bugatti F1 team, which would bring their own sexiness to the sport.

[PlatinumZealot]

Manor is doing quite well for itself. It can almost run the team for the entire year on that payment alone! (jk).

[flickerf1]

I will probably get some mild hate for this, but...

I know people say "Ferrari are sporting Gods they need to be paid extra", but I still think their bonus payment is grossly unfair, and practically allows them to fight at the top of Formula 1 for relative pennies.

Would F1 without Ferrari be poorer? Most definitely. But I think Ferrari would be poorer without F1 too and that they get as much out of the sport in pedigree as they put in.

Ferrari aren't THE supercar manufacturer anymore, they're just one of many, and without the F1 international showcase and the money to keep them at the top of it they would probably slip down the list of "most desirable makes". I reckon if they lost their special F1 privileges they'd still compete, because the brand needs it as much as F1 does. If they want to win prestigious races they should compete on the same level as other teams.

And if they did leave... well, I still think the sport would survive. And either way who knows maybe one day soon we will have a proper Aston Martin F1 team, or a Bugatti F1 team, which would bring their own sexiness to the sport.

I totally agree with you on this. As you put it it's grossly unfair the amount of money i that's in their bonus payment. Mercedes in this V6 turbo era have have the strongest package and have won the constructors 2 years on the trot so far and yet Ferrari are getting paid more? There is something wrong there.

[bhall II]

Its not fun to see, but they pay based on the value they bring to the sport. If manor falls off...not many fans go. If ferrari drops out...the fan base will fall even more.

When you look at the value...the compensation makes sense. F1 is purely about the money.

Indeed. The question we should really be asking: why is FOM's share the largest of all?

The sport would be so much better off if it was fronted by a salaried administrator. But, that would require the teams to agree on something among themselves. (And maybe avoiding that nightmare scenario is worth 35% of the whole pie.)

[Edax]

I wonder whether this is going to hurt Mclaren.

Total turnover of the group is around 500 million. So a 16% drop is a sizeable loss off income. Combine that with a lack of a title sponsor.

On the other hand leaving F1 would not be an option since without it their sportscar business wouldn't stand a chance. As stated before competition is becoming pretty fierce in this segment.

I think in this case we may be glad that they get something extra from the CCB. I would hate to see them leave.

[WaikeCU]

I wonder whether this is going to hurt Mclaren.

Total turnover of the group is around 500 million. So a 16% drop is a sizeable loss off income. Combine that with a lack of a title sponsor.

On the other hand leaving F1 would not be an option since without it their sportscar business wouldn't stand a chance. As stated before competition is becoming pretty fierce in this segment.

I think in this case we may be glad that they get something extra from the CCB. I would hate to see them leave.

I doubt so, I think there's a reason why they aren't in LMP1, but the brand Mclaren itself is very well capable of building such cars for LMP1. It's either going for a win in 24h of Le Mans or going for the championship in F1. I don't think nowadays manufacturers are capable of doing both at the same time.

[Jolle]

I wonder whether this is going to hurt Mclaren.

Total turnover of the group is around 500 million. So a 16% drop is a sizeable loss off income. Combine that with a lack of a title sponsor.

On the other hand leaving F1 would not be an option since without it their sportscar business wouldn't stand a chance. As stated before competition is becoming pretty fierce in this segment.

I think in this case we may be glad that they get something extra from the CCB. I would hate to see them leave.

I doubt so, I think there's a reason why they aren't in LMP1, but the brand Mclaren itself is very well capable of building such cars for LMP1. It's either going for a win in 24h of Le Mans or going for the championship in F1. I don't think nowadays manufacturers are capable of doing both at the same time.

Not going for LMP1 at the same time as F1 is pure marketing. A company as Mercedes could easily buy or order a LMP1 car (as they did with Sauber) and money still makes cars go fast. But the investment doesnt deliver the same exposure

[mrluke]

Money makes cars go fast.

F1 gives the most money to the fastest cars.

F1 complains that the top teams are too much faster than the bottom teams meaning the whole thing is so predictable.

[FLuidd]

those who say its unfair should imagine F1 without ferrari and then imagine F1 without force india.

thank you.