Comments on: The rise and fall of F1 driver numbers, 1980-2009 (F1 in numbers)

By: crossomotive

crossomotive — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 07:38:34 +0000

Yeah. I heard that Richards earlier spoke of F1’s need to severely cut costs and since then the FIA has confirmed.

By: Sasquatsch

Sasquatsch — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 10:40:27 +0000

Funny, I made the same observation in a dutch F1 forum before I read this article.

The past has showed that in good (economic) years the number of teams will rise and in bad years the number of teams will fall.

Since the introduction of the bond and later the limit to twelve teams the number of teams have not really risen (at least not enough, since only Toyota and Super Aguri where really new teams), but just dropped to the 9 teams now.

By: Dave Smith

Dave Smith — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 06:47:14 +0000

One thing that is easy to spot is that fewer cars on the grid will equal less overtaking – how good is the action going to be with 18 cars as opposed to say 24-30!!F1 will always have its front running team who will run off at the front-its normally the midfield which provides the action-problem is there is now no midfield. The championship should have been split into manufacturers and private entries so it was easy for private teams to bag a point or two in their championship – rather than fight with the big boys for a point, also I think if private teams want to enter 1 car then they should be able to.
Problem is I think mid 1990’s f1 got too big and powerful and lost touch with reality – we (the fans) are paying the price now!

By: Steven Roy

Steven Roy — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 19:50:33 +0000

I thought the bond had been done away with due to the need to get more teams in. I am sure Alianora will know.

We need to get F1 back to a situation where anyone with a car that meets the tech regs and a driver with the appropriate license can enter. The franchise system is counter to the ethos of F1.

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 15:51:40 +0000

Honda won’t lose anything as it wasn’t a new team – unlike, say, Toyota. Honda used to be BAR which used to be Tyrrell, which had been an entrant since the late 1960s so was never required to pay the bond.

One reason that buying an existing team is more attractive than starting from scratch is because you avoid having to pay the FIA bond. The bond is held by the FIA and paid back when the new team meets certain milestones – basically it gets some back at the end of its first year and the rest after the second year. So the likes of Toyota will have already had their cash back.

The idea behind the bond was to ensure high quality entries by requiring a substanial deposit of cash which would be repaid by the FIA over the team’s first two seasons. The thinking was that if a team wasn’t serious enough to be able to raise the cash in the first place or last long enough to reclaim it then it wasn’t a worthy entrant.

The problem is that it is a huge amount of money to raise at the same time as the team is trying to pull together an initial operating budget. It’s not a big problem for a team like Toyota but it presents a huge hurdle to the likes of Prodrive, ART or Carlin.

By: Chaz

Chaz — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 15:06:26 +0000

I take it this $40m bond is still in effect. I’d really like to know more about this. Does Honda stand to loose this and what happens to this money now that they have pulled out so suddenly…

By: Damon

Damon — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 11:25:32 +0000

@ DC
I second that. I love Indy qualifying.
Abother thing which is great about Indy is that – somewhat contrary to what Keith’s said – “everybody” can join in and compete. But it is all the greats that come and not the losers. It was very exciting when e.g. ChampCar teams bought an IRL car just to compete in Indy.
The Chip Ganassi Team, with Montoya, who fought in ChampCar competed like that in Indy in 1999, and Montoya won the race [sic!].
And this is why Indy500 always felt like the race of champions, and not like an F1-like two-strongest-manufacturers competition.
______________________________
They should let teams buy their chassis and engines.
If a reach team like McLaren or Ferrari want to build their own car, so be it. But there should also be a Reynard or Lola chassis to buy, as well as an engine that teams who don’t have the technologicial and financial resources could afford.
I’m sure that if there was a long term development of the “standard” cars/engines (with their manufactures having good financial status thanks to selling their product to several teams) – they would be more competetive than cars of the teams who waste 2 years to build their own car and then can’t afford to pay their bills and hence make no progress and trail behind until they’re bankrupt.

By: DC

DC — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 10:31:49 +0000

One of the things I like most about the Indy 500 is qualifying (except in recent years). There is always a lot of drama to see who fail to make the field. It would make Saturday qualifying so much more interesting if there was not only a fight for the pole, but also a fight for last place.