Red Bull want “tangible” limits on spending

F1 Fanatic round-up

Mark Webber, Red Bull, Melbourne, 2012In the round-up: Red Bull’s Christian Horner says costs should be reduced by tighter technical regulations rather than a budget cap or resource restriction.


Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:

Red Bull against FIA intervention (BBC)

Christian Horner: “Controlling tangible things like the amount of people we have at a Grand Prix, the amount of engines, gearboxes, the amount of testing we can do, are clear and transparent ways to control costs. Red Bull aren’t in favour of frivolous spending, and we’re as keen as anyone to control costs in F1, but to try to do it through equivalence as the [Resource Restriction Agreement] is constructed is fraught with problems.”

Teams optimistic over new F1 deal (Autosport)

Stefano Domenicali: “I think that what I can say is that we are in discussions, and the discussions are going on in the right way. But there is no more than that at the moment.”

Jenson Button hopes Sebastian Vettel will ‘get used’ to seeing him win (The Guardian)

“They’ve worked so hard and it really means a lot to us to be so strong at the first race after a couple of years of struggle and everyone saying ‘McLaren aren’t good at the start of the year’. We are now and we just have to hope our progress is as good as previous years.”

Analysis – Mercedes ‘F-duct’ rear wing (F1)

“It is effectively the same F-duct system used by the team two years ago (with air flowing from the nose, through the chassis, to the rear wing), but in reverse.”

Ferrari vow to help Massa (Sky)

Domenicali: “So now what is important is to realise analyse everything in order to make sure there is nothing strange, because that is a fundamental thing that we need to do in order to help Felipe to make sure he is performing without any extra pressure.”

Australian GP Review (Williams)

Pastor [Maldonado] is fine and the chassis stood up well to the impact. We damaged the front wing, nose and other body work but the chassis is undamaged.”

Eric Boullier on the Malaysian GP: “The E20 should be competitive in Malaysia” (Lotus)

“We knew our car was quite quick, but as for the others we had absolutely no clue. Saturday was a relief: you don?t reach the second row of the grid by chance.”

Brilliant coverage by the BBC (Motorsport Musings)

“The story of the Grand Prix was told, and rather brilliantly too by Ben Edwards who has stepped into Martin Brundle?s shoes as lead commentator this year. His appointment is long overdue in my book and, while less chummy with David Coulthard than his predecessor, the two make for a great combination in the commentary booth.”

The joy of six: Button and Sky off to a flyer as Massa suffers nightmare start (Daily Mail)

“It was a polished performance by the F1 new boys, from the composed elegance of presenter Simon Lazenby to the impressive commentary team of David Croft and Martin Brundle.”

On this evidence, Sky’s F1 season is unlikely to be a Brundle of laughs for the viewer (The Telegraph)

“Based on race day one, it is clear why Brundle moved to Sky in the off-season. Not just for money, but for a channel prepared to indulge his every whim, his every urge, his every ecstatic howl.”

Hats off to Fernando Alonso! (The H Duct)

“The peaks look to be getting increasingly bigger but the majority of drivers seem to be sticking with the traditional style.”

Comment of the day

Hairs picks a Driver of the Weekend for Melbourne:

Alonso proved why Ferrari made the right decision making him number one driver. There’s never been any evidence that Massa is capable of putting in those sort of relentlessly determined performances, and as they killed his spirit, I’m sure he can’t rise to the challenge now. The Ferrari looked like an unpredictable dog of a car to drive all weekend, and for a large part of the race Alonso made it look stable. Maybe that’s due to high fuel making up for lack of downforce, though, because it got twitchy again towards the end.

Massa… I don’t know. Perez should have had his seat this year, and will almost certainly do next year. Great performance from him, and as other people have commented, Sauber need to let us see what he can do with a less conservative strategy.

Maldonado drove a strong race, but again showed a lack of judgement more than once, and needs to show a lot more maturity and sense.

Raikkonen did well, but making a mess of qualifying didn?t do him any favours. In contrary to years of “Kimi?s lazy and unmotivated” commentary, I got the impression we had a “Kimi?s manic and grabbing the whole thing by the throat” this weekend. Sounds like a fun combination for race fans.

Grosjean did himself a massive amount of favours in qualifying, showing his detractors (like me) that he deserves the drive, but then losing places at the start and a fairly needless clash with Maldonado gave his detractors a lot of reassurance that he still has a way to go. As to the incident, I don?t have a very high opinion of either driver, so I?m not inclined to apportion blame either way. Both got too close unnecessarily and if either one of them were better at thinking things through, we probably wouldn?t have had the incident at all. Still, he deserved better than that as an end to his race.

All in all, I think we had the same as last year: do you give the DOTW to the guy who never put a foot wrong, and dominated the whole race against a strong field, or to the guy who dragged a bad car where it didn?t belong, but has a few mistakes here and there? Tough one to call, but I went for Button because I?ve liked his attitude, and I voted for Vettel in similar circumstances last year.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Girts!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

James Hunt won the 1977 Race of Champions at Brands Hatch.

Advert | Go Ad-free


81 comments on Red Bull want “tangible” limits on spending

  1. rdpunk (@) said on 20th March 2012, 10:43

    How come, the only major team saying they want a limit on spending is Red Bull? It seems to me that they are always mentioning it. I’m all for a limit on spending but it will never fully satisfy everyone, smaller teams will love it but big teams will hate it. The only major plus is that will could see better quality than quantity as teams won’t splash out just for a small gain.

    As for driver of the weekend, it should be someone who has impressed over the weekend and that for me happened to be the race winner, button

  2. Solo (@solo) said on 20th March 2012, 10:46

    The strange thing with round-ups is that many times articles from different sites have all been first posted in Autosport.
    For example those words Horner said where in an Autosport article about a week ago.
    So i wonder Keith, do you miss quite a few Autosport articles or to you simply choose to wait and put similar ones from other sites so you won’t end up having a round-up full of Autosport.

  3. vjanik said on 20th March 2012, 14:37

    Mr Horner,

    The easiest way of controlling costs is actually controlling costs. (directly). If you try to control costs indirectly through technical regulations, rich teams will always find other ways of spending money to become faster. In order to prevent this completely, F1 would practically have to become a stock series or something very close to it.

    First you ban testing on a track. So teams invest even more in wind tunnels to substitute their lost track time. So then the FIA limits the number of wind tunnel hours teams can use. So the teams buy supercomputers to develop CFD programs. So the FIA bans that. And so it goes on and on. The governing body is always one step behind, fails to cut costs, and bans every new idea that the teams come up with. New teams are forced to invest in very expensive equipment because they can no longer test on a track like they used to in the old days, making the barrier to entry even higher.

    This example shows that this approach does not lead to lower costs and sustainability. The only way of achieving that is by actually saying explicitly what is the highest allowed cost for a season. With good quality auditing this can be easily policed and would lead to more innovation and reward smart people rather than deep pockets.

    • Mads (@mads) said on 20th March 2012, 16:44


      With good quality auditing this can be easily policed

      Mercedes could easily sell their engines for near to nothing to the Mercedes F1 team, along with gearbox, diff and the carbon cloth they use to build the carbon fibre components from.
      I think the only result of a fixed spending limit will result in a lot of sub companies operating at a loss and with staff hired by the mother company etc. etc. and instead of driver salaries they get additional sponsor money from the mother firm.
      How should they control that?
      Force all teams to build every single component for the car themselves? Thats surely not going to cut costs.

      But it is always going to be cheaper to only use 8 engines in a season compared to one engine for each race and limiting CFD and windtunnel hours will again make it cheaper.
      Yes they might spend the money elsewhere, but it will limit the difference the extra money spend will make, so it will be easier to be competitive with a low budget, and in the end that is the most important thing.

      If for instance Williams could be competitive on a tight budget, then it wont matter if Ferrari wants to spend a million billion times that, as long as the larger budget them a large advantage.

  4. jpowell (@jpowell) said on 20th March 2012, 19:57

    The F1 Circus should look for further ways to reduce costs by more reductions in stress on the machinery. The brilliant idea for tyres that can only be driven hard for one lap have increased engine and gearbox life I should think one engine might last for a couple of seasons now. I would suggest a reduction in engine revs to a red line at say 6000 to bring them more in line with your average Fiat Panda. And why do we need these ridiculously overpaid drivers I am sure if we allowed Auto Pilots Honda could be persuaded back into the fold .Better still reduce the weight limit to .5kilos and track sizes to 20 meters (2 cars at a time ,you know what I mean) and the whole thing could be watched on your IPhones in HD.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.