Comments on: What’s the next “win-win” for Formula 1?

By: F1: British Grand Prix developments liveblog November 19-December 3 | Brits on Pole

Sun, 06 Dec 2009 23:04:51 +0000

[...] You can read his full blog post here – the section referred to above is towards the end. [...]

By: Trent

Trent — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 04:37:02 +0000

“If a car was set up for one type of tyre it was useless on the other” – that’s exactly what we needed! I think the racing was in general better at the start of the year than the end, with perhaps the exception of an exciting Brazilian Grand Prix. Maybe the tyres were key in that situation.

The cars need to be evenly matched over the course of a race, without being evenly matched on any given lap. The cars were amazingly close in qualifying this year, but it clearly doesn’t translate to wheel-to-wheel action on the track.

By: rpaco

rpaco — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 20:58:57 +0000

Looks like no-win no-win in France despite their two world class tracks.

By: Brace

Brace — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 21:34:07 +0000

I still can’t believe how that deal went through. I mean, it’s totally bad for FIA and if Max were the president of a company he would have been fired that same day, or he wouldn’t have even been allowed to go through with it.

By: AlejoB

AlejoB — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:19:04 +0000

Why Toyota’s penalty it’s so high?? $150 millions?? wow

By: James Allen

James Allen — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 18:09:17 +0000

What for? Are they from a few years ago?

By: James Allen

James Allen — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 18:08:11 +0000

They want experience, but they would also dearly love an Asian angle. Kobayashi is apparently linked with Renault and Panasonic.

By: Rich C

Rich C — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:22:37 +0000

How about *Hoosier tires!!? Now *that would be a coup! LOL I can see it now…

Of course we’d have to esplain how to pronounce it and what it meant and where they are and so forth and so forth and doobey doobey doo…

er… oh, excuse me, i got carried away there…

By: Rich C

Rich C — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:11:20 +0000

>> … it appears unreasonable to me to give away 50% of the revenue to an administrator …

Perhaps to an administrator, but not to the guy that ‘owns’ it. Like other racing series such as IRL and NASCAR it is ‘owned’ by one man or group. That means *he is giving *them 50%, not the other way round.

Champcars was different in that the teams owned it, but we see how good a business plan *that was – sorta like FOTA’s idea for a breakaway series.

By: MaxB

MaxB — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:48:13 +0000

How about this then?

Ferrari purchases the Toyota design and entry to field a B-Team with its own car design, but with a Ferrari engine, of course.

- It would mean Ferrari could have four cars to develop all important fuel-efficiency in the years to come – handy with very limited testing.
- Ferrari / FIA / Ecclestone have a drive for Schumi, which makes total commercial sense for everyone involved.
- MSC (or would it be SCH?) would be able to drive without having to untangle himself from his Shell and other contracts whilst being faithful to the prancing horse. He also can have a less threatening team-mate than the lot that is hanging around at the Ferrari and Mercedes garages these days.
- The FIA doesn’t have to worry about due-diligence on a team if Ferrari is running it, and has an easy way out of the currently awkward Toyota-Sauber-Stefan situation.
- Ferrai would snatch Schuey out of Mercedes’ grasp once more. That alone should motivate Montezemolo.