Site logo

The Third Way?

FEATURE BY MIKE LAWRENCE
26/09/2014

In an interview with Sky Sport. Bernie said that if we were down to eight teams next year. a third car would be allowed. Indeed, it would be a contractual requirement. He denied any knowledge of that being necessary, but it is known that some teams are struggling, some say that as many as four are on the brink.

That's the rumour mill for you, the same process that saw Vettel and Alonso swopping seats and a billionaire interested in buying one of the struggling teams.

You will not find Pitpass naming the struggling teams without hard evidence. Every F1 team is a fair-sized engineering business with employees, shareholders and suppliers. It is downright irresponsible to spread rumours about a company's viability. All rumours have a source and can be started by a rival, something the F1 para-sites should consider.

What is interesting is that the news of three-car teams did not arouse more interest. Could you imagine any of the disciplines of football (Association, NFL, Rugby Union or Rugby League) having to play extra games because there were insufficient teams? Or some teams being allowed to start with more players? It would not only be unthinkable, it would be a major scandal, but Formula One has become inured to scandal.

We take for granted conditions which would not be tolerated in any other sport. About half the revenue generated by Formula One goes to financial institutions whose only interest in the sport is the money it generates for their investors.

FOM guarantees 20 starters and there is a maximum of 24 places on the grid. Eight teams, each running three cars would work, provided they could all afford it. But the problem would be if say four wealthy teams did.

A team's extra car would score neither points nor prize money, but places scored would stand. If, say, Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull and McLaren (or Williams) ran a third car, it would surely diminish the chance of any of the smaller teams scoring a point.

What is less clear are the obligations of the engine suppliers. The three current providers (and Honda) are all major companies who, with the exception of Ferrari (Fiat) have used F1 as and when they have felt they had a reason.

Honda has been in and out like a fiddler's elbow. BMW and Toyota gave F1 a try, as did Peugeot, Chrysler (when it owned Lamborghini), and Ford. I am not sure that a Mercedes-Benz saloon is more desirable because the company finances an F1 team, any more than owning a BMW became less desirable when the company pulled the plug on F1.

Perhaps the engine makers would feel disinclined to provide extra power units. Law suits could follow, but legal action can take a long time and the 2015 season starts next March. As Bernie has shown, clever lawyers can delay hearings for a long time. Bernie's wealth makes him a big hitter by the standards of most people, but not against major manufacturers.

If they refused to supply additional power units, FOM could not meet its obligations and ownership of Formula One could revert to the FIA, which should own it in any case.

Manufacturers may not want to go so far, but they could be in a strong position to negotiate a better deal for the teams and thus perhaps could avoid losing some, or all, of the current contenders. Every team under threat of closure is a customer of one of the engine suppliers and so helps to spread the cost.

Another thing is that major manufacturers are used to cooperating with rivals in order to share costs. There have been several instances of companies creating a joint platform for a road car which they have then made distinctive by their running gear and body style.

If some teams run a third car to make up the numbers, it would be ineligible for points or prize money, but race position would stand. Say a brilliant newcomer in a third car had an amazing season and won most races. He would not be World Champion, or even runner-up, he would score no points at all. Let us remember that the following all began their F1 careers in a third Lotus: Mario Andretti, Jim Clark, Emerson Fittipaldi, Nigel Mansell and John Surtees, to name only World Champions.

If the brilliant newcomer was forced to concede places to his team-mates, the public would be outraged and surely TV ratings would take a further hit.

RELATED ARTICLES

LATEST FEATURES

more features >

LATEST IMAGES

galleries >

  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images

POST A COMMENT

or Register for a Pitpass ID to have your say

Please note that all posts are reactively moderated and must adhere to the site's posting rules and etiquette.

Post your comment

READERS COMMENTS

 

1. Posted by Steve W, 05/10/2014 19:43

"Back in the day, all drivers were eligible for points whether they were in a third car, fourth car or whatever. However, the Constructors only scored points for the top finishing car. For example, when Ferrari finished 1-2-3 in the 1960 Italian GP, the three drivers got their points, but Ferrari only got the points for first."

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

2. Posted by bfairey, 01/10/2014 17:24

"You guys have got it wrong again, its all about ENTERTAINMENT bums in seats etc.The guy who wrote that the teams should have packed up their bags, told Bernie to "piss off" and left to form their own competition."

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

3. Posted by Editor, 01/10/2014 14:02

"@ emcomments

The very same....

And what exactly is wrong in saying that Sauber is the subject of much speculation these days when it IS the subject of much speculation."

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

4. Posted by emcomments, 01/10/2014 13:57

"@Mike Lawrence "You will not find Pitpass naming the struggling teams without hard evidence."

Would that be the same Pitpass that writes about Sauber "which is itself the subject of much speculation these days" in the De Silvestro article (http://www.pitpass.com/52564/De-Silvestros-F1-dream-derailed)?"

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

5. Posted by Phil, 30/09/2014 3:56

"The teams, the FIA and Bernie will cause the downfall of F1.
The facts remain the teams signed up to the inequitable agreement. They should have stuck together and threaten and walked if need be when there was no contract or agreement in place to stay. People watch f1 for the mystic of Ferrari/Mclaren/Williams etc as well as the drivers of Alonso, Vettel, Hamilton, Schumacher, hill, moss who are at the top of the game. If they all walked when they had the chance Bernie and CVC would have been in a world of hurt. A championship can be started up by anyone with enough money, you don’t need the FIA to do it. The FIA would have been stuffed because they cannot prevent it, and we all know all know where the fans would follow. The new series could race anywhere in the world because most countries have restriction of trade laws so Bernie could not prevent a race say at the Melbourne GP or at Monza, laguna seca, etc. 95% of the revenue would be given to the teams.
The FIA pathetic rule changes are the direct cause of cost escalation. Everyone complaining about cost yet they had a massive overhaul of aero/mechanical/suspension etc. Keep a regulation in for long enough and you achieve the ceiling in performance and costs will come down. The current cars look pathetic, sound pathetic and the drivers are barely raising a sweet driving them.
Bernie/CVC funding arrangement is pathetic every track is going broke and f1 will kill itself because of these clowns. These clowns should not own f1 the teams should own f1. How can we have one company own the paddock club, one mob own the advertising etc etc. The whole economic structure of f1 is destined to fail because its employees are all losing money.
"

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

6. Posted by scf1fan, 29/09/2014 22:28

"The two things I do not see mentioned here is that 1) it's already being done to one degree more successfully (Red Bull A and B teams) and 2) under my current understanding of the rules, how is that going to make for either A) safer pit stops, or B) better economy if the teams will need more service personnel to do the preparation and the stops?

If Bernie and company won't do the right thing (which is to make sure that the back marker teams get more prize money (the front runners earn their money through advertising!)) then they should at least encourage a solution that maintains some semblance of the 2 car/team structure. The "big" teams should be encouraged to take a small team under their wing. So there would be Red Bull/Toro Rosso as is, and then perhaps Ferrari/Hass, MB/<?>, McLaren/<?> . . . Perhaps then have two middle ($$) teams join up Williams/Lotus. That would make for a (more) solid 20. Then PAY a "stipend" for a couple of the single teams and/or encourage/allow some other form of cooperation between them.

And yes, the current rules are becoming too restrictive. It would be nice if the engine/power unit formula were close enough to other race formulas to allow companies like Audi, Porsche, Cosworth, etc. (or their affiliates) to be able to leverage (and improve!) their existing hardware and capabilities into competitive equipment.

A large part of the "show" in F1 to me has always been its innovation . . . that is what I find the most lacking now. Three cars for some teams, (although it might solve Bernie's contractual problems and keep his money machine rolling) will not fix the sport's basic problem."

Rating: Positive (1)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

7. Posted by ape, 29/09/2014 19:03

"These days F1 management lacks the cleverness of Max Mosley, shame he was stabbed in the back and could not stay on."

Rating: Positive (1)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

8. Posted by nealio, 29/09/2014 17:49

"The institution of third cars will only place more teams in financial jeopardy. Ironic that Mr. Ecclestone seems to be striping F1 of all the money he is credited for creating. Also, the regulations are becoming so daffed as to read like fairy tales. What is the point of F1 is quickly becoming THE question. Well written as usual, Mike."

Rating: Positive (1)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

9. Posted by Spindoctor, 27/09/2014 22:44

"Another of Mr fixit Ecclestone's dodgy ideas gets a deserved battering.
Instead of trying to solve the problem he comes up with another sub-Baldrick cunning plan which he hopes will take attention away from the Imperial dishabille. When the weakest of the rump teams fails do we switch to 4 car teams, then 5, and so-on until Ferrari is the, only team left?"

Rating: Positive (1)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

10. Posted by f1khun, 27/09/2014 3:05

"@rodrigo
The problem remains that the more drivers are ran by the same team, the more teamorders will appear; and we want a fair battle on track. I think we should (1) allow more teams to join F1 (up to 28 grid positions maximum), to (2) introduce a cost cap per car including overhead and (3) allow teams to only enter one car instead of two (to be decided 6 months before the next season starts, such decision will be on a season by season basis).
In addition, FOM can financially support new teams to enter F1 because the better competition there is, the more people will be entertained by F1 and want to see F1. FOM is at risk to loose the sport more then anyone else; and while their shareholders have a vested interest to make as much money as possible from it, investing in your own company is a key-cornerstone for ANY successful and sustainable business concept!

Bernie: pay attention and overhaul the system so that lesser budgeted teams could emerge and with FOM help, use FOM invested state-of-the-art facilities (Brabham open source, anyone?)


"

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

11. Posted by Rodrigo, 26/09/2014 22:26

"If some teams could enter 3 cars, they should be allowed to score points with all of them, makes more sense. A third top level guy in a Mercedes could be a boost for the 2014 season for example, even a third Red Bull kid or Ferrari could do something. But to manage 3 cars is a change of culture too hard to take.

The better way for me is what Red Bull did with Toro Rosso, Ferrari is about to do with Haas, and other technical support as we saw between McLaren and Force India, at least for now, and to study better ways to cap costs, and even to sell more customer car parts, leaving just the chassis itself to the design of the own team. Would be a dream to see more equal profit shares between them.

Today the big problem in F-1 is that searches too much changes every year for a traditional sport, much of that changes making things more complicated than before - the radio ban was a desperate one; they thought that could make things simpler but its so hard to control that is a crazy idea in the end."

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

12. Posted by BentleyBoy, 26/09/2014 12:05

"Yes to three car teams, however it should not be compulsory, smaller teams could run two cars without disadvantage if only the first two cars in a team past the post can earn points. "

Rating: Negative (-2)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

Share this page

X

Copyright © Pitpass 2002 - 2024. All rights reserved.

about us  |  advertise  |  contact  |  privacy & security  |  rss  |  terms