Dear Adam

[bewildered_jim]

http://www.pitpass.com/44429-Parr-for-the-course

Dear Mr. Parr,

Seeing as I am now to start part funding Formula one, I have decided:

1) Don't bother with KERS
2) Bring back Imola and drop Turkey
3) Increase in-car camera quality.

If you could have these sorted by the time I start part-funding your job in March, that'd be great.

Cheers,

Donald.

On a more serious note: [naivety]I will expect fan forums and the like to be actually listened to in the future [/naivety]

P.S. I'm sure all the oil-stained, sleep deprived mechanics liken their jobs to Cirque de Soleil in all it's flaming glory.
_________________
"With its F1 coverage from 2012 set to play second fiddle, the BBC promises to get fans close to the true experience - of being Mark Webber" #HIGNFY @don_lyall

[solarflare]

Of course if CVC wasn't draining a huge chunk of money from the sport it wouldn't be remotely necessary to squeeze every last penny from the fans, circuits and broadcasters.
_________________
Life is.....the gap between Formula 1 Grands Prix

[Wee-Scamp]

If F1 wanted to save money then:

1. It should stop piddling around with DRS and KERS systems and save development cash on things it shouldn't be doing.

2. To ensure its environmental credentials it should start using 100% biofuel and drop this ludicrous proposal to bring in a new engine..

3. Cut back the number of races to 15

[Podge 90]

For my money, I want bloody helmet cameras!! Been waiting long enough for this simple, easy inclusion.

[matibee]

Dear Mr Parr,

Whenever I've brought GP tickets or team merchandise I'm sure you've felt a warm glow from knowing I chose to put my cash directly into Formula One but I now get the feeling from your recent comments that my continued viewing on a free-to-air TV channel shows a lack of respect for the amount of money it costs to run Formula One.

That's bollocks.

All of the BBC's 6,900,000 viewers will have been watching on a licensed TV set. My TV license fee is covering the cost of Formula One much more directly than than any TV ad revenue ever has since my take up of products or services shown in the commercial breaks during ITV's coverage totals zero. The TV license fee payers have a shockingly small say in how it is spent but I do feel lucky that at least some of it in recent times has gone to my favourite sport. Fans of other sports have had a right to be jealous.

I put it to you that something F1 needs more than anything is eyeballs.

I might be the only person in my house that follows F1 but today I conducted a simple test on my wife and two children. I asked them to list in 15 minutes, from memory, brand names (past or present) associated with F1. Here are a selection of results:

Wife (aged 30+): Benson & Hedges, Santander, Vodafone, Mumm, Mclaren, Ferrari, Orange, Mercedes, Rolex, Mobil, Pirelli, Bridgestone, First Direct (HSBC), Hugo Boss etc

Total: ~30

Son (aged 15): ING Direct, Red Bull, Vodafone, Inifity, BMW, Lotus, Mercedes, Ferrari, Samsung, Michelin, Shell, Virgin

Total: ~20

Daughter (aged 12): Red Bull, Santander, Ferrari, Fosters(?)

Total: <10 (As a side-note, she is registered partially sighted).


That's a pretty good reach for F1 sponsors, across an audience that have mostly left the room when a Grand Prix is on, too bored to care. There's been many a time when I've felt like following them but that's detracting from the point.

The point is, that reach that will cease once F1 moves to Sky. I'm not interested in watching highlights when I can fast forward through the interesting bits or read who won and how in a single headline once the race has finished out of my sight. I cannot afford a Sky subscription although I just might if I diverted funds away from my ING savings account or my Santander mortgage and gave up any hope of buying an actual Grand Prix ticket.

I fear this scenario will be played out across millions of UK homes in 2012 and the value of F1 will fall in the eyes of your sponsors. Your comments of late appear to be oblivious to this concern.

If Circ du Soliel could put their show out on free-to-air TV in the UK with every performer sporting a sponsor laden outfit, I'm sure their show would be completely free and extremely profitable.

[bewildered_jim]

[White Turf]

I wont quote Matibee's post above , but would just like to say thank you for encapsulating the whole reason for free to air coverage in the first place. It sums up just how far F1 reaches.
I recently took part in a phone survey about F1 sponsors and the young man seemed a bit taken aback when I mentioned Marlbro in the context of McLaren, or John Player, or Yardley or Goodyear or Elf or Candy or Saudia or Rothmans..... I could go on. We do remember these brands, but without free to air coverage will this continue into the future? I suppose only time will tell. However if Matibee is correct then Mr Parr will soon be looking for work outside F1 as I suspect Williams will not survive without sponsors.

[Podge 90]

[Editor]

[Ash]

I used to wonder for years what Veltins was. I think I assumed it was a Russian cigarette or vodka because it looked like Yeltsin.

I only recently discovered that it was a German lager.

The first brand I ever noticed as a child was elf though, on Jackie Stuart's car. I did wonder what the pointy-eared fantasy creatures had to do with racing cars.

[AllanL]

Having read Maurice Hamilton's Williams book, which is pretty much a love-in by folk who have been involved with Frank and Patrick down the years, I was puzzled that this wuckfit (my sister-in-laws acronym for idiots on the road) had no mention. Perhaps he is too far up his own backside to see that anyone else in the Williams organisation exists.

There again perhaps Nick Fry has been cloned, how many bumptious ineffective self-absorbed buffoons does F1 need?

Given his track record so far, I haven't see him bringing any memorable sponsors to Williams since he joined, I can't see Williams lasting long after Frank and Patrick part ways with the team.

[Brace]

[easy_rider]

[gourami]

VC firms normally acquire an asset, manage it on the EBITDA line, take out surplus cash and assets and then sell it when they can show potential owners the maintainable EBITDA at multiples that conforms with the investment plan.

It's a money play and it doesn't matter what business it is.

Sigh, I know a bit about these things, but I also know things in life are not all about money.

Our sport is funding a few young boys' BMWs, Ferraris and jet set lifestyles.

It's a money go round and we can't get off.

I just wish the FIA wasn't so commercially naive, or self serving, when it signed away the F1 rights for 99 years in return for little more of what it can throw off each year.

The teams *should* have broken away years ago - and we can blame McLaren, Ferrari, Williams and others just as much as we can blame Mosely, the FIA, Bernie, Kirch, CVC or anyone else for the status quo.

Ferrari! McLaren! Lead the revolt and let's go racing. For the fans!
_________________
Watching F1 since 1998... trackside at Silverstone, Shanghai and Melbourne.

[Gary]

See Williams reveals interim financial results.

Look, I know racing teams need to run their businesses properly but doesn't this strike you as so 'Williams under Parr'? All that core business and group strategy stuff. Makes you wonder where the emphasis of that group of people might lie. I was in no doubt where it lay in the '85 to '97 period.

Brings to mind a multinational food company for which I worked decades ago. The CFO said to me one day, "From an accountant's perspective, N----- is a rather large bank. One of its minority interests is in the food business."

Adam would dig that!