|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
24 Dec 2009, 12:39 (Ref:2604643) | #1 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
'Resource Restriction Agreement': The why and the when of it.
In case anyone thought that the budget cap had been completely forgotten:
http://www.autosport.com/features/article.php/id/2551 Will the likes of Ferrari and Mercedes have it their own way in the future? Or will 'fresh thinking' shine through? |
|
|
24 Dec 2009, 19:29 (Ref:2604781) | #2 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 809
|
Why is it that this is the only industry where we're actually going to enforce redundancies upon people? Surely this is a stupid idea, and we should at least let all these millions of pounds paid in advertising go to employees.
|
||
|
25 Dec 2009, 01:36 (Ref:2604881) | #3 | ||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
Problem is that the manufacturers and sponsors get a bit fed up of losing after a while, and tend to take the "millions" elsewhere (Toyota etc). Are you suggesting that Ferrari share theirs? !! |
||
|
28 Dec 2009, 13:44 (Ref:2605656) | #4 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
||
|
28 Dec 2009, 22:46 (Ref:2605810) | #5 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,022
|
||
|
29 Dec 2009, 02:07 (Ref:2605834) | #6 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,704
|
IF this can be made to work then it has got to be good for the sport overall. F1 had got to a point that it was synonymous with excess, greed and overspend. Not a good look really.
Very hard to come up with sensible restrictions, to police and enforce them so not an easy task but good luck to the people doing it. Even with more teams appearing on the grid, there is probably going to be a lot of people currently employed who are looking for work elsewhere, and this is the shame of it. Potentially though, that could mean plenty of talented people ending up in other forms of racing such as F3, touring cars, NASCAR, sports cars etc which could be a boost for all of those categories. The idea of people losing jobs when things are tough saddens me but I don't think that F1 has much choice - to let things run on as they are is clearly out of step with the rest of the world and probably keeping some potential sponsors away. It will be interesting to see how this is going to work as the details become clearer. |
||
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue |
29 Dec 2009, 13:27 (Ref:2605966) | #7 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 874
|
I think restrictions are important, and I share Jean Todt's sentiments that the cessation of development of KERS is a shame. Sadly people will lose their jobs - but with more teams, surely there will be more openings. Those smart enough to think ahead could jump ship to a newer team before losing out at an older one.
|
||
__________________
Belgian GP commentary: "Friday morning was nice and sunny - but not for Erik Comas, who crashed heavily." |
11 Jan 2010, 16:30 (Ref:2611721) | #8 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
This article suggests that F1 teams are already restricted to a 50 mil budget, reducing to 30 mil for 2011!
http://www.racecar-engineering.com/n...udget-cap.html |
|
|
11 Jan 2010, 21:13 (Ref:2611883) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,195
|
That 'Resource Restriction Agreement' will be as unenforceable as the budget cap. Therefore this piece of legislation shouldn't be introduced.
|
||
__________________
'Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines.' - Enzo Ferrari |
12 Jan 2010, 01:06 (Ref:2612000) | #10 | ||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
Sure there are going to discrepencies here and there, but you're going to be able to spot the difference between 40 mil and 140 mil a mile away. It would also be fairly difficult to keep the existence of around 750 employees totally secret. |
||
|
12 Jan 2010, 12:07 (Ref:2612123) | #11 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 275
|
I can see teams "offloading" developement work to 3rd parties (more than they do already eg brakes). If these companies have a vested interest, they could get some space on the car to show their name.
How would you police that? I could sponsor your team with payment in kind and you get another dozen phantom employees. |
||
|
12 Jan 2010, 12:56 (Ref:2612144) | #12 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 758
|
Quote:
With regard to 3rd party suppliers: That is how it used to be ages ago. Before commercial sponsors, the only stickers you might see on an F1 car were those of suppliers with a direct interest, i.e. those of the oil/petrol company, spark plugs, brakes, gearboxes etc. P |
|||
__________________
Madness is a normal condition interupted only by spells of sanity. |
12 Jan 2010, 13:28 (Ref:2612167) | #13 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,195
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
'Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines.' - Enzo Ferrari |
12 Jan 2010, 16:03 (Ref:2612236) | #14 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
||
|
12 Jan 2010, 17:01 (Ref:2612268) | #15 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,126
|
Quote:
James |
|||
__________________
Locost #54 Boldly Leaping where no car has gone before. And then being T-boned. Damn. Survivor of the 2008 2CV 24h!! 2 engines, one accident, 76mph and rain. |
12 Jan 2010, 17:24 (Ref:2612281) | #16 | ||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
Some think that McLaren's 100 mil fine was harsh, but in reality it could have been a whole lot worse! |
||
|
12 Jan 2010, 18:16 (Ref:2612304) | #17 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 275
|
don't get me wrong, I think a cap is necessary but these F1 types are sneaky and would just find ways to bend or sneak around rules.
I guess that more spec parts certainly gets you a bit closer as someone can't pay to improve it for 'free' if it has to be the same as the next guys. |
||
|
12 Jan 2010, 18:33 (Ref:2612319) | #18 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
I think that in future any progress a team will make will most certainly be down to someone having a 'good idea', rather than just throwing money at making what everyone else has got a little bit better. Which is how it should be.
|
|
|
12 Jan 2010, 18:40 (Ref:2612323) | #19 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 275
|
unfortunately it's the guys who follow the good ideas that get it on the cheap, the development work is done and running.
|
||
|
12 Jan 2010, 20:39 (Ref:2612387) | #20 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,357
|
That's true but the only benefit they get is to lift themselves to the standard of the others. The team that makes it work first enjoys a brief period in the sun during which their good idea gives them an advantage. It is the nature of F1 that it doesn't last long but for me at least that's one of the things that can make it so interesting.
|
|
|
29 Oct 2010, 16:53 (Ref:2782192) | #21 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 874
|
I am interested in this after hearing Martin Brundle make a quiet comment about one of the teams in the grand prix last week. I think he referred to Williams and guessed their budget could be in the region of 160m (dollars?).
Does anyone have any knowledge of how the resource restriction agreement is working out in F1? What changes have taken place since its introduction? Is F1 scaling back its budgets in line with its promises? |
||
__________________
Belgian GP commentary: "Friday morning was nice and sunny - but not for Erik Comas, who crashed heavily." |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Restriction | scoff | Sportscar & GT Racing | 5 | 2 Jul 2009 16:41 |
Drivers agreement. | BBKing | Formula One | 32 | 18 Sep 2001 16:38 |