Andretti F1 - 2025

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

but is that the problem, for lack of a better phrase, with promotion?

of course there is no clear ladder in motorsports (despite F1 thinking it is the top of the ladder), there probably still is this expectation that if you are moving to another category, that it should be coming off of very recent and major successes in the category you are moving up from.

if it was a Chip Ganassi or Penske (potentially with some of their current drivers even) looking to cross over, would the narrative be different? would the existing F1 teams be able to be as dismissive?

*i also dont follow much indy but those are the dominant teams as of late i think?

An interesting question, as to whether the narrative would be different if this were Ganassi or Penske. I think in Penske's case yes, considering his previous, involvement in F1 in the '70s and his legacy in motorsport in general. I think if Penske were to be turned down it would not go down well, imo.

Ganassi I'm not so sure about, though since series unification in 2008 they have been the most successful team, winning 10 driver's championships. Current champion Alex Palou has just won his second driver's title. There is also Ganassi's involvement with IMSA/WEC but I don't know if that would be taken into consideration.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

of course there is no clear ladder in motorsports (despite F1 thinking it is the top of the ladder)

There are multiple ladders in motorsport but only one pinnacle - and that pinnacle is F1. WEC would be the nearest thing to F1 (& is a serious undertaking in its own right).

Some of the ladders that can lead to F1 as examples are Super Formula in Japan (Domestic series but the fastest single seaters outside F1), F2 (International Series run across a number of continents by mainly Euro teams) and Indycar (Domestic series with slightly lower performance than F2). We've seen drivers progress to F1 quite effectively from F2 and Super Formula and it would be good to see some of that happening from Indycar.

Originally Posted by Richard C

I think maybe you are trying to make to much out of it, or maybe infer too much as to the F1 entry?

Maybe four is too many and maybe can distract your team? Maybe moving to three cars is a good thing?

Could be - I think that it's a fair question to ask in the first place, particularly for those of us not really all that familiar with how Indycar operates these days. I totally "get" why that fourth car might be one step too far & why Andretti, having considered that key rival teams don't do it, has decided to stop with the pay driver entry.

Originally Posted by Richard C

But I think the initial point that GTRMagic was making was that Andretti moving from four to three cars is maybe an indication of their ability (or inability) to get sponsorship and therefore it puts into question their ability to jump through the financial hoops for F1. My only comment there is that they seem to have shown FIA that they can swing all of this (including the $200M fee). Not to mention they are bringing a huge sponsor (and now engine supplier) to the series. So they seem to be able to get sponsorship.

Yeah I think that was the question being asked, which your earlier post (quoted above) answers very well I think. The commercial question of sponsorship and interest growth is of course exactly where FOM will be looking, most likely with a bigger magnifying glass and better understanding than the FIA - so it's reasonable to ask the question and I guess we'll find out where it all sits sometime in the first quarter of 2024.

Originally Posted by Richard C

What is also rough for Andretti, is even if they get in, there is close to zero chance they will be competitive in the short term. It will take them years to even get to the top of the mid-field if they are even able to do that. But it doesn't make them any less of a competitor like the rest of the F1 field. But people will claim that because Andretti didn't show up and do something magical in their first season, that it proves they were not worthy or something to that effect.

I don't think that it is "rough" for Andretti, simply the reality of jumping into the top level worldwide - it's like being the national 100 metre Athletics champion and then going to the Olympics - the competition is dramatically tougher.

I honestly haven't seen any view expressed by anyone on this subject other than an expectation that Andretti will take some time to be competitive. Some of the early rhetoric from Andretti itself seemed to suggest that it would be more competitive and even in the video I linked above, Micheal Andretti goes out of his way to mock Haas, and if Andretti gets in (which I expect that it will) then it will need to manage expectations of performance, particularly in the US.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Tourer

There are multiple ladders in motorsport but only one pinnacle - and that pinnacle is F1. WEC would be the nearest thing to F1 (& is a serious undertaking in its own right).

Some of the ladders that can lead to F1 as examples are Super Formula in Japan (Domestic series but the fastest single seaters outside F1), F2 (International Series run across a number of continents by mainly Euro teams) and Indycar (Domestic series with slightly lower performance than F2). We've seen drivers progress to F1 quite effectively from F2 and Super Formula and it would be good to see some of that happening from Indycar.

indeed on the drivers side but i was getting at more from a constructors side of things.

modern era ish...Sauber parlaying success in sportscars creating an opportunity to move into/create a new F1 team for example. were they the lasts ones to make such a jump? ProDrive/Richards tried but never managed.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

indeed on the drivers side but i was getting at more from a constructors side of things.

modern era ish...Sauber parlaying success in sportscars creating an opportunity to move into/create a new F1 team for example. were they the lasts ones to make such a jump? ProDrive/Richards tried but never managed.

With you now - Jordan was successful in F3 / F3000 and moved to F1, Manor the same, Prodrive/Richards had a big chunk of Benetton, Paul Stewart Racing became Stewart GP became Jaguar, became Red Bull but drawing a mental blank outside those however.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by Tourer

With you now - Jordan was successful in F3 / F3000 and moved to F1, Manor the same, Prodrive/Richards had a big chunk of Benetton, Paul Stewart Racing became Stewart GP became Jaguar, became Red Bull but drawing a mental blank outside those however.

Campos (latterly HRT), first GP2 then F1.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Greem

Campos (latterly HRT), first GP2 then F1.

Was it actually Campos in F1 though?

[Greem]

The original entry was, yes. Campos Grand Prix became Campos Meta, started putting the team and cars together, then Adrian Campos was ousted due to financial struggles and the team became Hispania Racing Team under different ownership and with the dentist as team principal.

(For new readers, the dentist is Colin Kolles, purveyor of incendiary endurance cars)

[Tourer]

View of some of the teams hasn't changed (yet) but may do once some projections and figures are presented. With the teams having no direct part of the assessment process, I assume from Toto's comments in particular that FOM must have assured teams that info would be shared for their feedback.

In some ways, that does make some sense, as only the teams really know what is involved in running a team week-to-week.

[S griffin]

It’s still very elitist of the teams. They’ve tried every excuse in the book not to welcome an 11th team. The FIA have accepted Andretti’s entry, so I just hope FOM pushes through with it and sticks it to the teams in the process

[morninggents]

Any major sport at it's pinnacle where a team's annual spend is in the region of £200 million must be considered elitist. And for that matter F1 and all motorsport has always been on the elitist side of life's spectrum.
As to the other teams stance wouldn't you be a tad upset if a newcomer wanted a share of your income?
Personally I would like to see Andretti be admitted to the party and maybe another viable team too. A grid of 24 cars would be ideal for me provided the quality is appropriate.

[Tourer]

With the anti-dilution fee paid by a new entrant one of the talking points around Andretti, this breakdown of the expected 2023 team earnings makes for interesting reading.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Tourer

With the anti-dilution fee paid by a new entrant one of the talking points around Andretti, this breakdown of the expected 2023 team earnings makes for interesting reading.

I think the anti-dilution fee discussion is more about paying £/$/€300m to enter a new team, when buying an existing team is more like £/$/€1bn.

While it's not that simplistic in reality, why buy when you can build from scratch for a fraction of the capital investment? Also, if one is let in, who's to say other won't use the precedent to force their way in later, which would devalue existing operations considerably?

Anyway, last I heard Andretti are possibly now going to be accepted, but will be pushed back as far as possible - maybe even to 2027-2029!

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Tourer

With the anti-dilution fee paid by a new entrant one of the talking points around Andretti, this breakdown of the expected 2023 team earnings makes for interesting reading.

That is interesting to me in the light of my assumptions in my earlier post with a $900 million pot. a billion dollar pot would just take the percentages and multiply by 10 million.

The first three are converted. But this is for 11 teams so you can see how little different it is from the article. In a meritocracy performance is all important.

1st 14% or $126 million (140 million)
2nd 12.5% or$112.5 million (125 million)
3rd 11,0% or $99 million (110 million)
4th 10% or $90 million
5th 9% or $81 million
6th 8,5% or $76.5 million
7th 8% or $72 million
8th 7.5% or $67.5 million
9th 7% or $63 million
10th 6.5% or $58.5 million
11th 6% or $54 million

If Richards assumptions about the time taken to be competitive are true then it is highly unlikely they would get out of the bottom three for several years.
In this case the lower teams lose very little.
My opinion about the dilution fee is that it is way overrated and really a scam.
There is no franchise system and never has been.
The FIA is the regulator, and it is not a part of the regulations, so I doubt if the franchise idea has any legal authority.
Further to that idea.
If Liberty is growing the returns to the teams at 10-12% then in real terms an extra team is not costing the teams anything. Their earnings from any given year fluctuate according to their performance. If they perform badly, they get lower returns. Welcome to the real world of business.
And the Franchise idea is just straw man rhetoric. They are using this argument to inflate the value of their teams.

Any business that is uncompetitive in its field of endeavors and is requiring $60 million of investment, and actually losing $20 million a year (as Vowles has gone on record as claiming) is not worth a billion dollars, or even half that amount in business terms. It's a financial black hole.
What MBS was roundly condemned for saying about the teams talking up their value when it was nothing like that, is true.

MBS was correct in what he said. Not wrong. There is a whole bunch of smoke and mirror games going on in terms of F1's real value. And a lot of it relates to the teams' approach to the Andretti bid.

Peebee says they may get accepted but pushed out till 2027-29.

If that happens then does GM-Cadillac-Andretti get 2 or 3 years where they can do engine and car development unfettered by any cost cap regulation, because if they are going to be held at an arm's length, then they shouldn't be held back from private research and development.

The idea of holding at arm's length may also not stand up against the EU anti-competitive rules.
And any EU legal battle is going to cost all the teams and Liberty millions.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

My opinion about the dilution fee is that it is way overrated and really a scam.
There is no franchise system and never has been.
The FIA is the regulator, and it is not a part of the regulations, so I doubt if the franchise idea has any legal authority.

If that happens then does GM-Cadillac-Andretti get 2 or 3 years where they can do engine and car development unfettered by any cost cap regulation, because if they are going to be held at an arm's length, then they shouldn't be held back from private research and development.

The idea of holding at arm's length may also not stand up against the EU anti-competitive rules.
And any EU legal battle is going to cost all the teams and Liberty millions.

On your first point re validity of the anti-dilution fee, my understanding is that it is part of the Concorde Agreement between FIA & FOM & the teams, so part of a legally-binding agreement and would have to be honoured. A number of the teams have said that they believe the currently contracted anti-dilution fee is too low, which is why the earnings achieved are so interesting.

I'm with you on the opportunity for Andretti to develop / test, unencumbered by the cost cap, up until the time they start competing (although I think that I saw somewhere that the cost cap would apply to new teams for the 12 month period before their first race). Where that might prove difficult is that I doubt they'd have access to the same tyres from Pirelli, the same control components that the existing teams use and I guess the crash testing process and scrutineering process that the FIA uses, so they'd probably have a few question marks that they couldn't resolve until "official".

Legal action could well prove expensive for all, but I guess also depends on what jurisdiction the Concorde Agreement is bound by - if it declares for example that UK law applies, then EU regulations probably don't come into it.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Tourer

On your first point re validity of the anti-dilution fee, my understanding is that it is part of the Concorde Agreement between FIA & FOM & the teams, so part of a legally-binding agreement and would have to be honoured. A number of the teams have said that they believe the currently contracted anti-dilution fee is too low, which is why the earnings achieved are so interesting.

I'm with you on the opportunity for Andretti to develop / test, unencumbered by the cost cap, up until the time they start competing (although I think that I saw somewhere that the cost cap would apply to new teams for the 12 month period before their first race). Where that might prove difficult is that I doubt they'd have access to the same tyres from Pirelli, the same control components that the existing teams use and I guess the crash testing process and scrutineering process that the FIA uses, so they'd probably have a few question marks that they couldn't resolve until "official".

Legal action could well prove expensive for all, but I guess also depends on what jurisdiction the Concorde Agreement is bound by - if it declares for example that UK law applies, then EU regulations probably don't come into it.

Agreed on the law issue if it's under UK law but the requirement to split FIA from the commercial side (FOM) came from the EU who could declare no races take place within its jurisdiction.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Tourer

On your first point re validity of the anti-dilution fee, my understanding is that it is part of the Concorde Agreement between FIA & FOM & the teams, so part of a legally-binding agreement and would have to be honoured. A number of the teams have said that they believe the currently contracted anti-dilution fee is too low, which is why the earnings achieved are so interesting.

The Athletic has run a piece about the dilution fee and prize money here - https://theathletic.com/5083642/2023...-dilution-fee/

From this article:

'a $200 million dilution fee, split 10 ways at $20 million per team, would make up for just two seasons of reduced FOM revenue for teams. The belief through the grid, therefore, is the fee should be at least tripled when the next Concorde Agreement is signed, for the 2026 season.'

It would also be interesting to know where the rumour of a push back to 2027-29 has come from. Because let's remember - the teams don’t technically have a say in the matter and FOM are in commercial discussions with Andretti currently.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

The Athletic has run a piece about the dilution fee and prize money here - https://theathletic.com/5083642/2023...-dilution-fee/

From this article:

'a $200 million dilution fee, split 10 ways at $20 million per team, would make up for just two seasons of reduced FOM revenue for teams. The belief through the grid, therefore, is the fee should be at least tripled when the next Concorde Agreement is signed, for the 2026 season.'

It would also be interesting to know where the rumour of a push back to 2027-29 has come from. Because let's remember - the teams don’t technically have a say in the matter and FOM are in commercial discussions with Andretti currently.

My own analysis of the antidilution fee indicates that in fact it would make up for at least 4 seasons losses for the other ten teams and quite frankly that is ridiculous in a competitive meritocracy.
As for a dilution of value there is no franchise value to compensate for.

[Guthrie]

It is a well-known name in the automotive industry and they're likely to add something good to the F1. I hope everything goes well for them and we'll see them compete in Formula One 2025 season.

[veeten]

They say 'A picture is worth a thousand words', then have a look at this one...
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/an...aled/10570623/

As well as the story behind it...

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by veeten

They say 'A picture is worth a thousand words', then have a look at this one...
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/an...aled/10570623/

As well as the story behind it...

It's certainly a step up on USF1's toaster.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by veeten

They say 'A picture is worth a thousand words', then have a look at this one...
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/an...aled/10570623/

As well as the story behind it...

Here are some links to high resolution photos...

https://cdn.theathletic.com/app/uplo...IMG_081122.jpg
https://cdn.theathletic.com/app/uplo...ure133-1-2.jpg

Per Craig Scarborough, this looks to be in the Toyota tunnel. I am glad they are continuing to push forward.

Semi related, I had recently tried to see if they had resolved the dispute with their design-build firm for the new HQ outside of Indianapolis. I couldn't find anything definitive including if the construction work has been halted or is still ongoing. Satellite images of the location in Fishers, IN show no construction, but those images could be years old.

Richard

[CarfanLUFC]

A disgraceful decision. F1 should be absolutely ashamed....

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Skam85

It's certainly a step up on USF1's toaster.

those were some really great cartoons tho!

[steve_r]

https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12...erical-grounds

Denied entry.

FFS. F1 is officially a closed shop.

[Tourer]

Full release / statement from FOM outlining reasons for not accepting Andretti's entry here.Can't say that I'm surprised but I felt it was a 50/50 thing - the way this reads it was far less likely to get up in FOM's view.

One thing that jumps out to me is that Andretti was invited to meet with FOM in December but chose not to do so - don't know why not but that seems extraordinary given the stakes being played for.

Clearly the majority of the concerns are around power unit, so door left open for re-application once GM has its own unit but there are also a number of references to Andretti being a "novice" manfucturer (which is accurate) and that in particular, the plan to build a 2025 car and then a 2026 car to new rules is indicative to FOM that Andretti doesn't understand the difficulty of doing so.

I guess that we can expect statements from both Andretti and GM in due course & part of me feels like ordering in the popcorn.