If there are only 10 teams next year, will all of them get TV money?

[Yoong Montoya]

I know that when there is 11 teams, the 11th team loses out on prize money, but if there were 10 teams next year (not that I would like that ), would they all get TV money at the end of the season or would the last placed team in the WCC still lose out?:confused:

[f1manoz]

All teams should receive money.

[EERO]

Arrows are currently tied with Minardi and TOYOTA for 9th, each with 2 points. Chances are that's Minardi's final tally for the season, but TOYOTA have a shot at more points, especially Indy, Monza and Suzuka.

I don't know waht the final standing will be, but it looks possible that Arrows will end up last without trying. in which case, as last-placed team, are eligible for no travel money and its a mmot point. However, should final scoering in some way find minardi last placed for the year, Arrows' money would be divied up among the nine higher placed teams.



Except that precedant has been set this year to pay out some of Prost's money to Minardi-its a mess really.


Thank you Mr. Walkinshaw.

[EERO]

Oops, I just remebered that as a first year team, TOYOTA aren't eligible for money and won't see their earliest POSSIBLE payout until 2004 for the 2003 seaon. My guess is that FOM just decide to shaft Minardi for old-times sake.

[Rick]

I'm not sure but I think Minardi is ahead of Arrows and Toyota because it is a 5th place and not two 6ths and also because they got them first. Anybody got the rulebook?

[BootsOntheSide]

Rick's right, if teams are on equal points the tiebreaker is who has the highest best finish. Minardi's 5th does it, and I think Toyota are ahead of Arrows as their points came first.

Not sure about Toyota not being eligable for money, that's news to me.

[EERO]

Boots, that note was in the most recent issue of F1 Magazine. TOYOTA are not eligible until their second season, and any money would be paid out in the third.

[BootsOntheSide]

OK Eero, I'll take your word for that.

You learn something every day.

So is their moeny divided among the other 9 top 10 teams, given to the 11th team, kept in reserve for Toyota to get in 2004 if they're still here, or divided among all 10 other teams?

[Liz]

If there are only ten teams next year, will there be an avalanche of people crying that F1 is dead and buried and hastening to dance on its grave?

Or is it different somehow from Champ Cars?

[Russfeld]

Yes

Prost's insolvency could have been forecast 18 months ago. Arrows had financial problems of this magnitude back in 1999. And Minardi have allways been on the verge. In 1998 CART had up to 28 cars starting races. They're struggling with 18 at the moment.

Your dislike for F1 is well documented, so why troll in the F1 forum?

[Adam43]

Frankly it is somehow different to Champ Cars. F1 has much more chance of surviving with less teams. The world-wide coverage and exposure is many times greater than CART.

F1 also doesn't have a (direct) rival series to compete against. And one that is looking quite strong and pulling more TV viewers (mainly because of one race).

Hopefully the current lack of teams in both is a temporary situation in both categories. (Although F1 can only 'grow' to 12 teams anyway and at present only allows 2 car teams).

I think that (and hope that) CART will continue to be a great race series.

[Adam43]

Back to the topic...

The fact that Toyota don't get any telly money next year is very interesting. Not that they need it, especially as they were happy to pay the fine for missing a year!

I wonder how the manufacturers are considering splitting the revenue in the potential breakaway series?

[EERO]

To be fair to Liz, I don't think she dislikes Formula 1, I just think she doesn't like its present condition. I would add that my patience is being tried by the "Sport" as well.

I don't think we need to imply that she is a troll, especially as she has so much to offer to the forum as a long-time fan.

Boots, you raise andinteresting question and I have to admit I don't know. I would guess that were TOYOTA to finish last, the other ten teams would just divy up the money. But if TOYOTA were to beat either Arrows or Minardi, then the funds would be distributed among the other nine teams.

TOYOTA are not eligible for money for their performance this season. Nothing would be held in escrow even in the unklikely event that they had won the WCC this season. They get zip.

[Adam43]

Does anyone know the fine details of the Concorde agreement? Or does Bernie keep it a closely guarded secret.

You should be able to download a copy from www.samplelegaldocuments.com

[Liz]

What's the fewest cars/teams F1 has ever had on the grid in the past?

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Liz
What's the fewest cars/teams F1 has ever had on the grid in the past?

Isn't it 16, back in 1980 at Imola?

[Russfeld]

Imola 1982 I imagine

[Mr V]

My apologies, i thought that it was 1980.

[Maxmil]

Originally posted by AdamAshmore
Does anyone know the fine details of the Concorde agreement? Or does Bernie keep it a closely guarded secret.
You should be able to download a copy from www.samplelegaldocuments.com

Sorry AdamA but that site doesn't work for me. Is it for real or are you joking as I suspect? Seriously, it is a strange situation when a sport with fans distributed worldwide and numbered in the billions is controlled by a document which is a closely guarded secret. "There ought to be a law" as some are fond of saying.

[Valve Bounce]

When there were 12 teams, the twelfth team did not get the travel money. Since F1 is limited to 12 teams, is the ruling that the 12th team does not get paid? or does it say the last placed team? It is a good time to change the rule, in the light of current developments, to pay all teams.

Valve

[Mekola]

Originally posted by Liz
What's the fewest cars/teams F1 has ever had on the grid in the past?

It was in the 1958 Argentinian GP, with 10 cars of 7 teams (1 official -Ferrari- and 6 privateers -2 "ScuderÃ*a Sud Americana" Maseratis (the official team was on bankruptcy), other four privateer entered Maseratis and RRC Walker Cooper-Climax-).

[freud]

Originally posted by AdamAshmore
Does anyone know the fine details of the Concorde agreement? Or does Bernie keep it a closely guarded secret.

You should be able to download a copy from www.samplelegaldocuments.com

Hmm, very interesting. I would love to get my hands on a copy of the concorde agreement and read what goes on behind closed doors.

Concorde Agreement is basically the agreement between FISA and FOCA over control of F1 . Among other things, it says that except in the case of emergencies, changes to technical regulations must be announced two years in advance of the date of adoption, unless all constructors agree unanimously to adopt the regulations earlier. This came up in 1994 because Max Mosley wanted to introduce several major technical changes in the wake of Senna/Ratzenberger incidents. He made these changes without the unanimous agreement called for by the Concorde Agreement, by claiming that this was an emergency situation.

So Max Mosley, as FIA president, is responsible for setting rules and policy for F1, but he's limited by the Concorde Agreement in how quickly and how far he can push things his way. Since Bernie Ecclestone still controls the purse strings for Grand Prix racing (controlling FOCA), he still carries a lot of clout.