So you wanna cut costs?

avsfan733 · 19 Apr 2006, 12:51 (Ref:1588668)

http://f1.racing-live.com/f1/en/head...19102911.shtml

The link above is a story on the new and improved red bull paddock command center. I can't even imagine the costs involved in designing building shipping and assembling that thing (5 days to assemble) for each european round!

If we really want to cut costs i can think of a few easy ways to trim the ridiculous amount of fat. A couple of these came up in the future of F1 thread and I thought they might merit a little more discussion on their own

my ideas:
1) limit paddock stalls to 2 per team, you have two cars you only need two stalls especially given how deep the modern ones are.

2) limit amount of freigth teams are allowed to bring to fliy away races. Bernie needs to put his foot down on this one and say you don't need 80 tons of freight to run two cars.

3) limit the number of parking passes for semi trucks in the paddock. Pretty self explanatory does the same thing of reducing general accumulation of stuff.

4) reduce the number of chassis and blocks allowed to be constructed each year. all the chassis get an FIA homologation number. Just limit it to say four chassis and ones to replace any that get scrapped. I know the cost isn't in production but by doing this it would reduce the ability to test. Same thing goes for engines. once the season is done. You turn all your chassis and engines in (save maybe one or two for winter testing) and they get auctioned off by the FIA and you get the money back

Mr V · 19 Apr 2006, 14:56 (Ref:1588755)

If one team wants to go to these extremes, and is prepared to put up the money to do it, then why not.

I have to say, Red Bull has been a breath of fresh air with what they are doing off the track imo. The best "hospitality area", printing 3 magazines per weekend, via their own on-site printing presses.

Marbot · 19 Apr 2006, 15:48 (Ref:1588805)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr V

printing 3 magazines per weekend, via their own on-site printing presses.

Something for everyone to read then.

Mike Gascoyne-'Gardeners weekly'

Kimi Raikonnen,Giancarlo Fisichella-'Practical Mechanics'

Yuiji Ide-'What Car'

Knowlesy · 19 Apr 2006, 16:01 (Ref:1588810)

If F1 wants to tackle costs, then the last place to start is the paddock facilities!

Red Bull's "motorhome" has hardly sparked a massive spending spree by other teams desperate to better it.....because it isn't essential. Just a smattering of flamboyancy on Red Bulls part.

Marbot · 19 Apr 2006, 16:06 (Ref:1588814)

Agreed,F1 isn't so much about the cars or the regs or whatever,it's about what happens around the race as well.

JeremySmith · 19 Apr 2006, 20:37 (Ref:1589090)

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyn bott

Something for everyone to read then.

Mike Gascoyne-'Gardeners weekly'

Kimi Raikonnen,Giancarlo Fisichella-'Practical Mechanics'

Yuiji Ide-'What Car'

flor · 19 Apr 2006, 20:59 (Ref:1589113)

They also will use a "tree house" to get room for the engineers above the trucks.

**Bononi** · 19 Apr 2006, 21:16 (Ref:1589127)

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyn bott

Something for everyone to read then.

Mike Gascoyne-'Gardeners weekly'

Kimi Raikonnen,Giancarlo Fisichella-'Practical Mechanics'

Yuiji Ide-'What Car'

"Quick guide to drive a F1 car for dummies"

R59 · 19 Apr 2006, 21:37 (Ref:1589146)

The main issue in F1 is escalating costs fuelled by continuous development.
Flav's idea of banning testing as we know it, and then making friday's the official test - that's one cost cutting idea.

Max want's homologated engines, I think that's going too far. However, something needs to be done to peg the power gains, and improve engine efficiency. And that has to be fuel restriction, no mid-race refuelling.
To bring about engine development that is "useful", the fuel should be drawn at random by FIA nominated persons "sent out with jerry cans to the local supermarket". With an option of using bio-ethanol. And each year, the allowance of fuel for the race/qualifying should be reduced. Let's start with the old figure of 200L for a race.

The show in the paddock is one thing that needs to stay, but it needs to be more open to the race-goers. Though I'm sure that Mr Pasquali won't be too sure about letting the gates open...
If the teams want to waste their budget on the paddock "show", then that's money that they're not spending on developing their car. A team doing it low-key could do just as well in the pitlane.

Rob.

Dutton · 19 Apr 2006, 21:42 (Ref:1589154)

Remember, though, if you reduce the fuel level each year then that is going to cost a lot in development.

Suze · 19 Apr 2006, 23:11 (Ref:1589209)

Ah well, let them spend their pennies if they wish...doesn't mean I think it's necessary

**Adam43** · 20 Apr 2006, 07:24 (Ref:1589411)

The best thing about them spending in the paddock is that it doesn't (directly) effect on track performance. So no one is getting an advantage from having more cash.

I think it would be a bad thing if we lived in a world where people weren't allowed to spend money. I think the better alternative is for the rest of us to get over it.

Red Bull spend money on lots of things, it might as wll be in the F1 Paddock.

Marbot · 20 Apr 2006, 07:29 (Ref:1589414)

If you want them to spend less money,we need to stop buying that awful drink..........spread the word.

Skam85 · 20 Apr 2006, 08:18 (Ref:1589455)

Awful drink!? AWFUL DRINK!!!!

That stuff is liquid gold!

dasc04 · 20 Apr 2006, 08:35 (Ref:1589469)

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyn bott

If you want them to spend less money,we need to stop buying that awful drink..........spread the word.

Its lovely stuff. And it pays my wages so drink more I tell you!

Suze · 20 Apr 2006, 11:43 (Ref:1589630)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

The best thing about them spending in the paddock is that it doesn't (directly) effect on track performance. So no one is getting an advantage from having more cash.

Good point. There's still the argument I guess of "is the spending of the money necessary?" but as you put it, at least it doesn't directly effect the on track performance...

avsfan733 · 20 Apr 2006, 13:27 (Ref:1589717)

Quote:

Originally Posted by knowlesy

If F1 wants to tackle costs, then the last place to start is the paddock facilities!

Red Bull's "motorhome" has hardly sparked a massive spending spree by other teams desperate to better it.....because it isn't essential. Just a smattering of flamboyancy on Red Bulls part.

fair enough but its still representative of where F1 stands. Mclaren and Toyota bring similar things just less talked about and slightly smaller.

Suze i disagree. this idea of it not affecting on track performance is irelevant. if they don't spend it here its not like its going to really affect ontrack performance. if it was they wouldn't be spending it on taking their HQ around Europe with them. And if we cut all these costs and cut what they are llowed to take by a significant margin. It reduces their ability to spend money. We have seen by my off the cuff count at least 5 teams fold due to lack of funds while I have been a fan. I think that a larger portion of the expense than one would originally think is incorporated in shipping the tons of equipment around.

Suze · 20 Apr 2006, 13:52 (Ref:1589728)

Spending the money on on track and off track things is different in my opinion...was also referring to Adam's post further up...

avsfan733 · 20 Apr 2006, 14:40 (Ref:1589745)

I look at it as it all comes out of the same pocket eventually. Honestly I would like to see the teams spend all of it on devlopment and free up the rules but the choosen FIA path is another direction. Whatever they do they need to do with more force and emphasis then the halfa**ing they do now which I believe only makes the original problem worse.

flor · 20 Apr 2006, 14:47 (Ref:1589748)

I just noticed even Midland bought a new hospitality unit....

avsfan733 · 20 Apr 2006, 17:03 (Ref:1589919)

as did BMW
http://f1.racing-live.com/f1/en/head...20150203.shtml

I would like to just point out that these are all nicer than my house. And my house isn't able to be assembled in five days

**Adam43** · 20 Apr 2006, 17:36 (Ref:1589953)

That doesn't mean you don't have a nice house.

I think there great, if only because they are interesting. These companies can spend the money on what they want. And it can be argued that it keeps the others paying the bills happy so it isn't a waste of money as they generate more.

I'm still unsure of the problem. If they are sacrificing on track performance for it then there is a (F1) problem, but they aren't.

Knowlesy · 20 Apr 2006, 17:44 (Ref:1589964)

It is just, really, an extravagant toy at the end of the day.

And it is in no way related to the main problems with costs!

Suze · 20 Apr 2006, 19:15 (Ref:1590062)

Hehe I like looking at pics of the new toys...!

Knowlesy · 20 Apr 2006, 19:36 (Ref:1590084)

I love them....the McLaren Technology thingummabob and the Red Bull Energy Station are impressive in their design and mobility......quite staggering really, you could live in them and call them houses!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
I wanna do it - I think!	Off at Paddock	Marshals Forum	21	28 Jan 2005 22:38
VW: I wanna have an F1 team	Nicholas	Formula One	9	23 Aug 2001 10:08