Helmut Marko Charms - My way or the highway !

The head of the Red Bull programme is Helmut Marko, who Vergne said has a justifiable image as a very tough and no-nonsense, old school character.

“When I started in Formula 3, he called me and said: Ricciardo has shown you how to do it. If you don’t win the championship, you can leave.”

Vergne also recalls another phone call with Marko, “I was starting on pole and eventually I won that race, but Marko thought it was unacceptable that I had not also taken the fastest lap. That’s just how he is.”

Sebastian Vettel said recently that Marko is “tough” but also “straightforward”, while Daniil Kvyat said the Austrian’s contribution to many drivers’ careers is obvious.

“I was maybe three or four seconds off in my first wet test in Formula BMW and he called me at 7am and said: So you’re quite useless in the wet. Then he just hung up,” the Russian recalled.

Penske’s purchase of Indianapolis Motor Speedway - More details are emerging.

Roger Penske’s purchase of Indianapolis Motor Speedway, the IndyCar Series and IMS Productions was a big shock in the IndyCar world but more details are emerging that may help to explain what happened.

The current owners - the George Family - seems to have decided to divest itself its original assets following the death a year ago of family matriarch Mari Hulman George. They sold the family’s $80 million baking powder business, known as Clabber Girl, back in May and the word from US is that they commissioned the secretive investment bank Allen & Company to find buyers for their racing properties. The bank is reported to have approached Liberty Media and the related but independent Liberty Global, which is the biggest shareholder in Formula E. Both organisations are controlled by John Malone but operate independently of one another.

Sources suggest that Tony George was uneasy about selling to either entity because he feared that they would not respect the heritage of the sport and so he approached Roger Penske at the final round of the IndyCar Series at Laguna Seca in September.

Selling to Liberty Media made a great deal of sense for them because it offered the potential for the company to rapidly build up F1 in the United States by being able to extract existing races from the IndyCar schedule and switch them to F1, without having to go through the complex processes of setting up new races.

A deal could, for example, have given Liberty Media immediate access to the Indianapolis Grand Prix (on the infield road course used by F1 between 2000 and 2007. It could also have meant a deal with Long Beach to run F1 around the streets there, with other potential switches in places such as Detroit and Toronto. The key question, of course, is whether this was a cost-effective solution with the right destinations, or whether Liberty would prefer to build its own events. The danger for IndyCar would be that stripping out such events would weaken the series, which struggles to make money and so getting Roger Penske involved was a logical step as he has a great deal to lose if IndyCar is weakened.

Liberty Media is not saying anything about what happened but the sale can perhaps be seen as a defensive action from Penske, which he is now in the process of turning into an opportunity.

Both Hulman & Company and the Penske Corporation are privately-held and so there has been no public discussion about the sale price, although some reports in the US have suggested that Penske could have paid as much as $400 million.

Other stories suggest that Penske is not going to have risked such large sums and that there may be others involved with him in the purchase (including George himself). There have been suggestions that John Menard, the billionaire owner of a chain of home improvement stores, and a Penske sponsor in IndyCar, may also be involved in the deal.

Source: Joe Saward's Business of Motorsport Newsletter

Clever request from Red Bull Racing !

The Formula 1 cars of today are incredibly complex pieces of equipment. They are hard to understand - and even harder to police. However, the teams watch one another like hawks and when a team gains a dramatic advantage, this will show up on the GPS data and the rival teams will then try to analyse what is going on.

On Saturday morning in Austin, the FIA issued a technical directive - the 35th of the year - giving details of a system that Red Bull Racing had proposed that might have allowed the team to race more than the permitted fuel flow. This was rejected by the FIA as being clearly illegal.

Red Bull will have known this in advance and so it is clear that the purpose the request was to get a ruling from the FIA not for a system that Red Bull wanted to use, but rather one that the team believed a rival was using. This is an elegant way to stop dubious systems being run, without the need for any public fighting, which is on no real value to the sport.

The Red Bull request related to a system by which the team was able to use more fuel than is allowed under the fuel flow regulations, but working around (or disrupting) the ultrasonic pulses sent by the fuel flow metering units, which measure fuel consumption over the course of a race and peak consumption. However, the measurement is not constant, but rather done by intermittent sampling. In theory, therefore, teams can use more fuel between each sampling, or can use aliasing techniques which mean that signals can become indistinguishable. There is no doubt that this is illegal and Red Bull will have known that in advance, but it does provide a way for the team to get an FIA ruling that will stop such activity. Using more fuel than the allowed fuel flow could create a situation in which a team could be able to burn more fuel at critical points during a race weekend, giving an engine extra power when accelerating at low speeds, which would then allow the car to carry more speed as the car accelerates and consequently produce a higher top speed.

The use of aliasing is a very complex subject, which is why reports have been confused, but raising fuel flow between the ultrasonic pulses might (theoretically) be possible, or aliasing could cause an effect similar to the optical illusion seen with film when frames captured by a camera are not sufficiently fast to capture a wheel’s true rotation, which then gives the impression that the wheel is turning backwards , or more slowly than it actually is.

Red Bull was clearly of the opinion that one of its rivals might have been using such a system.

It was thus quite a coincidence that Ferrari’s performance dived in the race in Austin, immediately after the directive came out.

Ferrari team principal Mattia Binotto clearly understood what people were thinking and spoke out about suggestions that the directive had had an impact on the performance of the cars.

“I heard comments at the end of the race, which I find very disappointing,” he said. “It’s not good for the sport and I think everybody should be a bit more cautious.”

Binotto said that the Ferraris had been competitive in the qualifying session, but had failed for different reasons in the race, resulting in Charles Leclerc finishing 50s behind winner Valtteri Bottas in the race.

The F1 circus will be watching to see what happens in Brazil at the end of next week.

Source : JSBL

LAW EXPERT: 50/50 CHANCE OF DUTCH GRAND PRIX BEING CANCELLED

Reuters
25 September, 2019




Seven months before the Netherlands is due to hold its first Formula 1 Grand Prix since 1985, the organisers have yet to obtain the permits they need to expand the Zandvoort circuit and environmentalists plan to block the race in court.

Bolstered by a recent court order over nitrogen emissions that has stalled thousands of building projects around the country, environmental group Mobilisation For The Environment said it would challenge the event’s holders over the same issue if necessary.

The country’s highest court in May banned the practice of granting permits for building near nature reserves based on promises to mitigate nitrogen emissions in future years.

That has halted projects worth billions of euros from highways to housing blocks and airports.

The picturesque but outdated Zandvoort circuit is hemmed in on one side by a large nature reserve and on the other by the coastline.

“I see a 50/50 chance of this event being cancelled”, environmental law expert Sander Lely told Reuters on Tuesday.

“It will be incredibly difficult for the organisers to obtain all the necessary permits on time. They will have to prove how they will limit nitrogen emissions, instead of simply promising to emit less during the rest of the year,” Lely added.

The race organisers did not respond to a request for comment on Tuesday, but have previously said they are confident the event will go ahead as planned.

First, they need to obtain permits to expand the track, build new access roads and construct extra stands to accommodate the expected 200,000 spectators, the province of North-Holland told Reuters.

“This means building cannot yet start”, confirmed provincial government spokeswoman Martine van der Heuvel. “There is a permit for the race itself, but we have not yet received an application for the work on the tracks and in its surroundings.”

She said the province was in talks with the organisers but would not comment on the timing of the process.

The Zandvoort Grand Prix is scheduled to be held on May 3 2020, with Formula 1 hoping to make the most of the popularity of Dutch racer Max Verstappen in the Netherlands.

Earlier this week, the country’s minister for sport Bruno Bruins said the government would do all it could to enable the race to take place.

“It would be fantastic if we could hear ‘Vroooom!’ on 3 May,” he said.

BERGER: LECLERC ABSOLUTE KILLER INSTINCT ELUDES VETTEL

Charles Leclerc has the sort of “killer instinct” that Sebastian Vettel has lost according to Gerhard Berger, as the world of Formula 1 reports that the number one status at Ferrari has been passed to Leclerc after his back-to-back wins at Spa and Monza.

In Monza qualifying, 21-year-old Leclerc had refused to obey a team instruction to give Vettel a slipstream.

“I say it very clearly: there is no team play at this level in Formula 1,” Berger, who was Vettel’s first-team boss in F1, told Kolner Express.

“I don’t know if he fooled Vettel, but it’s been clear for a long time that Leclerc has an absolute killer instinct. Vettel can never rely on him.”

Asked if Vettel is, therefore “naive” to have expected Leclerc to dutifully support him in 2019, Berger answered: “Let’s not call it naive. But perhaps he is too much in the direction of good faith. And good faith has little place in top-level sport.”

One theory is that Vettel lost his own “killer instinct” after winning four world championships, securing huge annual retainers, and becoming a father.

“It’s quite simple,” Berger said. “If you lose your instincts, then you no longer have the claim to become world champion. Then you have to get them back again.”

Another factor could be Leclerc’s political power, with his manager being Nicolas Todt – the son of FIA president Jean Todt.

“I don’t think that matters,” Berger said. “If Vettel spins or Leclerc does not stick to the agreement on slipstreaming, neither the FIA president or a manager can take care of that.”

What Berger does agree about is that the FIA stewards were reluctant to penalise Leclerc for his borderline driving against Lewis Hamilton at Monza.

“The goodwill issue for Ferrari at Monza cannot be overlooked. I agree,” he said. “Some gentlemen probably closed their eyes.”

Source : GMM

11 September, 2019 

ALEX ALBON IS THE REAL DEAL

Paul Velasco
2 September, 2019

Phew! What a weekend that was for Formula 1… Charles Leclerc won his first Grand Prix when he triumphed on Sunday at the ruthless Spa-Francorchamps after it stole Anthoine Hubert from us a day earlier and forced the race to be run under the shadow of death.

It was as harsh as it sounds. The morning after one of the most viciously horrific accidents I have ever seen, nothing felt real as fans, media, teams, drivers… everyone numbly went on doing what they do on Grand Prix day’s, but did something not feel amiss to all?

Putting aside the horror of a day earlier, it’s worth reflecting on an enthralling Grand Prix, with a fantastic result in the form of a new 21-year-old winner and (I predict) the arrival of a new real deal on the biggest stage of all.

Leclerc’s victory was just the tonic Ferrari needed, but also what Formula 1 needed. A new winner is always a boost while the Reds finally not shooting themselves in the feet and taking a victory for the first time this season was a welcome relief. The Reds need to be winning regularly all the time.

Apart from Lewis Hamilton’s late-race charge which was rivetting stuff, for me the highlight of the race was Alex Albon on his debut for Red Bull which indicated to me we may have the real deal in a race-winning car.

Onboard with Alex, during the race courtesy of my F1TV subscription, was a total revelation, particularly once he got going in the second half of the race.

Before we go there, it is worth pointing out that the apparent anonymity of the quiet-spoken Thai driver, before he burst on to the scene with an out of the blue Toro Rosso call up for this season, is misleading.

In 2005, eight-year-old Alex started karting and by 2011 was such an accomplished karter that he finished second in KF1 in the WSK Euro Series and second again at the CIK-FIA World Championship.

In karting circles at the time, Albon was the driver to beat at every race he turned up to. He was up against full-time factory drivers, career karters with huge experience and, more often than not, the youngster beat them. He became the benchmark for other drivers to target on race weekends.

In the junior series he never won but improved with each season until he finished the 2018 F2 season third, but did enough in a latter half surge of form that convinced Helmut Marko to hand him the keys to a Toro Rosso.

Fast-forward to Sunday. He knew he had the pace, did not get too excited early on, kept out of trouble and in the second half began his charge.

Granted Max won his first race when he stepped up to Red Bull, but Alex’s circumstances were vastly different and cannot be compared. Furthermore, he was not helped by the fact that engine penalties meant he started his first race in blue from 17th.

That failed to deter him, he avoided the melee that eliminated his teammate at La Source, then bided his time in the early stages as the DRS set the pecking order. Although down the order for a number of laps, he remained remarkably calm, incredibly cool with absolutely no panic evident in the cockpit view. Also, no indecisiveness or hastiness.

His real charge began shortly after the halfway mark as he picked off one rival after another, watching this at the time live, it was evident that the karting tricks were out in force as he stalked, feinted one way then the other before pouncing and finding a way through.

He ruthlessly cut up the king of the overtakers – Dan the Man – with a move that began on the exit of Les Coombes and ended as they roared towards Pouhon. At one point the Renault man had no clue where the Red Bull was.

Irrespective of tyres and strategy that was a neat move not only in execution but, crucially and impressively, with minimum fuss and no marked loss of speed or momentum. Very cool stuff in my book.

Then the show of ultra-big balls when he simply refused to go the long way around wily old Sergio Perez who tried to squeeze him onto the grass up the Kemmel dragstrip. Alex was having none of it, with DRS wide open and not to be wasted he just muscled his way past the pink car. Again: Wow!

The kid delivered in the car he only drove for the first time 48-hours earlier, showed a fighting spirit, race-craft and maturity that his predecessor sorely missed and probably does not have, while Alex appears to be part of a very select few who do at the very highest level.

It is very early days, but the signs are very positive and I don’t think I am going out on a limb, but in case I am alone in my observations, I am putting it out there:

“Alex is the real deal and he is going to wow us many more times in the future.”

He might be understated in comparison to some of the big caricatures in the F1 cartoon, but he gave a glimpse of something special during those 44 laps at Spa. Maybe more Prost than Senna, and we know how potent the Professor was in his heyday.

Evidence suggests that Red Bull have found their next warrior.

With Max guaranteed to deliver fireworks, the Blues are well served with a fireman rather than another fire-starter. The Doctor may have hit another home run with Alex.

Time will tell…

On a related note, Lando Norris was voted Driver of the Day and he deserved it merely for consolation from the heartache of a well-deserved fifth place going up in smoke with the finish in sight.

After he impressively missed the mayhem that ensued in front of him into La Source, he also did well to extract himself from the clutches of the mid-pack and proceeded to have a lonely race whereby fifth place became his to lose. Renault obliged.

No doubt the young Englishman – a true find by McLaren – has the real deal stuff in him too and he again delivered a performance that belies his youth but Alex got vote on the day, after all he did bag the points while Lando didn’t.

I also felt the Red Bull driver had to work harder on Sunday afternoon, not only when he was attacking but also when he was keeping his powder dry. Like I say, I only saw good things in Alex’s drive on the day.

MANSELL: TODAY’S DRIVERS WILL NEVER KNOW WHAT A PROPER F1 CAR FEELS LIKE

24 July, 2019



Today’s generation of race drivers “will never know” what racing a “proper Formula 1 car” is like according to 1992 world champion Nigel Mansell, who says the sport’s best era was actually before his title with the super-powerful turbo engines of the eighties.

“Formula 1 will never get back to that,” Mansell, now 65, told the FIA’s Auto magazine. “Driving those turbo cars was the most exhilarating, frightening thing that you could do in your life.

“The Williams FW11B… Nothing comes close to that car, nothing in the world. And Formula One will never get back to that. Really, today’s drivers will never know what a proper F1 car feels like.
In qualifying you literally had up to 1,500 horsepower – it’s reputed that BMW had more. And to have wheelspin in sixth gear down the straight, at 175 or 180mph…

“You cannot put that into words as a driver. At every single corner you came to, the car was literally trying to kill you,” recalled Mansell.

The Briton had his fair share of big-ones in a very dangerous era of the sport and he describes himself in his mid-sixties as “sort of in one piece if you discount a broken neck, three broken backs, a broken arm, smashed toes, 148 stitches for another back injury and all the rest of it.

“Things were moving in the right direction in the 1980s and 1990s in terms of safety but the technology wasn’t really there to make it better. It was still pretty grim,” he added before listing, without a pause, the deaths of Gilles Villeneuve, Riccardo Paletti and Elio De Angelis, then the career-ending accidents of Didier Pironi and Jacques Lafitte, all during Mansell’s heyday in the top flight.

WILLIAMS: RUSSELL IS WORLD CHAMP MATERIAL AND BIG PART OF OUR FUTURE

Williams is gearing up to take “three steps forward” after an abysmal first half of the 2019 season according to their rookie driver George Russell, who says the fact he is driving clearly the slowest car during his rookie season is not spoiling the fun for him.

“How can you not be happy when you get to drive a Formula 1 car every two weeks?” the reigning Formula 2 champion told Auto Hebdo. “I am paid to do the job I dreamed of as a child. I know we are going through a difficult time but there is light at the end of the tunnel. My time will come.”

Indeed, the 21-year-old is strongly backed by Mercedes, but for now he insists he is firmly behind Williams’ push to rediscover better days, “I am aware of the history of the team and it is a privilege to defend its colours.

“Everyone knows what our performance is at the moment, but it’s a long term project. We could have done several things in the short term to obtain immediate gains but the team has an overall vision that goes much further.”

Russell says Williams is now moving into the period where performance should finally be improved, “We are proceeding in stages for the moment.

“The team had a very difficult season last year and wanted to make a lot of changes to the organisation. It’s as though they had to take two steps backwards before taking three steps forward.

“The foundations are now in place to bring performance to the car and I am convinced that we can do it. At Silverstone, we had the first pieces of a major aerodynamic evolution that should ideally be introduced from now until Hungary.

“The numbers we have for what is coming suggests a significant advance in that we hope to be able to fight with other cars on the track. Whether it will be three tenths, six tenths, a full second, we are not 100 per cent sure,” revealed Russell ahead of the German Grand Prix weekend.

2021: THE SHAPE OF FORMULA 1’S FUTURE

F1 Media - 18 July, 2019




Following the June decision to further refine the 2021 FIA Formula One World Championship regulations ahead of a new presentation date at the end of October when the World Motor Sport Council will vote, the FIA and Formula 1 have this week revealed the most detailed vision yet of how the sport will change in 2021 and how the sport will achieve closer racing, a more competitive grid and a sustainable future for the pinnacle of motorsport.


The Aerodynamics of closer racing


For some time drivers have faced difficulties in following or attacking a rival car, an issue that stems from the aerodynamic characteristics of current Formula 1 cars. In recent years, team aerodynamicists have become adept at channelling airflow outboard of the car, thus creating a large, disruptive wake of ‘dirty’ air behind the car.


This wake has the effect of reducing downforce on a following car making it hard to stay close to the car in front. The reduced downforce also has the effect of making the car move around more. This leads to overheating tyres, a condition that also forces a following driver to back off.


The aerodynamic regulations for 2021 are designed to address this by generating downforce in different way to current cars.


In place of the complex front wings and bargeboards, Formula One will pursue a ‘ground effect’ solution that will see downforce generated underneath the car, as FIA Head of Single-Seater Technical Matters, Nikolas Tombazis, explains.


“There’s a diffuser going right under the car, with a Venturi-type channel running through it. The tunnels go right from the front to the back,” he says. “[With the 2021 car] typically, we will go from about a 50% loss of downforce for the following car at two car distances [in 2017] to about a 5-10% loss. So we have a massive reduction of the loss of downforce for the following car.”


The Venturi tunnels will feed air back to a much higher diffuser than on current cars, and allied to other conditioning elements, such as the front wheel arch, the wake generated by a leading car will be narrower and higher, allowing following cars to stay closer for longer in ‘cleaner’ air.


“The two strong vortices we are creating take a lot of the wheel wake up and over the car behind. As a result what the car behind sees is much cleaner flow,” says Tombazis.


One element still under discussion is the final specification of the front wing. “There is further work going on with the front wing,” says Tombazis. “We are still not completely happy with it, both from an aero point of view and from an aesthetic point of view, so we are trying to make it better in both aspects. There are good reasons why the current wing is very wide aerodynamically, but it is not the best aesthetic result, so there is work going on there.”





Getting a grip on tyres


The tyres on offer to teams from 2021 onwards will also be subject to the same sweeping changes. Chief among the alterations is the already announced move from 13-inch to18-inch rubber.


“We are into a deep consultation with Pirelli about how to be in a position where [the tyres] enable people to race and don’t degrade or force people to manage so much,” explains Tombazis. “They will need a broader working range and will not be as sensitive as the current tyres. We have understood jointly quite a lot of things that will make a significant difference in that respect.”


Pat Symonds, Chief Technical Officer at Formula 1 adds that altering the characteristics of the tyres will be a key component in creating closer racing, although he says that requesting Pirelli to produce a super-hard, “Le Mans-type tyre that will go on and on and on” is not part of the plan.


“The high degradation target is not the way to go,” he said, “however, we do believe that pit stops are important in F1 and we know our fans enjoy these two-second stops. Some of the teams are going to help us with this task through simulation.”


Another benefit of the move to 18-inch wheels is that understanding the deformation of the current tyres under load has been the subject of substantial and costly research and development by teams and that moving to lower profile 18-inch tyres that deform less that avenue of research for teams will be significantly narrowed.


Additionally, it is proposed that tyres blankets be outlawed for 2021 and beyond.


Reducing the performance gap


At last weekend’s British Grand Prix, Valtteri Bottas’ pole time in qualifying was over three seconds faster than Robert Kubica’s P20 time – and Formula 1 Managing Director of Motorsport Ross Brawn is candid that the performance gap between teams is too great. A key objective is to tighten the field up in 2021 by a nominal factor of around half.


“We have three teams that can win races at the moment, that’s all,” says Brawn. “Over the next couple of years, Formula 1 will be on a much better path… where a really good, moderately-funded team, can cause a lot of trouble. That’s what we want. If you get a Charles Leclerc or a Max Verstappen in a midfield team, it can make a difference.”


To close up the grid, in tandem with the spending restriction being put in place for 2021, the FIA and Formula 1 propose to simplify a range of car systems and parts in order to reduce cost and allow smaller teams to target resource more effectively.


Among these items are a simplified fuel system, less complex and longer lasting radiators, standardised wheel rims, a standardised brake system, a ban on hydraulic suspension systems, a restriction on the use of certain exotic materials, standardised pit equipment for all teams, and a freeze of gearbox specification for five years.


“All of these are technical and sporting regulations which, on top of the financial regulations, will in themselves create a significant cost reduction,” says Tombazis.


Additionally, cost controls are set to be put in place to limit the size of teams, with the goal again to stop the big teams dominating the smaller ones via superior resources.


“The great teams will still be the great teams,” says Brawn. “But in all the marginal gains that they do where they have 10 people on a project instead of two, which brings 5% more performance – they won’t do that anymore. They can’t, or if they do, they’ll be losing out in other areas where perhaps they could perhaps be making better gains.”


Stress-testing the regulations


A radical change in regulations invariably brings with it opportunities teams seek to take advantage of, but for 2021 Formula 1 and the FIA are seeking to ‘stress-test’ the regulations with the technical team at Formula 1 looking at how rules could be exploited.


“There is work going on to ‘break the rules’,” says Tombazis. “Our colleagues at F1 have put a different hat on and rather than being a rule maker they are actually acting like an aerodynamicist in a team to see how much they can stretch the rules. It’s an opportunity to really try to push [the regulations] to the extreme to see if certain [exploitable] areas may emerge from the rules, either as loopholes or unintended consequences. Clearly, if we have the opportunity to do this ourselves it means we may avoid certain rules that might otherwise create problems later on.”


Brawn added: “The group that we have at FOM is not going to stop work at the end when the rules are issued. That group is going to carry on working, so as we see the team’s solutions evolve, we’ll analyse those solutions and understand if they are starting to negate the objectives so we can steer it back again. We are going to monitor and develop and tune the solutions constantly to make sure that we maintain these objectives.”


The next steps


The progress towards the biggest change in Formula One regulations for many decades has been significant, and over the next two months more meetings involving all stakeholders will take place to further fine-tune the regulations before the October deadline.


At the head of that agenda is the discussion around placing more responsibility for race management in the hands of drivers, via a possible reduction in car electronics, the limiting of driver aids and restrictions around car-to-pit telemetry.


Talks are ongoing, too, on further standardisation of components that add little to the show and simplification of the lower part of the chassis.


Drivers will also play their part, and after a first meeting to hear the thoughts of the men behind the wheel, Brawn said more consultation will take place.


“The first meeting that we had was very good and the drivers stood as a group,” he says. “Drivers come under pressure from their own teams to take a position and that means that they’re just another voice in the same direction. [But] when the drivers stand and give us their own views, as a drivers’ group, the GPDA [Grand Prix Drivers’ Association], that’s really helpful and constructive.”


The outcome, in October, will change the course of the FIA Formula One World Championship and for Brawn that is an exciting prospect.


“Our objective is to make F1 more entertaining, more accessible, more sustainable – from a commercial perspective not just an environmental one,” he concludes. “There’s a lot going on, and it won’t stop. It will continue, and this is the new philosophy of where we will take Formula One.”

SILVERSTONE PAYING FAR LESS THAN MOST TO HOST FORMULA 1

Silverstone has played down reports about the new British Grand Prix race fee, with no one providing light on the amount of money that will change hands between the owners of the iconic venue and Formula 1’s new chiefs.

Earlier this week, F1 announced that Silverstone will remain on the calendar for the next five years at least.

The circuit-owning British Racing Drivers’ Club had terminated the previous contract for financial reasons. British newspapers claimed the new fee is $25 million per year.

Substantially less than the likes of Bahrain and Abu Dhabi are paying to host their races, although hard to confirm its believed both deals combined are well north of $100-million for the luxury of hosting F1 in the Middle East twice annually.

With regards to Silverstone, F1 business journalist Christian Sylt told Forbes that $25-million would be 3.6 per cent lower than the previous contract, but he also claimed: “A well-placed source said yesterday that Silverstone actually settled on $17 million, not $25 million as has been reported.”

Either way, Silverstone appears to be paying less than the previous contract, which could interest promoters not only in the Middle East as mentioned above but also in Germany, Italy, Mexico and Spain who are also in talks with Liberty Media.

Liberty would not comment on the $25-million fee. But a spokesman for the British circuit said: “I don’t know where this figure came from.”

“The only time a figure was mentioned in the press conference it was $125m but that referred to the amount of investment that will go into the Silverstone site over the next five years and was nothing to do with the contract,” the venue spokesman added.

Ameinfo reported in March last year that: “In order to host an F1 event, an organizer must pay a flat fee of $30.4 million, and over the life of the contract, they include a flat fee escalator which is a fixed percentage of up to 5% per year.

“This has brought Bahrain’s estimated fee at just under $53 million, according to Forbes. Abu Dhabi’s fee is estimated at $84 million, as per CNN, amounting to $1.2 billion in fees from both countries over the course of 14 years.”

Shortly after being deposed from his F1 supremo thrown, Bernie Ecclestone actually admitted in Bahrain two years ago: “When I convinced these people to build this place [Bahrain International Circuit] and all the other places, I feel a little bit responsible.”

“I charged them too much for what we provided so I feel a bit responsible. So when they ask me things I try and help them. We’ve delivered… Nothing to do with Liberty, and it went on my watch, we didn’t deliver the show that we charged them for.”

Good news for COTA

As expected, the United States Grand Prix at the Circuit of The Americas in Austin has been saved thanks to state government action in Texas.

The race was put into doubt last winter when the promoter failed to file all the necessary paperwork to qualify for the reimbursement of tax revenues that has been used to fund the race in recent years. This cost a whopping $25 million, which meant that the race was struggling to pay the required fees.

The problem became public after a leak in the local Austin newspaper and the Governor’s Office said that, because procedures had not been properly followed, the payment could not be made. The only solution was to pass a bill that would make it possible to reapply for the reimbursement. This was put forward by a Republican Representative called John Frullo and passed through the House of Representatives and will now go through the Texas Senate before the session ends on May 27. It was fortunate that the state government was in session because that happens only once every two years.

Frullo said that he backed the bill because it made no sense to lose the Grand Prix as the result of a technicality. The race will go ahead on November 3 in Austin.

Source:JSBL

Formula E: The $900 Million Racing Series That Has Lost $167 Million In 5 Years

Formula E remains loss-making with its annual results for 2018 showing a loss of $29 million. This is the fifth consecutive loss for the electric racing championship, bringing its losses from 2014-2018 to just short of $167 million.

However, the series has been generating more and more revenues with the 2018 total being $149 million.

This is a big leap forward compared to 2017’s $103 million and is largely the result of the new 10-year deal with Saudi Arabia, which is believed to be worth more than $25 million per year.

The results are promising if one considers Formula E as being similar to a technology start-up, with the primary goal being to add value to the business, even if it is making losses as it grows. It remains to be seen whether it can maintain the revenue growth and keep the manufacturers involved. Traditionally, racing championships tend to suffer from boom-bust cycles with manufacturers arriving, fighting and then departing if they cannot win. This also tends to push up budgets which generally results in smaller operations being driven out of the competition by the big spenders.

The series has achieved a great deal in terms of new ideas and getting racing into urban areas, but it is significant that F1 is now looking at going down a similar path and is seeking to promote its environmental credentials in order to get to better urban venues.

The car industry has jumped on the electric bandwagon, in part as a reaction to the damaging Volkswagen scandal, but it is still not clear whether electric cars are the way to go in the short- to mid- term, as hybrid technology (as used and pushed forward by Formula 1) is seen by many as being a better choice because of the slow development of batteries and the investment required in putting in electric infrastructure, while hybrid cars use the existing facilities. There are also questions about the CO2 output of electric cars , as the manufacturing of batteries must also be taken into account.

While Formula E does produce some good racing, the cars are heavy and not very quick, although the big positive this year is that the mid-race car-switch has finally disappeared.

When all is said and done, however, Formula E is largely owned by John Malone’s Liberty Global and Discovery Channel, sister companies of Liberty Media, the owner of Formula 1.

So Malone has both bases covered for the future...

Source: JSBM 18-19

2018 McLaren’s financial results

McLaren’s financial results have made for interesting reading of late, with the company announcing that it had revenues of $1,643 million in 2018, up from $1.132 million in 2017, an increase of 45 percent, thanks to road car sales that leapt from 3,340 in 2017 to 4,829 last year. There was particularly impressive growth in China, which was up 141 percent, with the Asia Pacific region up 57 percent, Europe up 43 percent and North America up 42 percent.

However, when the various divisions are considered separately, there was a rather shocking story with McLaren Racing recording a drop in revenues of around $172 million, compared to the previous year’s $272 million, a drop of $100 million, or around 37 percent. This was caused by the loss of prize money, sponsors and specifically financial support from Honda. There were increased costs as well with the need to buy Renault engines. This meant that despite the sale of “heritage cars” (worth $13 million), the team ended up with a loss of $125 million.

In the overall scheme of things, the company continued to invest in new model development and now employs 3,800 people.

The word in F1 circles is that the team owners (primarily Bahrain’s Mumtalakat investment company, which owns 57 percent of the shares) wants to stop the losses and produce better results in 2019.

Source: JSBM 18-19

F1 ESPORTS CHAMP LEIGH TO MAKE FORMULA FORD DEBUT

Source: Reuters





Formula 1’s eSports double world champion Brendon Leigh will make his real race debut this weekend in a Formula Ford 1600 race at Snetterton in the UK.

The 19-year-old former kitchen porter, who had yet to pass his driving test when he won the esports title for the Mercedes team last year but has done so now, became the sport’s inaugural virtual champion in 2017.

FF1600website.com said Leigh, who will race on Saturday and Sunday, had already done three days of testing to prepare for his debut with the Kevin Mills Racing team.

“He was fast straight away,” it quoted team boss Kevin Mills as saying. “He wasn’t too different to my other two drivers really. His laptimes were fairly similar. He’ll go well.”

Despite his high profile in sim racing, Mills didn’t realise he was dealing with an Esports champion when giving him his first test.

“He just asked to come and do a test two months ago. I didn’t even know who he was – my son knew who he was, I didn’t know!” Mills said.

“He tested and he went quite well. I thought it would just be a one-off but then he came back and did two more days and he was very good again.”

Leigh shed more than 20kg last year as he transformed from a chubby teen to a lean, professional gamer, working out at the Mercedes team factory with a Formula 1 trainer.

The website adds that Leigh is the second driver in as many years to switch from online racing to FF1600. Virtual racer Sebastian Job won a drive with B-M Racing last season through the JMR Scholarship.

BAHRAIN FORMULA 2: CANADIAN LATIFI DOMINATES

F2 Media
30 March, 201



DAMS driver Nicolas Latifi dominated an entertaining feature Formula 2 race in Bahrain, while series debutant Mick Schumacher impressed to turn 10th on the grid to eighth in the race with Prema, and earning the pole position start for tomorrow’s feature race due to the reverse grid rules.

Latifi claimed the first win of the 2019 FIA Formula 2 Championship season with a storming drive in this afternoon’s Race 1 at the Bahrain International Circuit in Sakhir, making a strong start and overcoming a slow pitstop for victory ahead of Luca Ghiotto and DAMS teammate Sergio Sette Câmara.

The groundwork for the Canadian’s victory was laid at the start: polesitter Ghiotto had a poor start, fellow front row starter Louis Delétraz had a better one, while storming starts by Nyck de Vries and Latifi saw the Dutchman move up to P2 at turn 1 but the Canadian blast past him at turn 4, with the top 3 already pulling away from Jack Aitken, Nobuharu Matsushita, Ghiotto, Anthoine Hubert and Nikita Mazepin, while a poor start for Sette Câmara saw the Brazilian drop from p7 on the grid to P13 at the end of the first lap.

Sette Câmara was soon moving back up through the order, recovering to P8 by lap 5, while out in front the leaders were looking to break the DRS gap to each as well as manage their tyres, a tricky balancing act at the hot, dry circuit, with a view to going as long as possible before the stops.

Nobody told Ghiotto though, as the Italian looked to reclaim ground lost at the start as he sliced his way by his rivals, claiming P2 from Delétraz on lap 13 as de Vries came into the pits, the first of the leaders to do so.

The Dutchman was now the target as his rivals came in, and emerging in fresh air helped de Vries to move up the order. Race leader Latifi came in on lap 16, but a slow rear tyre change saw the Canadian emerge behind Delétraz and with a mountain to climb if he was to return to the front, while Ghiotto spent one more lap out but lost time in the process, coming out P6 of the stoppers behind de Vries, Matsushita, Delétraz, Latifi and Sette Câmara.

Track position is important in Bahrain, but it soon became clear that tyre life is even more so: Latifi mugged Delétraz for P3 on lap 20 before blasting past Matsushita and de Vries to regain his lead on successive laps and starting to rebuild his big gap to the battle behind him, while Ghiotto got a double tow to blast by Sette Câmara and Delétraz on the front straight on lap 24, with the Brazilian following in his wake; earlier stops saw Matsushita and de Vries unable to stop the train coming for their potential podium positions a lap later.

With the top 3 storming off into the distance all eyes were looking behind them: Latifi ultimately claimed the win by 9s over Ghiotto with Sette Câmara a further 6s back, while Hubert did a superb job of managing his tyres to push up to P4 in his maiden F2 race ahead of Delétraz and de Vries, with Aitken ending a lonely race in P7 ahead of rookie Mick Schumacher, who mugged Matsushita on spent rubber on the last lap for 8th and tomorrow’s reverse pole, with Guanyu Zhou claiming the final point in P10.

TIME TO STOP THE SMOKE AND MIRRORS SHOW TOTO

With the Australian Grand Prix done and dusted, Mercedes again showed how mighty they are, despite propagating preseason testing fake news that their package was substandard and Ferrari were way ahead for the race in Melbourne.

The weekend Down Under proved that it was all lies, the W10 yet again a super piece of kit. In qualy Lewis Hamilton’s pole-winning effort was seven-tenths better than anything their rivals had under the skin and then, in the race, Valtteri Bottas drove into the distance winning by over 20 seconds, to Hamilton, 22 seconds to Verstappen and a whopping 57 seconds ahead of the best Ferrari.

Most teams would love to have the “problems” that Toto Wolff annually tells everybody his goliath of a team are experiencing, when in fact it’s all a smokescreen. Hence this open letter.

Dear Toto,

Congratulations on a most dominant victory at Albert Park, your guys produced another rocket ship, as they have for the past half dozen years and of course you cleaned up. But then you knew that would happen.

Before lashing out I will put it on record that the Mercedes F1 Team built under your watch is, in my book, the most potent F1 outfit in the history of the sport. McLaren in their heyday of the eighties, Williams in the nineties and Ferrari in noughties are simply no match. Bravo!

Ahead of the season opener you and your spin-doctors began spewing the disinformation that your package was suspect ahead of the new year and all us fools bought it as we have tended to over the years.

Again, it was a lie because when you unleashed what you had in Australia, under the impression Ferrari had more ammo, it was clear you still had a ton in reserve (maybe you showed too much on the day?) and your lads used it to great effect for the front row lockout and then claiming the top two steps of the podium 24-hours later. No victories are more emphatic.

Seb nailed it when he quizzed reporters during a press briefing after FP2 in Melbourne, “What was all that bullshit about them: Oh, we’re so out of shape and so on?”

It’s time to stop the bullshit by illustrating the damage you do to your own legacy with the disinformation you disseminate by laying out my version of a conspiracy theory spawned by your years of dishonesty in this regard, namely claiming your team have issues when there were never any while keeping the real advantage under wraps.

Since around 2014 when your outfit produced the most magnificent engine package in the history of the sport, savvy as you are, you realised what you had in your control – this awesome PU – was so good that it could destroy the sport.

You had to detune your package that year as your rivals tripped up over themselves trying to master the technology while trying in vain to challenge your team.

You dominated that year, but it worried you because destroying much-loved rivals is hardly endearing. The haters were growing. F1 was in trouble, and so were you.

Your solution, dropping off the ‘How To Build A Winning F1 Engine’ manual at Maranello in an effort to Ferrari up to speed with the new technology which your crew had mastered so effectively. Of course, vehement denials ensued.

But, after witnessing Ferrari enjoy a remarkable surge in the power unit stakes the first to smell a rat and go public was Red Bull’s Helmut Marko who in early 2005 said, “It is difficult to prove, but I am sure that Mercedes helped Ferrari. And we all know why.”

Marko suspected the motives were political and claimed it was not just Mercedes’ desire to address suggestions it was damaging F1 by dominating so effortlessly. The Red Bull consultant suggested that the ulterior was by helping the Scuderia they made an important ally with regards to the future of F1 being mapped right now.

At that time Sport Bild reported that Mercedes may even have slowed its own development programme over the winter, and had recommended that Ferrari sign up its hybrid specialist Wolf Zimmermann.

Tellingly, Sauber engineer Giampaolo Dall’Ara said of the Ferrari’s 2015 engine, “We expected an improvement, but such great progress in such a short space of time is difficult to explain.”

But of course, it was all hearsay until a year later F1 chief Bernie Ecclestone (with a finger in every single pie in the paddock) said as much in a dual interview with you and even accused you of not helping enough!

Suddenly with an incredibly dominant engine package, you found yourself pulling the strings, as you realised that you can control who wins and who loses, you can decide when it will be a close race and when not, you can control the cars, you can control your drivers, you are the F1 god because of your incredible engine.

[Bear with me this is a long and mean conspiracy theory.]

Moving on to the subject of drivers, with your finger on the horsepower trigger, you deemed Lewis should win titles in 2014 and 2015 which he duly did; your team claiming the constructors’ title in dominant style too.

So much so that at one point Felipe Massa was on record saying that he wished he had the same power unit package, your lads had on their Silver Arrows, on his Williams.

At the time the Brazilian told Globo, “If we have the same engine [as Mercedes] we can reduce the advantage. We do not have a better car than them, but they have a very good car and an engine that is a bit better than all of the others.”

A week later a remorseful Massa recanted: “The engine we have is exactly the same as the engine of Mercedes. It is the same engine and I am absolutely certain.”

His reward, five years later, a drive in your wife’s Formula E team. Just saying.

Then, after Lewis’s second pounding of Nico, a word in your ear from the big bosses at Daimler requested that a German driver, instead of the Pom, doing the business for a change would be good for the brand.

Comes 2016, you oblige and give Nico the additional horses… and boom he wins the title with Lewis, still aggrieved about that season to this day, immediately flinging this cryptic pearl: “You’ll have to buy my book in 10 years’ time to find out exactly what happened… It will be an interesting read.”

Granted, that was said after you swapped Lewis’ title-winning crew with Nico’s losers which was simply a smokescreen to hide the fact that you were staging the whole thing.

After all, you control the power-boost button, that’s what makes the real difference during a course of a two-hour race, not a dozen guys who come into the picture for less than ten seconds on a Sunday afternoon.

Furthermore, I will suggest that when Lewis looked like he might snatch it late in 2016, you pressed the ‘Engine Blow Up’ button in Malaysia and the bullet-proof Merc went up in smoke like never before. Rosberg won the title. The bosses in Stuttgart were happy. Lewis was not.

So for 2017 and 2018, you gave your superstar maximum power to keep him pacified. Why were you so cruel to Valtteri last year? Maybe to maximise the sensation of the wingman coming good this year in another of your premeditated scripts?

Credit to your conscience for deciding that 2019 you will offer Valtteri a serious crack at it by cranking up his package, or was that only for Australia? What’s next in the script you have concocted?

All signs are that in Melbourne you handed the wingman more HP than you wanted to and he nearly beat Lewis to pole, but then did trounce him in the race. On that day it would have been ghastly to deny your protege yet again.

The Valtteri Reloaded idea is smart, people love an underdog and Lewis ‘the brad’ is becoming bigger than Merc. Time to reel him in maybe? It makes sense for Valtteri to win the title this year, thereafter target Schumi’s records with Lewis. That should pacify him.

Despite all this, my prediction for Bahrain is that suddenly Mercedes horsepower will go AWOL after the Melbourne overindulgence, as you down tune things so Ferrari don’t look so bad and give credence to the crap that the Melbourne race was an anomaly.

It was no anomaly, you overestimated what the Reds had in their arsenal for the first qualy of the season, you turned it up on the Silver Arrows a tad too much (seven-tenths too much) and as we now know Ferrari had no answer.

That’s my theory.

“What bullshit!” I can imagine you will react in the unlikely chance you will read this. Fake News! Malicious conspiracy theory! I hear you say. Perhaps, but all fueled by you.

Downplaying your own team’s greatness in a ill-informed attempt to save F1’s credibility, pretending Mercedes in F1 are not a superpower beyond the reach of the rest is a slap in the face to everyone who follows this sport, including everyone in the paddock and every single one of your staff, Lewis and Valtteri included.

Do you take us all as fools? I don’t think I would be alone in betting you have at least a full second, if not more, in reserve for when needed.

What to do?

Accept your dominance as we have all been forced to do, relish it and wear it with pride, you have assembled the mightiest F1 team in history, you should not be apologetic for the repetitive success and feel the need to spew fake news to pacify us masses.

Just imagine Ken Tyrrell, Colin Chapman, Enzo Ferrari, Ron Dennis, Frank Williams, Jean Todt even Christian Horner during their heyday, and dominant best, being coy in the face of victory, so humble or so deceitful. If their common sporting spirit was Mohammed Ali, then you are Mother Theresa.

Their attitude, true of champions, was: we are the best, we are unbeatable, catch us if you can, kick them when they are down, win at all costs etc etc and fuck the fallout.

Your condescending sympathy for your prey is akin to older boys playing footie with kids in the park, the bigger lads make the young guys shine, egg them on, but always beat them by a goal or more and demonstrate condescending pity for the defeated little guys allowing to believe they had a chance.

In closing, the purpose of this letter – from an admirer of your achievements as Merc team chief – is to give you a heads up, because the “bullshit” is tarnishing your legacy as the man who led the mightiest team this sport has ever known, instead, you will be remembered as the guy who cried wolf once too often, ultimately exposing you as the puppet-master and race fixer of this era in F1.

It is time to stop the bullshit that fuels the conspiracy theories

Cheers

PV

WHEN SENNA TESTED FOR BRABHAM-BMW

That year Senna had triumphed over Martin Brundle in a historic British Formula 3 Championship duel.

In July, the Brazilian had a guest test in the Williams FW08C at Donnington, his first taste of F1 which impressed Frank Williams, but there was no place in the team for him as Keke Rosberg and Jacques Lafitte inked into deals for 1984.

In October that year, Senna tested for McLaren at Silverstone, ‘spied’ on with interest by Brabham sporting boss Herbie Blash. At that test, Senna impressed but Ron Dennis, with Alain Prost and Niki Lauda on his books, could only offer the Brazilian a Formula 2 season.

A test with Toleman followed and in the end, the minnows were the team that would allow Senna to race for them without conditions, which the likes of McLaren and Williams were not prepared to risk.

Information about the Brabham test is scarce, but suffice to say it did not go well for Senna who was only given a handful of laps in the car and was unable to impress on the day.

On the day the Gordon Murray penned, BT52 ran on Michelin tyres and was powered by the potent BMW M12/13 turbocharged engine which in 1983 produced about 850 bhp (630 kW) in qualifying trim, detuned to around 640 bhp (480 kW) for race distances.

Respected F1 journo Flavio Gomes wrote on his blog that Piquet went out on track first, did a few laps and popped a 1:05.90 around a shortened version of the French Grand Prix venue. With Piquet’s setup the three young guns were let loose in the Brabham BT52B BMW.

These were the times:
Nelson Piquet 1:05.90
Mauro Baldi 1:07.80
Ayrton Senna 1:07.90
Roberto Guerrero 1:08.60
Pierluigi Martini1:08.90

Senna was a couple of seconds slower than regular driver, double F1 World Champion, Nelson Piquet and a tenth shy of fellow rookie Baldi.

In the end, neither of the trio who tested that day would be chosen to partner Piquet as Brabham opted later for Teo Fabi on the behest of Parmalat, who were the title sponsors and wanted an Italian in the team.

Furthermore, it was well known at the time that Piquet was not keen on having the younger Brazilian as his teammate, and acted accordingly.

Senna later said of his day with Ecclestone’s team, “My worst test, of course, was with Brabham at Ricard. I had the feeling I could do a lot more, but the opportunity was not there.”

Despite the shortcomings, 23-year-old Senna said in an interview, “If Bernie wants me he must improve his offer and reach a reasonable position. If he does that I could drive for them.”

As for the offer, Senna insisted it was not only about money, “There are several items, it is not just one single thing. It’s all the elements that go into a contract that will weigh whether we sign or not. I need recognition for what I achieved so far and the perspectives for the future that I have in Formula 1.”

History shows that he did not sign for Ecclestone’s team, instead he took the option of driving for underdogs Toleman in 1984 on his terns and the rest, as they say, is history.

Formula One Group operating loss grew in 2018

Payments to Formula 1 teams slid for the second year in a row during 2018 while the sport’s revenues and operating loss grew, according to annual results published by commercial rights holder Liberty Media released on Thursday.

Total payments to the 10 teams fell to $913-million from $919 million in 2017 and $966-million in 2016.

Although the Formula One Group reported an increase in annual revenues to $1,827-million, up $44-million from a previous $1,783-million, the operating loss grew from $37 million to $68 million.

Primary Formula 1 revenue from race promotion fees, broadcasting fees and advertising and sponsorship was stable despite an increase from 20 to 21 races, with other F1 revenue showing 13 percent growth.

“Race promotion revenue increased modestly primarily due to contractual increases in race promotion fees, as well as a contract amendment for one event,” Liberty said.

“This contract amendment was neutral for total Primary F1 revenue. In addition, race promotion revenue in 2018 was impacted by the calendar variance, with the non-occurrence of the Malaysian Grand Prix in 2018 not fully offset by the return of two European races in France and Germany.”

U.S.-based Liberty said advertising and sponsorship revenue had decreased for the full year.

The growth in other F1 revenue was due primarily to higher logistics revenue, digital media and TV production-related revenue as well as fan engagement activities.

Liberty, who took over the sport in 2017 and ousted former commercial supremo Bernie Ecclestone, said the bigger operating loss was due mainly to increased costs as the business continued to invest.

“Cost of F1 revenue increased primarily due to logistics and travel expense, higher costs associated with providing the chassis and component parts to F2 and GP3 teams, digital media development and spend on fan engagement, which more than offset reduced team payments,” it added.

FERRARI PLANS A NEW ELECTRIC HYBRID FUTURE

(Before you go gaga over this Ferrari F80 Supercar Concept, you ought to know that this isn’t a concept product from the Maranello sports car maker. This is in fact, a product of the imagination of Italian designer Adriano Raeli.)

There was a time when the idea that Ferrari would build an electric car was excluded completely. It was simply never going to happen.

But times change and Ferrari is now planning a big shift in its products in the course of the next 10 years, in order to adapt to the changing markets. The company’s new range of hybrid machinery will be revealed in the course of this year ahead. 

Ferrari has already produced a couple of cars, notably the LaFerrari, which it has developed using the technology that has acquired from its F1 programmes. The next generation hybrid is likely to have a much smaller engine than the LaFerrari’s V12. 

Ferrari’s CEO Louis Camillieri says that by 2022 more than 60 percent of Ferrari models will have a hybrid variant and it is only a matter of time before the celebrated supercar company will have an all-electric car. This means that in the longer term Ferrari might be interested in competing in Formula E, if only to show off its technology. Having said that, such a programme is only going to be likely if there is a budget cap in Formula 1 and the racing programme costs Ferrari less than it does today.

Source: JSBM 18-21

The weakness of the F1 promoters

The Formula 1 race promoters have long griped and grumbled about the costs involved in hosting World Championship events and have tried to get the Commercial Rights Holder to reduce the fees or to allow them to keep of the available revenues.

The problem is that the race promoters have never really wanted to make too much noise, in case they lose their race, but at the same time they have little chance of success if there are always others willing to step in to host races. There is no necessity for any promoter to continue if they do not want to do so and there never seems to be a shortage of replacements. It is a question of supply and demand. The weakness of the promoters is that they have never been able to work together because ultimately they only have their own interests at heart.

The Formula One group is unwilling to make too many concessions - and does not need to - because its exists to generate revenues, although at the same time it wants to expand the sport into major markets that Formula 1 has never properly exploited and thus they are willing to help new events to develop, which is something that obviously annoys the traditional races, which struggle to make ends meet.

Last week, the Formula One Promoters’ Association, published a statement (right) listing some of their complaints. Only 16 of the 21 promoters agreed to be included as signatories of the letter. They argue that it is not in the best interest of the sport that fans lose free access to content and broadcasting; that there is a lack of clarity on new initiatives in F1 and a lack of engagement with promoters on their implementation; and that new races should not be introduced to the detriment of existing events.

The association said that it was, nonetheless, encouraged by the alternative business models being offered to prospective venues.

The statement called for “a more collaborative approach to the development of the championship and the opportunity to offer their experience and expertise in a spirit of partnership with Formula 1 and the FIA”.

It is not clear what the statement is intended to achieve as the Formula One group will view such a move as being unhelpful and unnecessary.

On the question of broadcasting, the new owners of Formula One, Liberty Media are, to some extent, stuck with broadcasting deals which were agreed before they took over the rights. At the same time they are developing direct-to-consumer OTT services which will cost money, but not nearly as much as they do today.

With regard to the supposed lack of clarity, it is really not clear what the race promoters want, as the Formula One group has given a fairly clear picture of what they want to do with the sport and how that will be achieved. On the question of competition from new events, it is fairly clear that the market will rule the decision-making. If there are promoters willing to pay more, the others must step up to remain part of the game.

Thus, it is not clear what the statement aims to do, except to draw attention to the fact that they exist. This will not change much. If they are to develop any real power within the sport, the promoters need to be the only choices available, but there is no shortage of new venues and still plenty of potential to expand the business further.

Almost all the existing races are now supported, to a lesser or greater extent, by public money of one kind or another and there is no doubt that hosting a Grand Prix remains a very valuable activity if one has the means to remain in the game.

This is why the governments are happy to pay. The problem comes in countries where the government will not pay, or where sport is sold cheaply, notably in the United States where a city can secure the Super Bowl for relatively little and even if there is a requirement to build a new stadium, which is often the case, the city benefits from that long after the event and all the additional benefits clearly make it a worthwhile experience both financially and for the development of tourism for a region or city.

F1 is not a cheap option but as has been seen in Texas the revenues generated make it worthwhile for the local economy. Different races have different business models, but special taxes in the week of the events help to offset the costs. The race in Singapore, for example, has been a huge success as a private-public partnership. 

There are often intangible benefits that generate revenues for cities but in places like Australia these are never included in the official calculations which leave the events open to criticism from those who are opposed to the concept, even if very often they are also benefiting from the success of an event. Melbourne used to have some opposition from the Save Albert Park organisation, but in reality the race has helped to drive up house prices in the district and so the opposition has now all but disappeared.

The most likely explanation for the FOPA statement is that the British Grand Prix is currently facing extinction. Silverstone took the decision to cancel the F1 contract early, to avoid putting the British Racing Drivers’ Club into potentially difficult circumstances, and as yet no deal has been found to keep the race alive.

The problem is real, but the gap between what Silverstone can pay and what the Formula One group wants is believed to be relatively small so a solution should be found.

At the root of the problem is that the British government will not get involved, although they are happy to pay for an Olympic Games or for the Tour de France and other such events.

At the moment British politics is so beset by Brexit that no-one seems to have focussed on the issue of the British GP and it may require the country to have a year out of the World Championship to get their attention. After that if Britain does not want a Grand Prix, it will not have one (just as happened in France between 2008 and 2018).

Source: JSBM

Mexican Grand Prix is in doubt ?

The future of the Mexican Grand Prix is in doubt as the Mexican federal government has decided to stop funding the race. The race has a contract that runs from 2015- 2019 and it is clear that without government funding the event may not be able to continue. The race costs the country around $21 million a year and has always been billed as a national project aimed at increasing tourism in Mexico. In the course of the F1 deal Mexico has climbed in the global ranking of most

visited countries, with 35 million visitors in 2018, which means it ranked eighth overall last year, compared to the 32 million in 2015, when it ranked 11th overall.

That deal was agreed by the government headed by Enrique Peña Nieto, who was president from 2012 but he was not allowed to stand in the elections in July 2018. His party, the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) suffered a massive defeat in the elections with its candidate José Antonio Meade beaten conclusively by left-wing politician and former Mexico City mayor Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who campaigned promising to carry out a radical transformation in the country and to eradicate corruption.

The race is run for the government by the Corporacion Interamericana de Entretenimiento (CIE), which is a subsidiary of Grupo Carso, a conglomerate owned by the telecommunications magnate Carlos Slim. The race has been a huge success and has won the Formula One’s Race Promoter of the Year Award every year since it began in 2015.

CIE boss Alejandro Soberón said last year that the race cannot be done without government support but h will now have to try to find the money from private sources if a new deal is to be agreed for 2020 and beyond.

The money that has been spent on the Grand Prix will be reallocated to fund the Tren Maya project which aims to promote economic development in the five of Mexico’s south-eastern states with the construction of a 950-mile rail link between the ancient Mayan ruins of Palenque and the tourist resort of Cancún. This will cost more than $7.4 billion in the course of the next four years.

The Mexican GP has had a history of coming and going from the World Championshi, having been held between 1963 and 1970 and then again between 1986 and 1992.

The loss of the race would be a blow for Formula 1, which is trying to build up interest in the sport in the US time zones.

Source: JSBM

Ferrari has reported its best ever financial results

Ferrari has reported its best ever financial results with 2018 producing sales of 9,251 cars in 2018, an increase of 10.2 percent compared to 2017. This resulted in revenues of $3.9 billion and earnings of $901 million, which is an impressive 46 percent hike over the previous year.

The revenues included $580 million from sponsorship, commercial and brand revenue, slightly up on the previous year, which resulted from more sponsorship deals as well as more revenues from the F1 prize fund, which is reckoned to provide the company with around $200 million a year. The company reported slightly lower industrial and research & development costs, largely due to the fact that it spent less on F1 activities.

The marque is believed to be planning to spend more on F1 in 2019 as it continues its push to win a World Championship, something which it has failed to do since 2008. It is impossible to work out exactly what Ferrari is spending on F1, as the company makes it difficult to do, but some estimates suggest that the total is now higher than $400 million a year. 

With the planned F1 budget cap of $200 million in 2020, reducing to $135 million by 2023, the team is obviously going to need to find ways to save money, although the planned budget cap will not include a number of items - notably engine development costs - which are probably included in the current figures.

The Ferrari share price rose 10 percent when the news was announced and has retained the rise since then and is now back to where it was last October.

Source: JSBL

SHOULD F1 FOLLOW NASCAR, BAN DRIVERS/TEAMS FROM BETTING

The ugly spectre of gambling is creeping into Formula 1 as we speak, with the myriad of ways in which teams and drivers can manipulate results it is surprising that placing a bet on any motorised sports is even allowed by governments let alone sports associations.

The Associated Press reports that with the prospect of cheating in mind Nascar have set a precedent by banning competitors from betting on its races as part of new gambling guidelines established in this season’s rulebook.

Nascar employees are prohibited from disclosing confidential information and from requesting insider information that could potentially help “their own gain or for the gain of others.”

They are allowed to participate in fantasy sports relating to the three national touring series, Cup, Xfinity and Truck, but may not accept prizes with a value of more than $250 in any games.

Nascar partnered with Sportradar Integrity Services to develop a comprehensive gambling policy intended to protect the integrity of the sport, concluded the report.

All sports are open to cheating in the name of gambling, a well-known scourge of horse racing, cricket, soccer, boxing and just about all mainstream sports.

‘Taking a Dive’ in sport is as old as the hills.

The opportunities for “insider trading” in motorsport is vast while tampering a result in F1 or Karting (and everything in between) is remarkably simple and extremely, if not impossible, to police or even bust after the fact.

Which begs the question: How can authorities allow the public to bet on motor racing let alone Formula 1?

Consider these very basic and obvious examples:

• Fictitious Example 1: You put a bet on Valtteri to win the Russian Grand Prix, you drop ten grand to get 10-1 odds from your bookie. You are looking like a winner for having faith in the Finn, until Toto  decides to hand Lewis the victory. Did the Merc boss have a mate with money on Lewis?
• Fictitious Example 2: A backmarker driver who crashes a lot gets a mate to a put 100K bet that he will crash within the first ten minutes of Monaco Grand Prix FP1.
  The mate gets 10 to 1 odds that driver will crash, the driver does as planned and on Monday his mate goes and collects a million in winnings from the bookies.

You get the drift…

It is no secret that Formula 1 are intent on maximising what they can with the extensive data they have at their disposal. In-race betting is on the cards perhaps even by the start of the forthcoming season

When sporting chiefs talk about digital assets, apart from the obvious value of content, without saying it, they also count the gambling potential of sport because that’s where the serious money is.

The online gambling industry gobbled up $44.16-billion in 2016 and is estimated to reach $82-billion by 2022. And that’s the ‘legal’ stuff double or triple that to include ‘illegal’ gambling.

A couple of years ago Liberty Media chief executive Greg Maffei said, “Outside of the United States there is a huge gambling opportunity in the sport, none of which we capitalize on.”

In September last year, Maffei got what he wanted when F1 announced a $100-million five year deal with Interregional Sports Group (ISG) to enable the development of live in-race betting during grands prix.

F1 commercial chief, Sean Bratches said at the time, “This deal allows us to develop new and exciting ways for Formula 1 fans around the globe to engage with the world’s greatest racing spectacle, while ensuring integrity with best practice oversight from Sportradar.”

He would say that, wouldn’t he? But what about the crooks? And the addicts? Has he a plan for them?

Apart from a cheating plague motorsport gambling triggers there is the sadder problem of gambling addiction – like drugs like booze gambling is addictive, and seriously so in this era of online betting.

Addiction.com reports: “As with all types of data, certain trends or patterns of behaviour start to surface within a given population. Gambling addiction statistics are no different.”

“Some of the more prevalent gambling trends show:

• The likelihood of developing a gambling addiction increases 23-fold for people affected by alcohol use disorders
• Over 80 percent of American adults gamble on a yearly basis
• Three to five gamblers out of every hundred struggles with a gambling problem”

The report adds: “As far as gambling and criminal activity goes, gambling addiction statistics reveal a direct correlation between the severity of a gambling addiction and the likelihood of committing crimes. Rates of gambling addiction for criminal offenders far exceed rates found among non-offenders. On average, an estimated 50 percent of those affected by gambling problems commit crimes in order to support their addiction.”

GrandPrix247, being in English, is frequented mainly by USA, British, Canadian, South African and Australian F1 fans where online gambling is sharply on the rise:

North American Foundation for Gambling Addiction Help has this to say about addiction to betting:

• In Australia statistics on problem gambling among the population shows quite high numbers. Approximately 0.5-1% (figures vary in different states) of citizens suffer from this addiction. This is so due to the changes in the betting industry due to digital technologies.
• Canada is among the countries with the highest percentage of gambling addicted citizens. Imagine that ¼ of all residents (or their friends/relatives) have suffered from some sort of bad consequences (job loss, depression, marriage problems and etc.) owing to their dependence.
• In the United Kingdom, addiction drains a lot of money (about £1.2 billion annually). Therefore, the government should pay special attention to this issue. According to various scientific sources, the cost also comprises special institutions service (mental health clinics), homelessness and police involvement.”
• The USA is in the top list of countries, where a huge part of the population (2.6% or almost 10 million people) has an addiction problem because of gambling. These activities are represented in every state (even where they are restricted). Overall, compulsive betting behaviour costs about $6-billion per year for U.S. economics.
• Note: No South African gambling info in the same report.

Governments, the FIA and motorsport authorities of every discipline, motorcycles and cars MUST BAN gambling at all costs, because motor racing is the least tinker-proof sport of all the ball games and solo sports put together. In other words: do the right thing, folks.

However unlikely that is, Formula 1 should at least take a leaf out of Nascar and stop drivers and team members from betting on the sport they compete in. The FIA should follow the example too.