Formula 1 teams' 2014 payouts revealed

[Pieoter]

The Ferrari Tifosi probably generate more than $90 - $100 million that is paid to Ferrari.

[SectorOne]

When the bottom 5 teams fold, how valuable do you think F1 will be to the remaining competitors? Ferrari are receiving payouts larger than the entire budget spent by Marussia for a years racing, meanwhile Marussia have gone bankrupt. How is that good for the sport?

When will people understand that Marussia actually can´t afford to go F1 racing?
They just like HRT and other teams simply don´t have the financial support to go racing in F1.

There´s a reason why the working class don´t all drive around in Ferrari´s, Bentley´s, Lambo´s.
That is what Marussia is doing right now, working a factory somewhere on minimum pay driving a lamborghini to work then complain about them not having enough money to buy food.

Bottom 5 teams might fold, just like teams have folded since the very first Formula 1 race in the 1950´s.
And just like since the 1950´s, new teams come in.

And since 1950 the same "F1 is heading for irreversible collapse" has been shouted over and over and over.

[mrluke]

Maybe if Ferrari weren't gifted £200m per annum then they couldn't afford to go racing either.

Sponsorship is never going to be available for cars at the back of the grid, which compounds their issue of a lack of funds for development. But somebody has to be last every week, if the team that finishes last each season goes bankrupt and quits where will F1 be?

For the future of the sport it needs to be resolved.

Unlike the 1950s, no new teams want to join anymore.

[Moose]

Maybe if Ferrari weren't gifted £200m per annum then they couldn't afford to go racing either.

Sponsorship is never going to be available for cars at the back of the grid, which compounds their issue of a lack of funds for development. But somebody has to be last every week, if the team that finishes last each season goes bankrupt and quits where will F1 be?

For the future of the sport it needs to be resolved.

Unlike the 1950s, no new teams want to join anymore.

Odd, I was sure we've had 3 new teams and 6 offers of new teams in the last few years.

[SectorOne]

Unlike the 1950s, no new teams want to join anymore.

Do we ignore HAAS or should we include that one?

[Jolle]

Following this pay-out scheme, It would be rather cheap to work (like RedBull) with a pure junior team (for a works team at least). Mercedes and Ferrari, would raise (depending on performance) around 40-60 mln dollars a year to run two extra cars. For instance, the Smart Grand Prix team and Alfa Romeo. That way there will be more opportunity for young drivers to enter F1.

A junior team is much cheaper to run then a small team because you don't need a separate factory, no windtunnel or computerpark, no marketing people, etc etc.

[Phil]

Maybe if Ferrari weren't gifted £200m per annum then they couldn't afford to go racing either.

Sponsorship is never going to be available for cars at the back of the grid, which compounds their issue of a lack of funds for development. But somebody has to be last every week, if the team that finishes last each season goes bankrupt and quits where will F1 be?

For the future of the sport it needs to be resolved.

Unlike the 1950s, no new teams want to join anymore.

Odd, I was sure we've had 3 new teams and 6 offers of new teams in the last few years.

You mean the 3 new teams that hardly get any television time because they are right at the back? The ones that aren't taken seriously and are referred to as the back-markers? two of which have folded, although one of them against all odds is showing up at GPs despite being ignored on the broadcasts? I'm willing to bet that Manor at this rate won't be showing up much longer. Caterham is already gone. Who else is there? Yeah, Haas might be something, but it's still left to be seen what they will bring and how competitive they will be. If Sauber or F-I folds, or Torro-Rosso, I think they'll leave quite a void which would be a pity. Williams was nearly there too, if it weren't for their turn-around season in 2014 with the Mercedes motor. Lotus is probably right on the crisp of folding too...

This is seriously not a healthy sport and the payout, no matter how much value Ferrari brings to the sport, isn't helping. It's downright insulting.

[SiLo]

We can see how just splitting up the money more fairly (More money to the teams) Would make a big difference to midfield and lower teams.

The other issue is that if you do get a long run of success, you also get more money. Making it more difficult for other teams to beat you because you can simply throw more money at everything (pinch of salt there).

I think it would be fair to say, get a certain amount of money for each year you have been in the sport too. So logically, Ferrari would get the most, but then teams would gradually be rewarded more and more the longer they are in the sport.

This could be done on a set value for each year up to a certain limit.

[megz]

I read earlier today that the payout to the top teams was for their lengthy involvement in the sport. I assume that can't be true given Sauber has been in for over 20 years, Toro Rosso has been in for one year less than RBR.

If Mercedes are getting "long time" payments, surely Lotus should too - both teams have been around (with different names) since 1999 (BAR -> Mercedes) or earlier in the case of Lotus. Or Force India for that matter which can trace itself back to 1991.

Ultimately it's not our place to be making sounds about it - this is surely all part and parcel in the Concorde Agreement which the teams continue to sign on to so they know this is what happens. From the outside it does look ridiculous given how the small teams are on the brink of folding for so long but it's difficult to see how you would make a fairer method.

$Xm for competing
$1m for each year of continued competition up to a maximum of $20m
$5m for each team you beat to the constructors championship or $X for each point

What do you do?!

[SectorOne]

The problem isn´t so much that the teams have a pretty huge disrepancy in payouts.
The real problem is 37% of the total cash generated by Formula 1 disappears into some powerful mens pockets for simply owning the sport.

That´s over a third of the money generated that none of the teams will ever see again.

@Megz It´s not lengthy involvement but rather historical importance.

[FW17]

I thought Williams and McLaren got the same amount of money as bonus

[Moxie]

In a fair competition, long term success is its own reward. Sponsors love winners! Merchandisers love winners! Even without the premium payouts, the role of sponsorships has created a fair deal of inequity on the F1 grid. From a competition point of view, there is no good reason for specific individual teams to receive premium payments.

F1 seems to be a pyramid scheme disguised as a sport. Sure there are cars that go around a track, and a certain amount is paid out...eventually... according to outcome of WCC. But there are those teams that receive premiums, and there are those that do not. Just like a pyramid scheme, there is a promise that the longer they stay in the game, the more likely they will receive the financial benefits of their investment. When investors at the bottom end of the pyramid can no longer contribute to the membership fee, they drop out, and new suckers...errrr....teams must be found.

The international nature of F1 makes this all very interesting. In many countries pyramid schemes are illegal. But clever twists on the scheme considered legal. In the U.S. a structure of sales network called "pyramid sales" is perfectly legal. I don't understand why anyone would want to start a new team or buy a back marker F1 team. The only reason I can find is that ego trumps intelligence.

[megz]

@Megz It´s not lengthy involvement but rather historical importance.

I fail to see how RBR meet that requirement, yes they've been sponsors in the sport for about 20 years but they've only competed for 10.

Williams, McLaren, Ferrari - these are the historical names that haven't changed, they would qualify. Perhaps too, Sauber. 20 years is a long ass time to be racing at the pinnacle of motorsport as a privateer.

It seems more a case of - you've been around and you've been successful for a bit. Here's some money. It's hard to lump Mercedes in with the teams of historical importance, a few years in '50's and now 5 years now does not a historical impact make... *shrug*

When we individually rule the world it'll be so much better for just ourselves eh?

[Moxie]

@Megz It´s not lengthy involvement but rather historical importance.

@SectorOne It's neither lengthy involvement, nor historical importance. It's whoever the capricious dictator happens to favor at the moment.

[SectorOne]

It is historical importance. But it´s subjective since you can´t put "importance" on a graph as you can with lengthy involvement.
Obviously all of us don´t really agree with the ranking of that list.
If it was up to me i´d go with lengthy involvement. Because it does not care about your opinion or mine.

So the premium cash would be distributed as follows:

1 Ferrari - 65 years
2 Mclaren - 49 years
3 Williams - 38 years


Cut-off point to be included in the premium cash, 25 years. With Sauber due in three years time.