Customer Cars or Franchise Teams, what do you think?

[Wayne DR]

I have been supportive of the concept of Customer Cars for a while now, as a way to simply get more cars on the grid, if nothing else.

I was always considering Manor running a 2014 Ferrari Chassis in 2015, as the concept. This should be far cheaper than designing and constructing your own car from scratch. However, the new "Franchised Team" concept may be taking it a little bit to far, but, in theory, it should lead to better racing.

I totally understand William's, Sauber's and Force India's position for the following reasons:

1) They could potentially lose a substantial share of the F1 Constructor's money
Should a Customer Car or "Franchised Team" earn points in the Constructor's Championship? In my opinion, NO, as they haven't "constructed" anything.

2) They could also lose the income from their Pay Drivers
Pay Driver's sponsors could be more inclined to setup a "Franchise Team". The point I think they are missing, is the potential income from their own "Franchise Teams". Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes can't make, maintain and operate 10 cars a piece, so their is an opportunity in this for them too!

3) The current Constructors may be at risk of not even qualifying
If we end up with more than 26 cars (which is hopefully likely), teams like Manor will be at significant of not qualifying to race. Should Constructors be given rights over Customer Cars in this regard? (For example, Massa and Vettel probably would not have even raced in Canada two weekends ago, if we had these extra teams.)

What do you think? What specific rules should the FIA be considering to protect the sport and the current Constructors?
Do you think it will produce better racing?

[Emmcee]

I have been supportive of the concept of Customer Cars for a while now, as a way to simply get more cars on the grid, if nothing else.

I was always considering Manor running a 2014 Ferrari Chassis in 2015, as the concept. This should be far cheaper than designing and constructing your own car from scratch. However, the new "Franchised Team" concept may be taking it a little bit to far, but, in theory, it should lead to better racing.

I totally understand William's, Sauber's and Force India's position for the following reasons:

1) They could potentially lose a substantial share of the F1 Constructor's money
Should a Customer Car or "Franchised Team" earn points in the Constructor's Championship? In my opinion, NO, as they haven't "constructed" anything.

2) They could also lose the income from their Pay Drivers
Pay Driver's sponsors could be more inclined to setup a "Franchise Team". The point I think they are missing, is the potential income from their own "Franchise Teams". Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes can't make, maintain and operate 10 cars a piece, so their is an opportunity in this for them too!

3) The current Constructors may be at risk of not even qualifying
If we end up with more than 26 cars (which is hopefully likely), teams like Manor will be at significant of not qualifying to race. Should Constructors be given rights over Customer Cars in this regard? (For example, Massa and Vettel probably would not have even raced in Canada two weekends ago, if we had these extra teams.)

What do you think? What specific rules should the FIA be considering to protect the sport and the current Constructors?
Do you think it will produce better racing?

Uggghhhh no thanks. Why don't they fix the problem to begin with Instead of creating new ones? That's the problem these days, they don't fix issues. They bring out a whole list of new regs each year which just creates new issues ontop of the pre standing ones. It would create a 2/3 tier formula one IMO. But hey since there trying to copy lmp racing with constantly saving fuel, it wouldn't be a suprise if the have 2-3 different categories and 2-3 different winners each weekend. What a mess that would be.

[Wayne DR]

But hey since there trying to copy lmp racing with constantly saving fuel, it wouldn't be a suprise if the have 2-3 different categories and 2-3 different winners each weekend. What a mess that would be.

Couldn't agree more. We already have 2 tiers (just without the actual category) between the haves and the have-nots. (More like 3 tiers if you take a hard look at Manor. So we are already there!)

The whole Customer Cars/Franchise Teams fiasco is purely a way of making it cheaper for new teams to enter, be semi-competitive and hopefully survive more than 2-3 years before going bankrupt.

Lets face it, Manor are the only team left from the 3 that entered in 2009/10, and even they have had a close shave with the receivers! (No one has the $250-$500M annual budget needed to start and run a new team, due to the current financial market.)

The sport is broken, this is yet another Band-Aid, but it is possibly the best we can hope for from the FIA... I just want to see more cars on the grid, to give some of the better drivers currently in DTM and Sports Cars a shot, instead of these all-so-ran Pay Drivers! There is SO MUCH wasted talent out there!!

[matt21]

IMO the fundamental problem was created, when people (B.E.) became too voracious.
If you sell the commercial rights to somebody who has no real interest in sport this is what you end up with. A circus travelling around the world with only one goal: making as much of profit as possible.

For me this is why the WEC is working so good at the moment:
The price for a season is around 150m-200m € for the manufacturers. Running twice as much races cannot explain 300m more.
It is a better platform for OEM to demonstarte technology.
The prices to watch a race are affordable, e.g. 35€ for the whole Nürburgring-weekend incl. pitwalk and free-to-choose-seats.
The only problem is a bad TV coverage.

IMO racing should be managed by racers with a sensible attitude towards money, not bankers or used-car-salesmen which used to own a team at one point.

[Emmcee]

IMO the fundamental problem was created, when people (B.E.) became too voracious.
If you sell the commercial rights to somebody who has no real interest in sport this is what you end up with. A circus travelling around the world with only one goal: making as much of profit as possible.

For me this is why the WEC is working so good at the moment:
The price for a season is around 150m-200m € for the manufacturers. Running twice as much races cannot explain 300m more.
It is a better platform for OEM to demonstarte technology.
The prices to watch a race are affordable, e.g. 35€ for the whole Nürburgring-weekend incl. pitwalk and free-to-choose-seats.
The only problem is a bad TV coverage.

IMO racing should be managed by racers with a sensible attitude towards money, not bankers or used-car-salesmen which used to own a team at one point.

Exactly.

[Emmcee]

But hey since there trying to copy lmp racing with constantly saving fuel, it wouldn't be a suprise if the have 2-3 different categories and 2-3 different winners each weekend. What a mess that would be.

Couldn't agree more. We already have 2 tiers (just without the actual category) between the haves and the have-nots. (More like 3 tiers if you take a hard look at Manor. So we are already there!)

The whole Customer Cars/Franchise Teams fiasco is purely a way of making it cheaper for new teams to enter, be semi-competitive and hopefully survive more than 2-3 years before going bankrupt.

Lets face it, Manor are the only team left from the 3 that entered in 2009/10, and even they have had a close shave with the receivers! (No one has the $250-$500M annual budget needed to start and run a new team, due to the current financial market.)

The sport is broken, this is yet another Band-Aid, but it is possibly the best we can hope for from the FIA... I just want to see more cars on the grid, to give some of the better drivers currently in DTM and Sports Cars a shot, instead of these all-so-ran Pay Drivers! There is SO MUCH wasted talent out there!!

Yep completly agree also.

[bhall II]

I totally understand William's, Sauber's and Force India's position...

I can sympathize with Williams' plight, but I've got nothing for Force India and Sauber.

Vijay Mallya has systematically run his companies into the ground, and Monisha Kaltenborn has pilfered sponsorship money from at least four pay-drivers over the last year or so, potentially exposing Sauber to significant liability claims. The biggest problem for those teams isn't revenue; it's chronic mismanagement. (If Colin Kolles, of all people, questions the propriety of your business dealings...)

Naturally, they should get a higher percentage of F1 income, anyway, because it's simply the right thing to do. But let's not kid ourselves into thinking it would make much of a difference. If they had more money, they'd just waste more money.

That said, rather than customer cars/franchise teams, I think the FIA/FOM should enforce an extremely strict price cap on PUs for customer teams. Since the current formula was specifically designed to promote the marketing interests of the manufacturers, there's no reason in the world why smaller teams who didn't want the current PUs, and stand to gain nothing from them, should nonetheless be forced to essentially underwrite the manufacturers' advertising budgets. If automakers want "road relevance," they can pay for that --- themselves.

[matt21]

That said, rather than customer cars/franchise teams, I think the FIA/FOM should enforce an extremely strict price cap on PUs for customer teams.

Regarding the PU, I think it is definitly time for another "DFV". If companies like Cosworth, AER, Ilmor and their liking would be able to design and build competitive engines, this would help. But I think they only would do this, if they are allowed to do something outside the "1.6-V6-4MJ-HERS-KERS" box.

Why not just simply give an amount of energy for a race, equalling 100kg of petrol + the average recuperated energy from ERS, and let them have a go.

[Samraj_official]

Thats why i have always dreamt of free relaxed engine configyrations the teams can opt to use, why would again invite small firms to join F1....while F does the opposite it specifies even the mounting points and the V angle!!!!!!!! Which makes it extremely hard for engine manufactureres to gain an upper hand rather becomes an ARMS race where the mighty brixworth and maranello completely torment the small Viry-chattilon.....this must change!!!!!

[matt21]

it specifies even the mounting points

This to me is one of the most useful compared to rather vast amount of unnecessary regulations, as teams are able to swap engines and gearboxes without redesigning their chassis.

[tuj]

Regarding the PU, I think it is definitly time for another "DFV". If companies like Cosworth, AER, Ilmor and their liking would be able to design and build competitive engines, this would help. But I think they only would do this, if they are allowed to do something outside the "1.6-V6-4MJ-HERS-KERS" box.

Why not just simply give an amount of energy for a race, equalling 100kg of petrol + the average recuperated energy from ERS, and let them have a go.

Matt21: you nailed it. The DFV gave us 20-years of fairly competitive racing for teams that were essentially 'have-nots' or mid-pack. And to think the DFV was basically the work of one man (Duckworth), no computers, and another guy designing the ancillaries....amazing. How many people does AMG have on their power unit? 150? 300?

[Emmcee]

F1 today shows how hard and restricted for little teams to operate. We have 20 cars now and top 10 score points, the lower end struggle to score anything compared to 20-25 years ago when we had 25-30 car grids and only top 6 scoring positions, yet more of the back marker teams scored points than they do today, it's rediculous IMO.

[ChrisF1]

F1 today shows how hard and restricted for little teams to operate. We have 20 cars now and top 10 score points, the lower end struggle to score anything compared to 20-25 years ago when we had 25-30 car grids and only top 6 scoring positions, yet more of the back marker teams scored points than they do today, it's rediculous IMO.

You've made a good point, but it's flawed to compare even 20 years ago:

Let's look at 1994 then for example, and compare to 2014.

1994 - Top 6 scored points, 11 teams recorded a points finish in 16 races.
2014 - Top 10 scored points, 9 teams recorded a points finish in 19 races.

In 1994 11 people retired in Brazil, 15 people retired from the French GP, and 18 from the German GP.

Races often had less than 12 runners, so by modern standards every team would have scored a point with that reliability (Caterham and Sauber both failed to score in 2014, but did manage 11th place finishes)

Quite simply, Formula 1 now is harder to score points because:

Mistakes aren't punished by gravel traps any more, so cars get away with errors.
Cars are stronger (Hill vs Schumacher, Adelaide 1994, Maldonado vs. Gutierrez, Bahrain 2014)
Cars are more reliable, with shocking late retirements a rarity - Hakkinen 2001, Massa 2008...

[r_b_l]

Cars are more reliable, with shocking late retirements a rarity - Hakkinen 2001, Massa 2008...

Not sure about engine reliable, ask the Renault & Honda drivers this year, maybe more reliable in regards to overall car components these days, looking at DNF's in 1994 you can come across a number of different car componentry failures.

But I think these days there is a element of drivers not being able to get or push 100% out of the car or the team ensuring a factor of safety when it comes to reliability, for example engine limit per season, lifting and coasting, looking after tyres & fuel, engine settings,etc. Granted, back in 1994 they could go through a few engines without a penalty but im sure they pushed and got the max out of the car at every opportunity.

[wesley123]

We have customer cars already, it's called GP2.

Such a thing will never happen in F1, it has no reason to be there to begin with. It's not multiclass racing, nor is it endurance racing. Teams will be sold cars that no team makes anymore as they have moved on to next years cars. Old, second-hand cars can be labeled unsafe as tubs simply have a certain shelf-life(after that, they aren't "optimal" anymore). So they will be sold cars that no one has, nor want to make anymore.

Apart from that, as they are year old cars they will also be a year behind, which pretty much leaves them to be moving chicanes.

No one in F1 needs another few moving chicanes in the field. Apart from those teams being useless and bringing nothing to the sport, they'll probably reduce F1's value as a whole, it's like allowing homeless people at a party on someones million dollar yacht.