under various brands, outsource and produce in bulk (in newly industrialising countries when possible), rely on economies of scale, dominate distribution, make sure that subsidiaries carry all overhead and risk. Appear as safe, recognisable, simple, ubiquitous, unchanging and in every way as self-evident and unchallenged towards your retail customer as possible. Minimise contact between the actual running of the business and the retail customer, the experience towards him/her must always be the same, the protocol of interaction must always be the same. Make it a habit, conditionalise by repetition.
OK, maybe I'm in a bit of a depressed and aggravated mood. But once again, the issue of cost cuts has arisen. And there's an effort by Mosley to make it an absolute priority. Once again, once again. I can't help but think that this risks a lot. It might also preclude a lot ... is there a lack of faith creeping in that Formula One can't take on the challenges of sustainability and producing technological advances, outlined so very recently? How much pressure is there because of the loan burden of the new owners of the series? Mosley has sent a letter to team principals last week and it sounds a lot like a "Spec'n'Span" future for this motor sport series. This is strange as teams and companies are more and more highlighting their innovations and technologies through F1, especially online. Excerpts from an Autosport article (link to full article):
I especially "love" the comment about only using items that the fans "understand" on the cars ...Max Mosley in a document attached to the letter wrote: Formula One's vast profits are currently being wasted on pointless exercises for the private entertainment of the teams' engineers. As a result, several independent teams are losing money when they should be making a profit, while car manufacturers are forced to spend excessively. This is the problem which needs to be addressed.
If it did not waste money on pointless, hidden and duplicated technology, Formula One would be an immensely profitable business. Each department would be a valuable franchise. Instead it is living on subsidies from the car industry and hand-outs from friendly billionaires.
Until the basic problem of costs has been resolved, time should not be wasted discussing how the FOM money is to be distributed. It is a secondary matter. The same applies to debating the level of technical co-operation allowed between teams.
The technical contest has become enormously expensive. However, most of its elements are concealed from the public. Because they are concealed, even secret, these elements add nothing to the entertainment.
Therefore the money spent on them is wasted, all the more so because work on these elements is duplicated in each of the 12 departments (the teams). It makes absolutely no sense to spend large sums on items which do not add to the entertainment, indeed often detract from it.
It makes even less sense for each of 12 departments to carry out the same unnecessary work. No rational person would run a business in which 12 departments duplicate each other's research work, still less if that work provides very little of the entertainment which underpins the business.
Therefore all items on the cars which are not known, visible and understood by the public should be standardised and manufactured at minimal cost. The technical contest should be limited to items which are visible, understood and potentially useful - eg KERS.
This would produce a huge reduction in costs without affecting the entertainment. Indeed the cars would be more equal, giving closer racing and better entertainment.
And here I was thinking that it was the FIA's current F1 rules that forced the 12 "departments" i.e. teams to allocate big resources to study and develop very similar technologies ... How stupid of me.Here's a little something to reflect the ongoing cost cutting drive against: A Pitpass article (link) stating that since CVC acquired the sport, profits have gone from $312.7M to $6M.
EDIT: A pretty good opinion about all this from Grandprix.com - "The funding of the sport" (link).
)
