I'm at work, so won't be able to give this topic the detail it deserves.
I've been lucky enough to manage several multi-million dollar marketing projects in US computer companies (one of several "careers" I've survived). In the context of multi-national marketing/branding/PR efforts, the F1 hospitality setups are NOT over the top. Period. You don't have to like the expense, but the expense is considered justified by the return.
Now a point I hope some of you will respond to: the teams did not gain the money they spent on these mobile palaces through selling drugs to school children or engaging in slavery or other onerous activities -- they earned it through hard work, skill, and smart investment. Their success earned them sponsorship money, which they re-invested in people, technology, and mobile palaces. It's their money; they can spend it as they please. Their success is proof that they usually spend it pretty well.
One of my main problems with Max's budget cutting is simply that I think you need to EARN your place to the pinnacle of racing. Shouldn't these mobile pleasure domes be banned or limited because "new" F1 teams can not afford them? Should F1 be dumbed down to allow new teams in? What happened to earning your way? I hope that those of you who are familiar with the history of Williams and McLaren (among others) will take the time to tell their story. They fought and earned their way to the top -- they did not get into F1 because rules were created or bent to allow them to compete. Similarly, great teams rose to the top, but were unable to stay there. No one stepped in to save Maserati, Surtees, Cooper, BRM, or Lotus. They couldn't keep up, so they died. But in future, it looks like Max wants to manipulate the rules, NASCAR-style, to make racing "fair." Absurd.
Enzo Ferrari was a great man. But he was not a good man. -- Phil Hill