2009 Motorhomes/Hospitality Zones

[grano123]

By the look of some of the *normal* motorhomes, ie: Williams, Renault..........they seem to be based on 2 or 3, in the Williams case, trailer rigs which are joined together to form the final product.

Does anyone have any pics of them being put together, as I'm curious as to how much work goes into putting this show together...........is it really worth it?

[ESPImperium]

Red Bull have 3 of the big ones, as they take near on a week to build. They send one to 1 GP and the other is at another GP. The 3rd one is the most refined one as it takes a couple of days to put up and pull down, but that one if for their MotoGP concern and is slightly smaller than the F1 ones as Suzi Perry eluded to that fact in a MotoGP broadcast i watched about a year ago on BBC2.

[RacingManiac]

I wouldn't be surprised actually that some of the money came from the sponsorship dedicated to PR. I think I read somewhere that Ferrari's unit is build entirely on Marlboro's money dedicated for their marketing and advertisement dollars. And I think its a case of matching the spending of the sponsors....

Like football sponsors with hospitality suites at football arena, the money probably is proportional to that consider how much they pay to sponsor F1 outfits...

[donskar]

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.

[ISLAMATRON]

Non of your arguments hold weight donskar

once again, the mobile palaces as part of hospitality/marketing would not be included in the cap... MAX is not trying to make the teams get rid of them.

Williams started with customer chassis which are currently banned, partly because of Williams, and they used a spec/standard ford engine/hewland gearbox combo that Max is trying to reintroduce back into contention in the series.(not the hewland)

"Ron Dennis F1"/McLaren(as it stands now) bought into the already existing Mclaren which itself started out running a modified formula 2 car, which is not an option these days.

The rules did not have to be "created or bent" to allow them in because those rules already existed, but do not anymore... Max is just reintroducing some of the rules that allowed those great teams to get started.

Yes Max is manipulating the rules but please tell us a time when the FIA didnt manipulate the rules?

[jddh1]

At the end of the day, it's still just a glorified trailer park.

If Max has his way, these trailer parks will look like the ones we have here in the states in neighborhoods you don't really wanna drive around, let alone walk.

[freedom_honda]

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.

But the thing is, the current regulations simply does not provide opportunities for new teams to enter. Assume the new team is a relatively small team like FI/STR, their annual budget would somewhere between 150-200million (just a rough guess). Assume their they have to invest 100million on new equipment/HQ etc. before they enters. In their three years (not sure about this) without any TV money, it means they will have to pump in 550million just to keep the team going for three years. Now in the current situation, or even in the economic environment BEFORE the financial crisis, I simply cannot see any company willing to waste 550 million in F1 for three years, with pretty much grantee no success. I seriously cannot see new team coming to F1 with the current regulations.

[WhiteBlue]

I seriously cannot see new team coming to F1 with the current regulations.

Exactly!!

[Slife]

Here is a floor plan of the old Renault Motorhome



It is in french but it is pretty self-explanatory.

[Giblet]

That floor plan looks like a chart for a new system of government.

[donskar]

freedom honda wrote:

But the thing is, the current regulations simply does not provide opportunities for new teams to enter. Assume the new team is a relatively small team like FI/STR, their annual budget would somewhere between 150-200million (just a rough guess). Assume their they have to invest 100million on new equipment/HQ etc. before they enters. In their three years (not sure about this) without any TV money, it means they will have to pump in 550million just to keep the team going for three years. Now in the current situation, or even in the economic environment BEFORE the financial crisis, I simply cannot see any company willing to waste 550 million in F1 for three years, with pretty much grantee no success. I seriously cannot see new team coming to F1 with the current regulations.

In no particular order:
If a new team needs the 150-200 million you estimate, then Max's fiat is impracticable.
If the new team has the background to have any chance of success in F1, then they should not need an additional 100 million in new equipment (again, your figure) to enter.
You mention (I revised your spelling): "no guarantee of success." Should success be guaranteed in the most prestigious series in all of auto racing?!

I COMPLETELY agree that F1 must be made more economically feasible for existing AND new teams. But let's not let Max and Bernie get us so worked up that we forget that we need reduced budgets AND increased sharing of revenues. The money is there. Max and Bernie (and CVC) must be forced to share it more equitably. (You cite an example -- sharing of TV revenues. That barrier to entry is Bernie's doing -- not the tams.)

[donskar]

islamatron, I have read your reply, but will not -- as I have said before -- waste time replying to you. You are not open to discussion. Your posts are purely polemical and are antithetical to open discussion.

[ISLAMATRON]

islamatron, I have read your reply, but will not -- as I have said before -- waste time replying to you. You are not open to discussion. Your posts are purely polemical and are antithetical to open discussion.

You cant reply because everything I said was factual and logical, and you have no rebuttal.

But you are also correct that the teams need to find a way to squeeze more of the commercial money out of BErnie.

[DaveKillens]

It takes money to make money.

Wining and dining the high rollers who really control the flow of sponsorship and advertising money is critical. And you won't achieve those goals by using plastic cups to serve Champagne.