Ban automakers

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
roon
378
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

Ban automakers

Post by roon » Wed May 15, 2019 5:23 pm

F1 should break from car manufacturers. Road cars are heading toward automation and electrification. Forced marketing connections between track and road should be abandoned.

Ban automaker association, participation, and funding. Ban Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, and Renault. Leave motorsports companies only. Leave motorsport engine suppiers only. Williams, Sauber, RB, TR, Haas, RP, remain. New entrants will arrive.

This returns the racing cars to a singular focus: laptimes.

This eliminates automaker influence on funding and regulations.

This returns the spectacle to fans, away from pandering outreach to the general population.

Phil
385
User avatar
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:22 pm

Re: Ban automakers

Post by Phil » Wed May 15, 2019 5:25 pm

It's a little late for that now...
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II
#Team44 supporter

FrukostScones
178
User avatar
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: European Union

Re: Ban automakers

Post by FrukostScones » Wed May 15, 2019 5:29 pm

Phil wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 5:25 pm
It's a little late for that now...
we already have Indycar. (the laptimes though, cough cough.)
Finishing races is important, but racing is more important. ...

roon
378
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

Re: Ban automakers

Post by roon » Wed May 15, 2019 5:38 pm

LMP1* and LMP2 might be a better analogy.

*Disincluding LMP1H

zac510
39
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 11:58 am

Re: Ban automakers

Post by zac510 » Thu May 16, 2019 8:58 am

roon wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 5:23 pm
F1 should break from car manufacturers. Road cars are heading toward automation and electrification. Forced marketing connections between track and road should be abandoned.

Ban automaker association, participation, and funding. Ban Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, and Renault. Leave motorsports companies only. Leave motorsport engine suppiers only. Williams, Sauber, RB, TR, Haas, RP, remain. New entrants will arrive.

This returns the racing cars to a singular focus: laptimes.

This eliminates automaker influence on funding and regulations.

This returns the spectacle to fans, away from pandering outreach to the general population.
Why would a private team not have an interest in marketing, sponsorship, influencing the regulations in their favour, or winning the race as slowly as possible?

A private team and a manufacturer team are one and the same, the latter is just a lot wealthier. In the same way there are poor and wealthy privateers in Sauber and RBR.

Their motivations are all the same, regardless of wealth or ownership.

edit: I want to add that I agree with you in principle that one or two exceptionally wealthy manufacturer and then 10 privateer teams is not a good platform for a balanced racing series. But this proposed rule change would not change the environment the teams operate in and not change their motivations and rich and poor would still exist.

santos
34
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 3:48 pm

Re: Ban automakers

Post by santos » Thu May 16, 2019 9:57 am

Do you know a category of motorsport that doesn't have a automaker? And the problem isn't that. WRC have them and it's totally fine. On the other end, WEC that was becoming a very nice category with the batle between audi, Porsche and Toyota, now i only see it because of the GTE.

Jolle
139
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Ban automakers

Post by Jolle » Thu May 16, 2019 10:29 am

And what about Philip Morris? If a party is responsible for the ever growing costs of F1, they are raising the bar since 1981. They set the bar so high that only a company as Daimler or a money machine like RedBull can compete.

Xwang
5
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:12 am

Re: Ban automakers

Post by Xwang » Thu May 16, 2019 10:33 am

Are Mercedes and Ferrari really lot more wealthier than RBR that does not have to invest in designing and building an engine?

mertol
21
User avatar
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:02 am

Re: Ban automakers

Post by mertol » Thu May 16, 2019 12:13 pm

How is Philip Morris responsible? Why can't the other teams find sponsors? The whole ban on cigarettes is nonsense. Either make them completely illegal or allow their advertising.

Jolle
139
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Ban automakers

Post by Jolle » Thu May 16, 2019 12:47 pm

mertol wrote:
Thu May 16, 2019 12:13 pm
How is Philip Morris responsible? Why can't the other teams find sponsors? The whole ban on cigarettes is nonsense. Either make them completely illegal or allow their advertising.
Philip Morris is a bit more then a sponsor. When the decided to do F1 proper, and not be dependent of a team. They funded Project Four to buy/merge with McLaren and much of the team management was done in Lausanne, next to all of the team marketing of course. After Honda left, the disappointment of Mansell and probably a bit Ron Dennish behaviour, they decided to part with their own team and made a mega deal with Ferrari. Winning at any cost. This destroyed one "garagiste" team after the other. They just couldn't keep up. Mclaren only could keep up because Daimler stepped in and took over the team and same goes for Benneton (and without much succes, Stewart and Sauber of course).

At this moment you could almost divide the big teams from their funding to see how the game is played.
Philip Morris - Ferrari
Daimler - Reynard-Brackly
RedBull - Stewart-Milton Keens
Renault - Enstone
You can almost swap the funding/name and the factory/team without much trouble, as has been happend in the past. What you can also see, that from the four big funders of F1, only two are car brands, the other ones are marketing wizards.

a really fun fact is of course, that the Ferrari team is funded by Philip Morris and FIAT Chrysler themselves fund another team...

In the past the influence of Philip Morris was a lot bigger by they way, they were funding/placing drivers with multiple teams trough the paddock. Just look at old pics, more then half of the cars had a Marlboro logo around the drivers name. Guess you paid/approved that driver?

zac510
39
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 11:58 am

Re: Ban automakers

Post by zac510 » Thu May 16, 2019 1:02 pm

Great point about Philip Morris Jolle! Their funding created the same imbalance of wealth that a manufacturer can.

mertol wrote:
Thu May 16, 2019 12:13 pm
How is Philip Morris responsible? Why can't the other teams find sponsors? The whole ban on cigarettes is nonsense. Either make them completely illegal or allow their advertising.
You are accepting that F1 is a meritocracy and that if one team has a very wealthy sponsor backer or manufacturer funding then by merit (wealth) it's acceptable that they win. However, If I understand roon's point, it's that there can be a little bit too much merit sometimes :D .

Sports with closed economies like NFL can have a salary cap but it's proving difficult in international sports like F1 and soccer.

Jolle
139
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Ban automakers

Post by Jolle » Thu May 16, 2019 1:11 pm

zac510 wrote:
Thu May 16, 2019 1:02 pm
Great point about Philip Morris Jolle! Their funding created the same imbalance of wealth that a manufacturer can.

mertol wrote:
Thu May 16, 2019 12:13 pm
How is Philip Morris responsible? Why can't the other teams find sponsors? The whole ban on cigarettes is nonsense. Either make them completely illegal or allow their advertising.
You are accepting that F1 is a meritocracy and that if one team has a very wealthy sponsor backer or manufacturer funding then by merit (wealth) it's acceptable that they win. However, If I understand roon's point, it's that there can be a little bit too much merit sometimes :D .

Sports with closed economies like NFL can have a salary cap but it's proving difficult in international sports like F1 and soccer.
American sports like NFL or NBA have another few "tricks" that make if more entertainment business then a sport. The whole draft system is a bit like a balance of performance and makes a loosing team actually a solid investment.

It is kinda fun that in Europe, where we tend to have a socialist liberal economy, with lots of equal opportunity rules, sport is as capitalist as you can imagine while in capitalist America, the sport is the opposite.

zac510
39
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 11:58 am

Re: Ban automakers

Post by zac510 » Thu May 16, 2019 1:37 pm

It's as if in sport we desire the opposite of what we get in politics!

strad
255
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:57 am

Re: Ban automakers

Post by strad » Thu May 16, 2019 5:32 pm

I'm confused... So you would ban Ferrari since they are an auto maker?
Motorsport without danger is like cooking without salt
Sir Stirling Moss

roon
378
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

Re: Ban automakers

Post by roon » Thu May 16, 2019 7:59 pm

Yes, because Ferrari will advocate for multi cylinder engines and loudness. Others would advocate lower power:weight ratio drivetrains that achieve other deliverables imposed artificially via regulations. The premise of the thread is to detach marketing convolutedness from the sport. Resulting in racing cars only concerned with lap times and by default reliability among other metrics. Not saying it's right, but it might be worth considering. In the other direction, no road cars will be resembling F1 cars to any remarkable degree. AMG One will be incredibly slower than W10. Furthermore, road cars will become evermore a form of pure functional transportation as suggested in the OP. Ever fewer will care about motorsports veneers placed upon road transports.