Martin:"Who will be the next to go after Super Aguri?"

[Valve Bounce]

Martin was standing at the empty space that Super Aguri's motorhome was supposed to be, and he pointed at Torro Rosso , saying that it will be the next to go (it is already for sale) but who could buy it if customer cars are banned?"

Then he wondered if one of the manufacturers will follow after Torro Rosso.

Funny! I've been saying this all along.

[veeten]

You and me both, valve. :o

After 15 years of trying to turn it into an auto manufacturer-driven series, they are reaping the rewards; teams in receivership leading to dwindling grids, reductions in sponsorship, and an unwillingness by other manufacturers to enter due to exceedingly high start up/maintenance costs. The lie of just buying the defunct teams' stuff and IP and going racing just doesn't wash anymore, and without the possibility of buying 'customer cars' or cars from a 3rd party, no one is willing to part company with $200 M+ as a start up. The last to do that was Toyota, and that was in '02.

[ArrowsFA1]

Absolutely :up: Crunch time will really come if one of the manufacturers decides to pull the plug on their F1 involvement, but even so Super Aguri are a warning of a clear and present danger that has been there for quite some time.

[woody2goody]

I'm appalled that F1 only seems to take a look at itself after something happens. It's taken the demise of Super Aguri for them to even discuss matters.

They shouldn't have completely scrapped customer cars even if it would (rightly) annoy some teams.

[Nikki Katz]

Something really needs to be done now. If it's true that most circuits have a 20 car minimum in their contract, yet current rules mean that there's only going to be 18 cars legally allowed to race unless somehow Toro Rosso or a new team can put together a design team in time for the start of next year (!) then surely the FIA will be in a lot of trouble.

My opinion is that customer cars should be allowed, but not the latest spec, to make it a bit fairer to Williams and Force India. Unfortunately this has come about at a time of rule change regarding the spec of the cars for next year, so it would be hard to adapt a 2008 Red Bull to 2009 specification for Toro Rosso.
Secondly there needs to be serious budget caps. Currently they are leisurely talking about budgets being capped at, well, loads, perhaps a slight cut for McLaren/Honda/Toyota. It really immediately needs to be brought down to Red Bull levels, firstly so that teams with a smaller budget than that aren't at such a disadvantage, and secondly so that when in 4 years or so Honda and Toyota are still midfield that they don't pull out, leaving a very small grid. There's something of a global recession at the moment and it's going to get worse before it gets better, I would have thought that the chances of a major car company running into trouble like Ford did a few years ago are really quite likely.

Oh, and scrap "historic significance" bonuses from prize money :p

[rah]

Torro Rosso sure, but I can't see Honda hanging around much longer if they continue like this. I can also see Renault and Toyota quiting as a manufacturer and letting the customer teams do the racing for them. That is if their customer teams beat them of course.

I say remove some of the regulations and let the teams innovate again.

[PSfan]

Just a thought, and not sure if this is the right thread for it but:

I read that one of the Factor's in Magma's deal dieing was the news that Toro Rosso was on the market. Just perhaps, Magma might end up buying up the Toro team, and picking up some of the Super Aguri's assets in order to have a race capable team for 2010? maybe that is part of the reason Fry didn't allow the Weigle bid to go through, so his Friends ats Magma would still be able to get their hands on whatever they think is usefull from SA?

[ChrisS]

Just a thought, and not sure if this is the right thread for it but:

I read that one of the Factor's in Magma's deal dieing was the news that Toro Rosso was on the market. Just perhaps, Magma might end up buying up the Toro team, and picking up some of the Super Aguri's assets in order to have a race capable team for 2010? maybe that is part of the reason Fry didn't allow the Weigle bid to go through, so his Friends ats Magma would still be able to get their hands on whatever they think is usefull from SA?

I don't think SA had anything useful for designing and making an F1 car, they used the old Arrows facilities but most of the Arrows assets were sold off years ago.

I think Toro Rosso does have the Minardi equipment to design and make an F1 car.

[CNR]

it may be the end of toro rosso but Berger owns 50 per cent of the team


Dietrich Mateschitz declared that his 50 per cent share of the Faenza based squad is for sale


but who would buy in to a team that would most likely be a back marker ?

[Valve Bounce]

..........then I think that Force India would be the likely candidate for tail gunner.
So! OK!! If it is Force India, could they ever afford to attract sponsors sufficiently to continue in F1, let alone design build and test a car that would be competitive?

But supposing if they do design a car that can get off the tail end of the grid!! just supposing, OK. The question then is: which of the others could sustain any lengthy period qualifying behind Force India.

That is the interesting question here. Of course if Force India crumbles, then one of the other manufacturers will inherit the tail gunner job.

Strangely enough, F1 has always had some poor schmuck that was tail gunner: Minardi, Stryker and Super Aguri come to mind. They are a very necessary part of F1 to prevent one of the bigger teams from coming last - a sort of buffer from the abyss. Soon there won't be this buffer, and one of the big teams will fall, then possibly another, then another.

Not Good is it??

[aryan]

I don't think SA had anything useful for designing and making an F1 car, they used the old Arrows facilities but most of the Arrows assets were sold off years ago.

I think Toro Rosso does have the Minardi equipment to design and make an F1 car.

Toro Rosso is going to design a car based on the Minardi? A V10, running on grooved tyres, which was a dog on its day? How are they going to adapt that car to a V8 running on slicks with KERS and all the rest of the development which has happened in F1 in the past couple of years?

The Minardi designs and intellectual property is worth zilch right now. No one would use that as the basis for anything. Designing from scratch would be a better option for any designer.

The question is, after Red Bull bought Minardi, did they keep the Minardi design team, or thinking that they will be using the Red Bull designed car, did they just sack the whole team?

If they still have the design team on board, they might be able to do something.

But is Toro Roso in a financial position to hire new people and equipment to design and build a car of its own?

Did Red Bull sell all the Minardi design equipment after their acquisition of the team in the name of "leveraging synergies"?

[555-04Q2]

Unless they start winning soon, I think Toyota wont be around for much longer.

[BDunnell]

Strangely enough, F1 has always had some poor schmuck that was tail gunner: Minardi, Stryker and Super Aguri come to mind. They are a very necessary part of F1 to prevent one of the bigger teams from coming last - a sort of buffer from the abyss. Soon there won't be this buffer, and one of the big teams will fall, then possibly another, then another.

Absolutely right. :up: The very fact of an 18-car grid won't be enough to push things towards the abyss by itself, because the racing up front wouldn't be affected, but the team that finds itself habitually running last surely won't hang around, and then, as you say, I think you start to have problems. This has been the case with plenty of manufacturers in other formulae - rallying, touring cars - and there's no reason for F1 to be any different. Then, you need the 'independents'.

This is clearly a critical time for F1. In what form, I wonder, will the next investors in F1 teams come? The investment they provide will need to be stable and long-term in nature - quite a rare thing nowadays, if one considers the examples of certain Premiership football clubs whose owners don't really grasp the nature of what they're getting into, or indeed Midland in F1.

[BDunnell]

My opinion is that customer cars should be allowed, but not the latest spec, to make it a bit fairer to Williams and Force India.

The problem, of course, is finding investors for a start-up team that is going to be effectively 'handicapped' from the outset. Again, we come back to the need for a long-term view. It would be all very well for a team like Prodrive to take advantage of this as a starting point, as their goal would clearly be to develop their own cars, but other than that sort of outfit there is the danger of bringing about a load of short-term efforts that would, in the longer run, do little to sustain F1.

[ChrisS]

Toro Rosso is going to design a car based on the Minardi? A V10, running on grooved tyres, which was a dog on its day? How are they going to adapt that car to a V8 running on slicks with KERS and all the rest of the development which has happened in F1 in the past couple of years?

The Minardi designs and intellectual property is worth zilch right now. No one would use that as the basis for anything. Designing from scratch would be a better option for any designer.

The question is, after Red Bull bought Minardi, did they keep the Minardi design team, or thinking that they will be using the Red Bull designed car, did they just sack the whole team?

If they still have the design team on board, they might be able to do something.

But is Toro Roso in a financial position to hire new people and equipment to design and build a car of its own?

Did Red Bull sell all the Minardi design equipment after their acquisition of the team in the name of "leveraging synergies"?

They dont have a design team as a company called "Red Bull Technology" designs the cars for both RBR and STR

I didnt say anything about making a car based on the Minardi, I said that I thought Toro Rosso has the Minardi facilities and equipment that are capable of making a car, If as you say Red Bull sold the Minardi design equipment then Toro Rosso has nothing, not even a motorhome

[JSH]

The problem, of course, is finding investors for a start-up team that is going to be effectively 'handicapped' from the outset. Again, we come back to the need for a long-term view. It would be all very well for a team like Prodrive to take advantage of this as a starting point, as their goal would clearly be to develop their own cars, but other than that sort of outfit there is the danger of bringing about a load of short-term efforts that would, in the longer run, do little to sustain F1.

Speed Channel interviewed Bernie before the race and Bernie told them "we are very selective about who we allow as sponsors in F1"... "There are many more people trying to sponsor F1"...

Not sure if I believe him...

[Valve Bounce]

I have been saying this for many years. Bernie needs to distribute more money from the TV revenue to all the teams.
Perhaps if they established a system whereby the bona fide constructors get a larger allocation of money than the teams using customer cars, this may work. In addition, if the customer cars can only compete for WDC points and not WCC points, then this could create a fair set of conditions acceptable to all parties. And if Force India finds they cannot be competitive with their own design and constructed car, and decides to go the customer car way, then this should be an avenue to appease all teams.

The way I see it, despite all the objections made by Force India, their ability to design and construct a new car, with all the testing required, and not come last or not go broke in the process is very remote. I cannot see them coming up with their own car and beat the likes of Red Bull or Williams or Toyota. OK!! at a pinch they might occasionally beat Honda, but even that is rather remote.

[Hawkmoon]

I have been saying this for many years. Bernie needs to distribute more money from the TV revenue to all the teams.

I agree Valve.

All the teams contribute to the spectacle that is F1, not just the front runners. The TV money needs to be split evenly across the teams with all teams receiving an equal share. This way all the teams will have the same starting point in terms of revenue.

The meritocracy that is F1 will still be preserved as the successful teams will be better able to attract high paying sponsors. Prize money would also reward teams for better performance. Regardless of how each team performs, they will all have a guarnteed amount of revenue that they can rely on each year.

The way that new entrants are dealt with would have to be looked at as it would effect the amount of TV revenue for each team but I figure that wouldn't be all that difficult if the teams removed their heads from the own backsides for 5 miniutes.