So how do you feel about 14 cars?

[keysersoze]

Evidently, Bernardo doesn't see this as an issue, rather criticizing the teams that spend "only" 50-80 million as having their "begging bowls."

[jens]

Needless to say, 14 cars basically means a series is dead. Or at the very least about to die.

Can't believe Bernie will let it go that far, but it could be he has no choice given he has let F1 to fall into the state it has fallen. To give $100M to Ferrari for just showing up, while half of the field get nothing, is meant to cause issues one day.

The rich and successful may think that "poverty is the problem of the poor", but ignorance will hit them sooner or later too. Because big teams need smaller ones as well for healthy competition and for the series to actually exist.

[Mark]

Quite so. You can't win unless you've beaten someone.

[Bagwan]

If I'm not mistaken , this is the time for talk about how to redistribute the wealth , as , isn't today the day they are to sign on to next year ?
Lotus , Sauber and Force India have all made statements to this effect .

It is at this point , when the survival of the series is clearly at significant risk , that they MUST make a change .
They want to compete , so the formula , itself , isn't the issue .
Even the actual money to run is acceptable , if the series shared out the funds in a better way .

The money could still be more for those top manufacturers who reach the front , but the disparity between them and the tail-enders should be a lot less .

[Mark]

They had a serious proposal to cut costs and get more teams in but the existing teams threw it out.

[Tazio]

So how do you feel about 14 cars? I'll tell you when it is a reality, but I think that theywill hammer something out and there will be 18 cars on the grid, with 20 in2016. Bernie won't let it go that far, he’s talking shit now but he will bucklebehind closed doors, and it’s pathetic that that is the way he does business,because they need sweeping changes in the way profits are distributed. My opinionof him and his constant tinkering with the formula hasn't changed, and wouldreally like to see that little miser over throne, but I've felt that way formany years. I’ll be fine with 18 cars.

[steveaki13]

I want 26 cars FFS.

I know it won't happen, but I want it :mad:

[driveace]

Its a sorry state of affairs when 2 team are going bankcrupt ,and maybe 2 others are complaining about their state of affairs.
IF Bernie is paying Ferrari $100 million ,just to turn up ,then why do some of the others not get a help too ?
Probably 14 of the current drivers get payed whilst the others are pay drivers .
There is money about ,as Mac/Honda have reportedly offered Alonso 35 Million Eu to drive next year .
Its a case of them and US .BUT US need them (The smaller teams ) to make the numbers up ,and overtaking interesting too

[Tazio]

Apparently the proposed boycott has gotten his attention. :dozey:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/01/motor-racing-prix-ecclestone-idUSL4N0SR0IV20141101?rpc=401

[journeyman racer]

14 cars? I wonder how bad it really has to be, before everyone backs down and does something to restructure F1?

Just think. People would still spend heaps of money going to watch that field lol



I want 26 cars FFS.

I know it won't happen, but I want it :mad:
That's the limit of an F1 field. In hindsight, it's poor form that the F1 "economy" isn't tailored to that. 20 is as bad as 18. But there must some negative psychological effect of having 20<.


Quite so. You can't win unless you've beaten someone.
As someone who benefited as a result of "winning" a single field in my class a couple of times, I can tell you that it's an empty feeling. I gladly take the points towards the standings, but that's it.

[keysersoze]

Apparently the proposed boycott has gotten his attention. :dozey:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/01/motor-racing-prix-ecclestone-idUSL4N0SR0IV20141101?rpc=401

He wants the big teams to agree to give away the millions they contractually earned to help the cash-strapped teams. Yeah, Hecklestone, I see them doing that. I mean, wouldn't we all?

[Tazio]

He wants the big teams to agree to give away the millions they contractually earned to help the cash-strapped teams. Yeah, Hecklestone, I see them doing that. I mean, wouldn't we all?Bernie is speaking out of both sides of his mouth, and is starting to feel the heat.

http://www.espn.co.uk/blogs/motorsport/story/181995.html?CMP=OTC-RSS

Bernie talks a lot of shit, but it is my opinion that the series will survive with a few tweaks.

[zako85]

With 14 cars you still have a whole lot more cars than says WEC's prime class, the LMP1. The last WEC race at COTA I was spectating for six hours even though I was watching only the top 6 cars, the two Audis, two Toyotas, and two Porsches. 14 cars competing with each other is just fine by me (though, at this point, I would revert to the old system of granting points only to the top 6 cars). Almost no one cared about what happens to Marussia, HRT, or Caterham. These three simply made the Q1 of qualifying sessions really REALLY boring and also served as obstacles for other cars to go around in the race.

[Zico]

I want 26 cars FFS.

I know it won't happen, but I want it :mad:



Imo 18-20 cars on the grid is about right and could probably be acheived safely with an equality minded budget shake up. With 26 cars I'd be a bit worried that filling up these spare spaces with even more low budget teams/mobile chicanes which would be to the detriment of safety.

[Bagwan]

So , did I hear Bernie say that he would match any money that they could claw back from the teams ?
Did I really hear that ?

Weak moment for Bernie , or shrewd business move ?

We have reports that there are offers for Caterham and Marussia , or would be if things were fixed .
And , everyone is saying , apart from those at the top who just want a bigger pie to accommodate the minnows , that they want a re-distribution of wealth .


In saying that he is maybe to blame , Bernard has just called out the big guys , to receive their part of the blame as well .
The first of the big teams to comply will look as though they are shaming the others into complying with the rethink .

At least , they should all be really thinking about this .
It is inevitable , I think , and the gauntlet is thrown .

The best way to reply , if RB , Merc , and Ferrari have the foresight to see it can't work this way , would be to reply positively , and most importantly , together .
Pigs can , in fact , fly , if you attach enough balloons to them .
Nothing is impossible .

There are a number of ways this could all work out , but it's perhaps never before been so obvious that the whole thing could fold without more of the pie going to those farther down the grid .

[N. Jones]

Imo 18-20 cars on the grid is about right and could probably be acheived safely with an equality minded budget shake up. With 26 cars I'd be a bit worried that filling up these spare spaces with even more low budget teams/mobile chicanes which would be to the detriment of safety.

I second steve - 13 teams, 26 cars.

[Jag_Warrior]

He's old. He's filled his pockets (and those of his worthless offspring) with money. And more & more, as the years pass and longterm issues arise, he sounds increasingly like Andrew Craig. The old CART fans here will know exactly what I mean by that!

14 cars my @$$!!! :mad:

[Duncan]

Today with 15 cars for most of the race it was rather lacking...

I have to say that it's pretty striking just how small the gap really is in terms of performance between the fastest teams and the slowest, despite a huge gulf in the level of resources they respectively have to throw at the problem. It took the Mercs, what, 40 laps to lap Gutierrez in the Sauber, and for the whole race you had Lotus, Red Bull, Toro Rosso and Ferrari all tangling for places. Really great stuff from the "slow" guys.

I'm with Steve too. 13 teams, 26 cars. It really shouldn't be that hard to figure out once everybody is sufficiently motivated.

I take Bernie's statements to be just positioning. It's what Bernie does. Every issue is a deal to be done, and every word that comes out of his mouth is an angle. Hopefully he can actually earn some of the money he makes and get something done. Caterham and Marussia are all but done without immediate intervention, and Force India is apparently right on the edge also.

[Mark]

Aren't we seeing the shaking out of the financial crisis here? F1 has managed to insulate itself for a time, but reality catches up with everyone.

Back in the day F1 was able to get by with tobacco money so you wouldn't see this sort of issue, but today it's not so easy.

[SGWilko]

14 cars is the minimum before the FIA have the right to effectively tear up the 100 year deal and start with a clean sheet is it not?

There may well be a 'cruel to be kind' agenda here to knife BCE in the back and finally get rid!

[zako85]

Today with 15 cars for most of the race it was rather lacking...


I can't believe that Sunday's race was somehow lacking because of the 4 missing back marker cars. What did you miss of them? Perhaps those 12 seconds of TV time granted to those, or their function of an obstacle for other cars to go around? Let's face the reality. F1 has been a 9 team sport for the last 5 seasons. The three new back marker teams added nothing to the sport. They only made the Q1 session of qualifying really boring.

[zako85]

Today with 15 cars for most of the race it was rather lacking...


Did you even see the race? Would you have enjoyed it significantly more with four more loser cars driving somewhere in the back?




I have to say that it's pretty striking just how small the gap really is in terms of performance between the fastest teams and the slowest, despite a huge gulf in the level of resources they respectively have to throw at the problem.

This statement is quite meaningless. Who are you to judge how much let's say a third of a second over a lap should cost the teams? Why shouldn't this cost say tens of millions in budget? The rules of the FIA have really set the baseline lap times for all teams and all those fractions of second above the baseline do cost the millions in resources. And Mercedes cars are something like a full second ahead of the rest of field. The field is not close at all. No one can catch the Mercedes cars right now. Then you have a tight midfield, and then a bunch of cars that can never catch the midfield (I speak of Marussia or Caterham). Inside the field, the cars powered by engines other than Mercedes are certainly at a huge disadvantage.

[journeyman racer]

I can see zako's pov, for his own interest. But I suspect he's only meaning as far as the race at the front is concerned. In this context, he might even be satisfied with a little as 6 cars then. It hard to articulate, but there's just something not right about F1 having a small field. There are too numerous to mention, maybe even some I can't think of, but here's some anyway.

Leading drivers making their way through backmarkers is not a "skill" as such. But there is a knack to it, which highlights driver's abilities, or shows a strength. Being a good river is not all about what happens in qualifying. Which to some, seems like the be all, end all of a driver's ability.

It adds value to finishing postions. It used to be a big moment for a smaller team to get at least a point.

It creates a bridging level, between classes like GP2, FR3.5 and so on. It's all very well leading runners, title winners in the smaller classes, getting a drive in a bigger team. But some could benefit from a year or two, or there, from running at the rear of F1, before they become a "complete" driver.

With smaller fields, it creates an appearance that it's not a serious, genuine competition, or that it's not really that big of a deal. I see this happening with the view of race fans here about Bathurst. As good as the finish might've been this year. A growing number of fans here see it becoming less and less of a significant race, due to there being 25 cars racing. Compare that to the 50+ the B12h will get, that race is starting to gain a presence here. Similar can happen with F1 over time.

It's not all about what's happening at the front.

[Duncan]

Did you even see the race? Would you have enjoyed it significantly more with four more loser cars driving somewhere in the back?

Umm, yes, I saw the race. From the bleachers at turn 12.

And yes, it would have been significantly better with more cars. There's a lot more going on than you necessarily see on TV, which tends to focus on the guys up front at the expense of whatever is happening further down the field.

And, BTW, not only were Caterham and Marussia not there, but Force India and half of Sauber were gone pretty early on. The remaining cars further down the order were fighting tooth and nail the whole race, and really put on a great show. It would have been great to have more of that. Caterham and Marussia fighting amongst themselves would have been a significant additional element.

For sure, the stuff happening up front is important and exciting, but it's not everything that's going on.





This statement is quite meaningless. Who are you to judge how much let's say a third of a second over a lap should cost the teams? Why shouldn't this cost say tens of millions in budget? The rules of the FIA have really set the baseline lap times for all teams and all those fractions of second above the baseline do cost the millions in resources. And Mercedes cars are something like a full second ahead of the rest of field. The field is not close at all. No one can catch the Mercedes cars right now. Then you have a tight midfield, and then a bunch of cars that can never catch the midfield (I speak of Marussia or Caterham). Inside the field, the cars powered by engines other than Mercedes are certainly at a huge disadvantage.

Compared to other series? There's almost nothing in it. Earlier in the weekend were Ferrari and Porsche races over much shorter race distances (like 20 minutes to half an hour) and the different cars were much more strung out in that time than you would ever see in an F1 race, even though they're all driving the same car (or two classes in the Ferrari challenge case). It's pretty remarkable to me that all of the F1 teams are as close as they are building their own cars on vastly different budgets.

[Duncan]

It's not all about what's happening at the front.

Exactly...

[Doc Austin]

It's easy to lose interest in things when you know it could fall apart. I remember when champcar got down to 15-16 cars, and even those were falling apart because they were so old and worn out. Everyone knew it was just a matter of time, and it got too sad to watch. I don't think Formula One is going to go away, but if the grid shrinks any more people could start turning it off. It's hard to sell something as important if you can't get enough people to compete.

More equal distribution of funds will help, but it's still going to be so expensive that teams will falter. They need to cut down the expense or they are going to have this kind of crisis again. Teams have always come and gone, and it always revolves around money. I think the current crisis was exacerbated by everyone having to throw out everything they had and start over with all new cars this year That, and these cars are so complicated that it would be hard to believe they are not substantially more expensive than what we had before.

OTOH, Indycars are very inexpensive comparatively and they are scratching around for entires. I think the whole world is just dead broke.

[schmenke]

Not sure I understand all this recent talk about redistribution of teams' revenue? The most recent Concorde agreement had been signed by all teams, including Caterham and Marussia, several months ago and establishes the revenue distribution scheme until, I believe, 2020.

[Doc Austin]

Not sure I understand all this recent talk about redistribution of teams' revenue? The most recent Concorde agreement had been signed by all teams, including Caterham and Marussia, several months ago and establishes the revenue distribution scheme until, I believe, 2020.

It's like professional athletes wanting to re-negotiate their contracts when they have a year or two left. What's wrong with honoring the current contract?

OTOH, this is different because if you don't have the money to run the car, what else can you do?

[Storm]

OTOH, Indycars are very inexpensive comparatively and they are scratching around for entires. I think the whole world is just dead broke.

Not really. They are just spending the money elsewhere ;)

[Doc Austin]

Not really. They are just spending the money elsewhere ;)

Perhaps. In the US, cars have become uncool. The econazis have convinced everyone that cars are polluting the planet and burning resources. Besides, today's kids (tomorrow's fans) would rather keep their noses buried in their cell phones than get laid, so I don't have much hope for racing to survive in this country, at least not at anywhere near the levels we have seen.

[steveaki13]

Those 6 cars at the back though when watching live could have some great battles. Thus I do not agree with the "Its the front that matters the rest are pointless"

26 cars is much more of a spectacle on the TV and live. It provides more battles and also more cars for spectators to watch. 8 good cars would be enough for TV, but would leave live spectators bored for 65 seconds each lap

[Bagwan]

Compromise starting to edge closer , as Bernie's dare has come good .

He said he was partly to blame , and his hands were tied .

Red Bull blinked first , as Horner has now made mumbles about giving up a few per cent , if Ferrari and Merc do the same .

Now that this has been raised by a front runner , the others must respond , or look greedy and foolish trying to defend the disparity .


Whether it was his own idea or not , this was an extremely clever move from our Bernard .
He'll soon have them all at the table , talking real numbers .

[Tazio]

Whether it was his own idea or not , this was an extremely clever move from our Bernard .
He'll soon have them all at the table , talking real numbers .
With all due respect Baggie, I would say Bernie had, and has a minor role in the decision as he himself stated. There was a time when he did, but I believe he is on a very short leash these days, ands personally think his retirement/replacement is imminent or at least in the foreseeable future. Donald MacKenzie is the prime mover here:


Donald MacKenzie, co-chairman of F1's largest shareholder, CVC Capital Partners, phoned Lotus boss Gerard Lopez and promised to address their concerns. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/29867941) MacKenzie said he would do this irrespective of Bernie Ecclestone's position.
As co-chairman and co-founder of CVC Capital Partners, the main shareholder of the group of companies that own F1's commercial rights, MacKenzie employs Ecclestone to run the sport.
He persuaded Lopez to call off the news conference ahead of the race, Jordan says, promising that he would do something to ensure the smaller teams earned more money from the sport.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/29888406

[Bagwan]

With all due respect Baggie, I would say Bernie had, and has a minor role in the decision as he himself stated. There was a time when he did, but I believe he is on a very short leash these days, ands personally think his retirement/replacement is imminent or at least in the foreseeable future. Donald MacKenzie is the prime mover here:

With that same respect back , Mr. Bear , his move to divide and conquer in the last agreement has changed to suit his needs here .
He doesn't have to have real control to prompt a response from the big teams .
He just has to open his gob , and the obvious becomes clear .

The whole thing just aint fair .

[Tazio]

I agree Mr. Baguette, I never thought the distribution of F1 monies was fair, in fact it is very inequitable. I was not disputing that, but I think he is much more of a mouthpiece for CVC, and I also believe he will be asked to choose his words, and deeds more carefully. Of course this doesn't change the fact that CVC is in the business of making money, and redistribution in and of itself wont affect their bottom line. However I do think the big teams will want CVC to also "give" a little if they are expected to. This could turn into a Mexican stand off before it's over. ;)

[Bagwan]

I agree Mr. Baguette, I never thought the distribution of F1 monies was fair, in fact it is very inequitable. I was not disputing that, but I think he is much more of a mouthpiece for CVC, and I also believe he will be asked to choose his words, and deeds more carefully. Of course this doesn't change the fact that CVC is in the business of making money, and redistribution in and of itself wont affect their bottom line. However I do think the big teams will want CVC to also "give" a little if they are expected to. This could turn into a Mexican stand off before it's over. ;)

Ah , but Mr. Ursa Major , he's a mouthpiece for CVC for a reason .
And , given his history , and recently demonstrated power , don't think for a second that MacKenzie doesn't follow Bernie's lead to begin with .

Crazy things come from his mouth sometimes , and sometimes they look like they had more reasoning behind them than when they were fresh .
3 car teams once delighted teams like Ferrari , but now they are dreaded even more as the last resort for a dying series .

And , remember , oh fuzzy one , that CVC kept the little guy on , even through a trial they said would end his reign if found guilty , when all and sundry thought he would be .

That's either a reaction founded on fear of reprisal , or fear of not being able to herd the cats as well as he does .
Or , maybe a little of both .

He's still there , and hoping to be the savior .
And , Bernard gets what Bernard wants .

[Jag_Warrior]

Perhaps. In the US, cars have become uncool. The econazis have convinced everyone that cars are polluting the planet and burning resources. Besides, today's kids (tomorrow's fans) would rather keep their noses buried in their cell phones than get laid, so I don't have much hope for racing to survive in this country, at least not at anywhere near the levels we have seen.

Sadly, I can't disagree with you here. I want to, but the data suggests that younger Americans, in general, are not as car crazy as they were in my generation and before. In the south, kids seem to still be gearheads. But one study I read showed that kids 16-24 are not seeking driver's licenses in the same percentages as they were in the years and decades prior.

But still, there will always be niches that racing series can exploit. Just as the major OEMs are producing more high performance cars than ever, F1 (and NASCAR) can "preach to the choir" and continue to do very well, IMO. I just picked up my latest hot car last week. And I've been surprised by how many kids (young enough to be my sons or daughters) make an effort to approach me and compliment it. The big one was a redneck looking kid in a diesel pickup (with a smoke stack coming out of the bed!) who pulled up beside me at a light and shouted "that's cool as hell, man!"... before charging off in a cloud of soot. So they're there. But I don't think Mr. Ecclestone can relate to that generation even as well as someone my age can (and I admit that I don't "get them" either). So I don't think he'll be able to draw them in. He still seems to be stuck in the 80's. Not a bad place to be stuck (I play the soundtrack to Miami Vice in my car all the time), but that mindset offers no help in bringing this generation (the ones at the margin) through the gates of the racetrack.

[schmenke]

... However I do think the big teams will want CVC to also "give" a little if they are expected to. ...

The CVC doesn’t have to "give" anything.
The CVC is in no way involved in negotiations with the F1 teams, or how the revenues are distributed.
The CVC is merely a holding company with one of their many assets being the FOG, whose operations are delegated to Bernie. It is Bernie alone who negotiates the revenue distribution between the Formula One Management and the teams, as specified in the Concorde Agreement.

[Doc Austin]

Sadly, I can't disagree with you here. I want to, but the data suggests that younger Americans, in general, are not as car crazy as they were in my generation and before.

Hell, they don't even care about p*ssy any more. All they care about it their cell phones.

[Tazio]

It is Bernie alone who negotiates the revenue distribution between the Formula One Management and the teams, as specified in the Concorde Agreement. The following seems to contradict this notion :confused:


Donald MacKenzie, co-chairman of F1's largest shareholder, CVC Capital Partners, phoned Lotus boss Gerard Lopez and promised to address their concerns. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/29867941) MacKenzie said he would do this irrespective of Bernie Ecclestone's position.
I never said that CVC has to do anything, but it appears that there is a feeling by those in the know that this idea I put forward (as abstract as it is) may have some traction:


Some key members of the paddock feel that CVC can afford to solve the three teams problems from their enormous profits.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/formula-1/bernie-ecclestone-trying-negotiate-deal-4563136

Then again it is The Mirror, and they are not naming names. ;)

[Tazio]

So what do we think, is CVC caving, or is this fund coming out of monies previously given to the bigger teams?


On the table now for Mackenzie to consider is a proposal whereby the smaller teams are given an additional pot of money to top up existing annual payments based on their final position in the constructors' championship.
Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has already argued such funds would not solve the problems of the more minor marques.
Kaltenborn naturally disagrees as she feels an additional 20 million US dollars per team - the figure understood to have been put forward - will suffice.
http://www.sportinglife.com/formula1/news/article/669/9550921/-
Or is it just talk to placate the "Rebels" for the rest of the season?

[longisland]

The logistic cost is a sizable chunk of the teams' spending. The organizer, CVC, may help out by arranging and footing the bills for the teams to each race. They may offer to cover the cost of a fixed number of team members, cargo & accommodation. The teams will pay for the extra if they decided to fly first class or in their private jet. The subsidy will not cover team promotional activities & hospitality. More attention is required on the mid table battles. I can still remember when Minardi & Webber scored their first point in Australia. A second set of cameras & crew dedicated to the rest of the pack are required. The free to air viewers will get the standard broadcast. The pay tv viewers will have acces to more contents such as the midfield & bottom table battle or subscribe to certain team or driver exclusively. CVC should invest in producing 4k content. The premium package subscribers will be able to enjoy the 4k quality at a price. It can be done with 1 company equipped with 4k capability. Formula 1 ought to be in the forefront in delivering cutting edge content.
In short. Bernie needs to focus more on how to sustain the business as a whole rather than just making profits from creating new race venues.

[AdvEvo]

Perhaps. In the US, cars have become uncool. The econazis have convinced everyone that cars are polluting the planet and burning resources. Besides, today's kids (tomorrow's fans) would rather keep their noses buried in their cell phones than get laid, so I don't have much hope for racing to survive in this country, at least not at anywhere near the levels we have seen.


Thats one best reply s i have ever read!

[Malbec]

Perhaps. In the US, cars have become uncool. The econazis have convinced everyone that cars are polluting the planet and burning resources. Besides, today's kids (tomorrow's fans) would rather keep their noses buried in their cell phones than get laid, so I don't have much hope for racing to survive in this country, at least not at anywhere near the levels we have seen.

No its not just the US. Its definitely the case in Europe and once the Chinese and Indians get over the novelty of having their own cars and realise the cost of all the taxes they are hit with they'll go the same way. Many adults I know living in or near the centre of London don't bother owning a car, if they need one they become members of a car-sharing club or hire one. I can't see their kids being too enthusiastic about car-culture either. Motorsports will have a tough time recruiting a new generation of fans.

And thats ignoring the cultural and legal effect of self-driving cars. It might well be the case in a decade from now that the concept of driving your own car for pleasure on public roads will be viewed as being as irresponsible as taking drugs once self-driving cars gain a reputation for being safer than human drivers.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Well now I'm depressed!

Surely cars will always be cool?

My passion for cars comes from my father who had a V12 XJ-S Jaguar and I loved the smell it made. Kids today will get a passion for cars through their Xboxes and Playstations. Some of the latest games such as Forza Horizon look beautiful and make cars cool.

[jens]

Interesting discussion. I agree with Malbec about the general world trends. By the way, I am also among those people, who values the whole eco stuff and sustainable development a lot. And I also don't have a car to drive in everyday life, and don't care to be honest.

But still.... I like motorsport, I like racing, I like sporting contest! Even if everyday simple life is quite different and not in any way helpful to the motorsport business.:p:

As for how F1 and racing could find new fans. It is a complicated topic with no easy answer. Perhaps it is time to re-define itself a bit, and which side of it to promote. I don't need to be a car fanatic in everyday life to like F1. There are many facets of F1, which are fascinating - driving skills, racing, competition, team work, modern technology, business, tradition/history, speed fascination (lost a bit in the new era), and other stuff. Each to their own I guess. But F1 is like a microcosm of a world, that's how I like to think about it.

[journeyman racer]

Some of us have referred to the 26 car limit. But I was thinking further. F1 should actually aiming for more than 26 car. 30, 40 if possible! It would be better overall.

The F1 "boys club" has exaggerated the cost of everything, including competing at the rear. It'd be bare bones, no frills budgets. Aside from more spots being available, the budget required to get a drive would be a lot lower. This give more and even wider opportunity to break into F1 grid. Budgets could possibly be so small, that a team might not even bother with a pay driver (even if they bring in slightly more money) and take a punt on a "worthy" talent. You know, the egalitarian utopia we all want F1 to be?

If in a really weak car. Someone may qualify for a race (or even makes it through pre-qualifying unexpectedly!) it could be the one-off result that could transform a career!