2022 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[chrisc90]

Oh George, oh George.

https://www.skysports.com/amp/f1/news/1 ... pa3jnt5i2g

Anyone who was not pushing the regs, was not trying hard enough

True. Same with AM rear wing and the zero-pod concept.

Effectively calling them out for cheating. I can’t see the order changing. Can’t see any benefit of bending the plank away from the tarmac allowing more air to pass under ir

[atanatizante]

There are rumors that are saying they'll have onwards the race set-up more towards qualy, now that they analyzed the data and in particular the Saturday qualy gamble they took with Russell in Hungary...
There are at least two reasons for doing that:
1. The last races will have lower track temps which requires quicker warm up tyre phase
2. It seems that the tyre deg is not so high even in RUS' hands/driving stile and his setup more towards qualy

[Wouter]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/merc ... /10356153/
.

In order to keep a tight focus on its spending regarding F1 car development and upgrades, Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff says it is using financial engineers to account for its updates across the season.

"So we have a tracker with financial engineers that track every single process and every single part that comes into the car," Wolff told Motorsport.com.

"So when we take things out of the truck, the financial engineer notes, the value.
When you utilise it's being counted for.

"You are following this trend, like we have planned. We didn't bring a lot at the beginning but it's coming steady now."

.
Do I understand correctly that if they do not use something that has been produced (say 5 different front wings), it is not counted for the budget cap, but only if they do use it, is it counted for the budget cap?

But producing that (of those 5 different front wings) also cost money, even if you don't use those parts.
So those production costs don't count if they don't use something?

[Stu]

If true, that is ridiculous! And also totally pointless….

[Just_a_fan]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/merc ... /10356153/
.

In order to keep a tight focus on its spending regarding F1 car development and upgrades, Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff says it is using financial engineers to account for its updates across the season.

"So we have a tracker with financial engineers that track every single process and every single part that comes into the car," Wolff told Motorsport.com.

"So when we take things out of the truck, the financial engineer notes, the value.
When you utilise it's being counted for.

"You are following this trend, like we have planned. We didn't bring a lot at the beginning but it's coming steady now."

.
Do I understand correctly that if they do not use something that has been produced (say 5 different front wings), it is not counted for the budget cap, but only if they do use it, is it counted for the budget cap?

But producing that (of those 5 different front wings) also cost money, even if you don't use those parts.
So those production costs don't count if they don't use something?

I think he's saying that they just track everything so they know exactly what everything costs. It's probably just the way that Wolff phrases things - I've noted that his comments often take a bit of thought to understand exactly what he means, even though on the face of it his English is very good. Sometimes he says something and I think "I know you've just said that in excellent English but I have no idea what you mean!"

[atanatizante]

Are they allowed to subcontract different daily jobs like CFD for example? If that`s the case could they contract another company to do their homework for let`s say half of the price they are now spending? Or even better to do twice the workload, hours etc. they are doing now for the same amount of money they spend currently?

[Wouter]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/merc ... /10356153/
.

In order to keep a tight focus on its spending regarding F1 car development and upgrades, Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff says it is using financial engineers to account for its updates across the season.

"So we have a tracker with financial engineers that track every single process and every single part that comes into the car," Wolff told Motorsport.com.

"So when we take things out of the truck, the financial engineer notes, the value.
When you utilise it's being counted for.

"You are following this trend, like we have planned. We didn't bring a lot at the beginning but it's coming steady now."

.
Do I understand correctly that if they do not use something that has been produced (say 5 different front wings), it is not counted for the budget cap, but only if they do use it, is it counted for the budget cap?

But producing that (of those 5 different front wings) also cost money, even if you don't use those parts.
So those production costs don't count if they don't use something?

.
I think he's saying that they just track everything so they know exactly what everything costs. It's probably just the way that Wolff phrases things - I've noted that his comments often take a bit of thought to understand exactly what he means, even though on the face of it his English is very good.

Sometimes he says something and I think "I know you've just said that in excellent English but I have no idea what you mean!"

.
"When you utilise it's being counted for."

This sentence cannot be interpreted in two ways. He says exactly as it is and as he means it.

[Just_a_fan]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/merc ... /10356153/
.

.
Do I understand correctly that if they do not use something that has been produced (say 5 different front wings), it is not counted for the budget cap, but only if they do use it, is it counted for the budget cap?

But producing that (of those 5 different front wings) also cost money, even if you don't use those parts.
So those production costs don't count if they don't use something?

.
I think he's saying that they just track everything so they know exactly what everything costs. It's probably just the way that Wolff phrases things - I've noted that his comments often take a bit of thought to understand exactly what he means, even though on the face of it his English is very good.

Sometimes he says something and I think "I know you've just said that in excellent English but I have no idea what you mean!"

.
"When you utilise it's being counted for."

This sentence cannot be interpreted in two ways. He says exactly as it is and as he means it.

You assume that the bit before that:

So when we take things out of the truck, the financial engineer notes, the value

means at the race track. It could also mean the things that they buy in, e.g. carbon fibre prepreg, that is delivered by truck to the Brackley factory. So in that case, they make a record of every single cost associated with things coming in to the factory "out of the truck".

So, yes, it can be interpreted in two ways. That's the problem with the short quotes used in journalists' stories these days - they are open to [mis]interpretation and that is probably done on purpose to increase clicks.

If this is a general issue about how the cost cap is structured then it should be discussed elsewhere and not in a team thread. If it's an attempt to suggest Mercedes are doing something naughty then it's a fairly thin piece of evidence.

[Just_a_fan]

Are they allowed to subcontract different daily jobs like CFD for example? If that`s the case could they contract another company to do their homework for let`s say half of the price they are now spending? Or even better to do twice the workload, hours etc. they are doing now for the same amount of money they spend currently?

Sub-contracted CFD would still fall under the flops limits so it wouldn't help them do more analysis, although they could do it cheaper for the same number of flops. I doubt they'd do that, however, as they have the computer power in place already and just switching it off and getting someone else to do the work would seem to be a strange thing to do. It would also open them up to increased risk of espionage.

[morefirejules08]

Oh George, oh George.

https://www.skysports.com/amp/f1/news/1 ... pa3jnt5i2g

Anyone who was not pushing the regs, was not trying hard enough

True. Same with AM rear wing and the zero-pod concept.

Effectively calling them out for cheating. I can’t see the order changing. Can’t see any benefit of bending the plank away from the tarmac allowing more air to pass under ir

Just because “you” can’t see the benefit doesn’t mean that benefit doesn’t exist.

[RZS10]

Strictly speaking "When you utilise it's being counted for." isn't even a full and/or correct sentence ... even in context with the previous and following sentence it's really confusing.

But i thought i remembered having heard/read something like that a long time ago and i could not say where and when exactly - the gist of it was that unused parts would not count towards the budget cap, even when producing them was obviously related to some costs ... but then i guessed that this could not be correct when a team as big as Mercedes only had shared spare parts for both drivers (like the floor and rear wing in Austria) - unless that was related to freight cost, as transporting those parts would count towards the cap even if the manufacturing would not (?)

[Just_a_fan]

Strictly speaking "When you utilise it's being counted for." isn't even a full and/or correct sentence ... even in context with the previous and following sentence it's really confusing.

Exactly so, at least to this native English speaker.

[organic]

Dipped in red

[Big Tea]

Lets hope they do not catch 'Ferrariitus' in the garage. That began with a spreading red area on the car...

[Tvetovnato]

Has anyone heard more about this?