Well, you can only afford it if there's enough money coming in, isn't there? The problem is that the current system gives all the money to those at the front, and almost none to those at the back. I'm not saying there should be no reward for good performance, but there should be a basic split BEFORE money is divided based upon performance.emaren wrote:If you cannot afford it, then you have no place on the grid. No team should be going into F1 with a paltry budget and hoping that they magically break into the top tier. It is simply not going to happen.
I see your point. But the analysis kind of depends on your point of view, doesn't it? From the point of view of Ferrari, Mercedes, Red Bull and McLaren, what you say is absolutely correct.It costs at least $100M for a two car team to run for a season, $200M would see you in the mid field. If you want to run at the front, it seems that you need $400M or more. That is the price of entry, if you cannot afford to pay, well, you cannot play....
That's not racing. That's an overhyped, made for TV spectacle designed to feed a few egos and fool networks into covering it.
And yet, people have done just that for over 60 years.MOWOG wrote: We don't want to see the same 4 teams on top race after race, year after year.
You obviously don't remember Lotus, Brabham and BRM, do you?wesley123 wrote:And yet, people have done just that for over 60 years.MOWOG wrote: We don't want to see the same 4 teams on top race after race, year after year.
They should use a system like the premier league does in football. Basically 50% is shared equally to all teams, then the remaining 50% is divided up depending on position. 10th place gets #### and 9th #### and so on.thedutchguy wrote: Well, you can only afford it if there's enough money coming in, isn't there? The problem is that the current system gives all the money to those at the front, and almost none to those at the back. I'm not saying there should be no reward for good performance, but there should be a basic split BEFORE money is divided based upon performance.
This is the solution.astracrazy wrote:They should use a system like the premier league does in football. Basically 50% is shared equally to all teams, then the remaining 50% is divided up depending on position. 10th place gets #### and 9th #### and so on.thedutchguy wrote: Well, you can only afford it if there's enough money coming in, isn't there? The problem is that the current system gives all the money to those at the front, and almost none to those at the back. I'm not saying there should be no reward for good performance, but there should be a basic split BEFORE money is divided based upon performance.
The trouble is, the big teams won't accept this because they don't dare risk there income being based on performance.
Ferrari want the biggest chunk of the pie always, in this system there chunk would be getting smaller this year
That is almost exactly the current system.astracrazy wrote:They should use a system like the premier league does in football. Basically 50% is shared equally to all teams, then the remaining 50% is divided up depending on position. 10th place gets #### and 9th #### and so on.thedutchguy wrote: Well, you can only afford it if there's enough money coming in, isn't there? The problem is that the current system gives all the money to those at the front, and almost none to those at the back. I'm not saying there should be no reward for good performance, but there should be a basic split BEFORE money is divided based upon performance.
That's the way it should be, no?Ferrari want the biggest chunk of the pie always, in this system there chunk would be getting smaller this year
Is that the same one that forecast that Austin would never get built and that the 3 kings doomed Merc to failure? Hopefully its had a recalibration since then.xpensive wrote:My kriztal ball seez...
etc. So the last few teams got 1/12th of $350M or ~$30M. Some teams - Ferrari/RedBull etc then got the lions share of the other half. Which actually seems reasonably fair.Last year, F1 generated around $1.6 billion in commercial revenues, of which $700 million was distributed to the teams. Roughly half of this cash fund is shared equally with the other half allocated according to where the team finished in the championship.
Pup wrote:The allocation of this year's prize fund, per Saward's formula (which I don't think is quite accurate, since it doesn't account for the "Category B" payments which are based on historic performance)...
Total estimated fund (per TJ13) - $750,000,000, less Ferrari's 2.5%, or $18,250,000, leaves $711,750,000.
Half of that, or $355,875,000, will be split evenly among the top 9 teams, or $39,541,666.67 for each.
(This is normally a top 10 split, but since a team has to remain in the top 10 for 2 years straight to qualify, Marussia does not partake.)
The other half gets split as follows:
1st @ 19% = $67,616,250
2nd @ 16% = 56,940,000
3rd @ 13% = $46,263,750
4th @ 11% = $39,146,250
5th @ 10% = $35,587,500
6th @ 9% = $32,028,750
7th @ 7% = $24,911,250
8th @ 6% = $21,352,500
9th @ 5% = $17,793,750
10th @ 4% = $14,235,000
Bernie's $10,000,000 new team deal is up this year, so no more of that.
Adding it all up, the total prize money for the year:
Red Bull - $107,157,916.67
Mercedes - $96,481,666.67
Ferrari - $104,055,416.67
Lotus - $78,687,916.67
McLaren - $75,129,166.67
Force India - $71,570,416.67
Sauber - $64,452,916.67
Toro Rosso - $60,894,166.67
Williams - $57,355,416,67
Marussia - $14,235,000.00
Caterham - $0.00
And both Carteham and Marussia ended out of the big pot, because of fighting for the rights to get in the pot this year (top-10 2 years in a row). Marussia is about to get it now, if it survives, but it would be a very different Marussia. But if they had made the crazy deal last year where Marussia gifted the 10th place to Caterham, we would not be having this conversation now...hollus wrote:Little wonder that Marussia and Caterham have trouble catching up with the rest. What is the point of the top-10 money limits anymore?
Had a top-12 finish been for grabs, Marussia could have made a deal with Caterham to let them by for 14M$, then both teams could split that top-10 split money 50-50, and both teams would have won 20M$. Makes no sense!
