A single fuel provider in the future of F1?

[CottrellGP]

Hi all, i read a post on the internet earlier which talked about a single fuel provider in the future, do you think that the FIA would go ahead with this plan? or do you think that the teams would be against it? If the FIA did go ahead with this plan do you think teams would loose a lot of sponsor money from there fuel partners?

Source :http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/09/2 ... YS20130927

P.S not sure if this has been mentioned before or if im posting this in the right category!

[SectorOne]

The ideas they come up with...

[timbo]

Fuel companies often not only offer technical partnership but also financial support, I'm not sure they would go ahead with this proposal, F1 cannot afford to lose sponsors.

[xpensive]

Fuel companies often not only offer technical partnership but also financial support, I'm not sure they would go ahead with this proposal, F1 cannot afford to lose sponsors.

Oh but they will, next year will be rife with speculations over which laboratory managed to pack the most MJ in every kg of fuel and equalizing that will be in line with FIA's spirit to turn F1 into a global IRL-series, or even a motorsport WWE if you wish.

[timbo]

Fuel companies often not only offer technical partnership but also financial support, I'm not sure they would go ahead with this proposal, F1 cannot afford to lose sponsors.

Oh but they will, next year will be rife with speculations over which laboratory managed to pack the most MJ in every kg of fuel and equalizing that will be in line with FIA's spirit to turn F1 into a global IRL-series, or even a motorsport WWE if you wish.

Just few additional lines in regs, and F1 can still be safely spec'd but the fuel companies can still sticker their badges.

[xpensive]

Right, like they could have done with the tyres you mean?

[timbo]

Right, like they could have done with the tyres you mean?

I think there was little incentive to go that route with the tyres. Firstly, there was a precendent with tyre monopoly which suited teams and FOM with Goodyear, and secondly tyre suppliers never were a major sponsors (if I'm not mistaken), while fuel companies were (remember Tyrrel-ELF?).

Of course anything is possible, but I would be surprised with this move. I don't think Merc would be happy loosing Petronas badge, as well as Lotus, Ferrari, RBR etc.

[xpensive]

Like Ferrari losing Marlboro, McLaren and Williams losing West and Rothmans respectively, should I go on?

They all survived.

[timbo]

Like Ferrari losing Marlboro, McLaren and Williams losing West and Rothmans respectively, should I go on?

They all survived.

Tobacco companies were different matter as that came from the outside -- firstly most countries where F1 races are held banned tobacco sponsorships then there were EU laws. F1 had no choice.

[Sombrero]

Ferrari is still cashing big money from Philip Morris til 2015 !

[xpensive]

Like Ferrari losing Marlboro, McLaren and Williams losing West and Rothmans respectively, should I go on?

They all survived.

Tobacco companies were different matter as that came from the outside -- firstly most countries where F1 races are held banned tobacco sponsorships then there were EU laws. F1 had no choice.

Outsiders, national bans and EU laws, so what, the teams still survived, didn't they?

If F1 is going IRL or Nascar, they need to learn from them, bring in McDonads, Dunkin' Donuts, Pepsi, KFC, IKEA and Tide!

[MOWOG]

What have you got against Tide?

I thought Mr. X was gonna tell us about how manipulating the fuel for maximum energy content within the rules was gonna be the next new thing in the sport, because of the new engine formula coming in 2014. So the sport would transition from being an aero based product - which most fans could give a flying fig about - to a fuel based product - which would be worse because at least you can see the aero.

Perhaps the FIA is anticipating X's argument and wants to stop it dead in its tracks by specifying a spec fuel?

Personally, I think the teams that enjoy massive financial support from a fuel supplier - like Ferrari with its decades long association with Shell - will not be supportive of this idea. And we all know that what Ferrari wants, Ferrari gets.

[timbo]

Outsiders, national bans and EU laws, so what, the teams still survived, didn't they?

Yeah, but actually tobacco sponsored F1 seemed healthier, as there were actual sponsors around and tobacco companies could afford to throw away cash. But this is other question.

What I'm talking about is that FIA first has to propose this idea to teams (unless someone blows up and fuel monopoly is passed as safety measure) and I don't think they would welcome that.

If F1 is going IRL or Nascar, they need to learn from them, bring in McDonads, Dunkin' Donuts, Pepsi, KFC, IKEA and Tide!

Actually I wonder why there's no Pepsi or Coca-cola owned brand in F1. Also the scope of the businesses sponsoring F1 seem to have narrowed over time.

[xpensive]

@MOWOG;

As discussed on this thread a while ago, the energy density of regular pump-fuel can vary with +/-4% according to the US EPA, though some members dismissed and almost ridiculed the concern, some of them seem to have changed their minds however.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline

Xcerpt;
The bulk of a typical gasoline consists of hydrocarbons with between four and 12 carbon atoms per molecule (commonly referred to as C4-C12)

Just imagine what Shell's and Total's lab-rats can with this, literally puzzling together the 2014 F1-fuel molecule by molecule.

[SectorOne]

Actually I wonder why there's no Pepsi or Coca-cola owned brand in F1.

There is, Burn is coca cola owned.