2018 F1 news

[Ed Harley]

So much for Christmas spirit.

[IulianFerrari]

So much for Christmas spirit.

Cheerful bunch indeed.

[aroutis]

So as expected you can't back up your claims and try and turn it around

We can play that game, if you back up your claims....shall we wait?

I don't intend to play this game, I thought you could understand that.

I guess not :D

P.S. It's most entertaining to watch you trying to twist things around, however to those accustomed to this, it just does not work. Try something else;)

[Christopher]

There is no point playing blame game what is in the past is in the past. I think everyone in the team can look at their own shortcomings and work on improving them for next season we win and lose as a team and whats done is done. Lets forget about the past and move on to next season and start with a clean slate because If you go into next season with a negative attitude and don't believe you can win then you may as well not bother turning up because you'll never win with that attitude.

[Greig]

I don't intend to play this game, I thought you could understand that.

I guess not :D

P.S. It's most entertaining to watch you trying to twist things around, however to those accustomed to this, it just does not work. Try something else;)

Wasn't even me that called you out on your claims, but here you are avoiding it and turning around.....

[Gerhard Berger]

I think at this point it is clear that when Aroutis says he is posting "facts", he is in fact posting bull

[IulianFerrari]

I think at this point it is clear that when Aroutis says he is posting "facts", he is in fact posting bull

A bit out of line there, my friend.

[Gerhard Berger]

A bit out of line there, my friend.

If someone cannot back up their claims then they will be called out.

[IulianFerrari]

If someone cannot back up their claims then they will be called out.

Friendlier fashion.

[stefa]

I must say I admire you all how much free time you all have discussing about... nothing!

[FerrariF60]

I must say I admire you all how much free time you all have discussing about... nothing!

well, it's the holidays, nothing else better to do i guess....ha, ha...

[wisepie]

I must say I admire you all how much free time you all have discussing about... nothing!

I was thinking the same myself, can't we just agree to differ sometimes?!

[IulianFerrari]

I must say I admire you all how much free time you all have discussing about... nothing!

Good quality to have during the winter break.

[jgonzalesm6]

The cost of F1 revealed: How much teams spent in 2018

Since 2013 I have complied an annual review of Formula 1 teams’ finances. The basis of the analysis is a combination of interviews, off-record discussions (crucial to obtain inside numbers), Companies House records for UK-based teams, and good old-fashioned sleuthing. The latter includes cross-referencing information with folk who migrated to other teams or those keen to spill beans for reasons best known to themselves.

Companies House records provide valuable, accurate references but are released nine months in arrears: the 2017 financials were filed by 30 September 2018. So where applicable these have been used as a base and updated using published information and/or other known factors.

Financial records of non-UK teams are not publicly accessible and thus educated estimates are applied. These teams are Toro Rosso in Italy, Sauber in Switzerland and Ferrari. The latter, as a conglomerate, does not split finances – either within the group or within Gestione Sportiva (as does Mercedes F1, which operates separate engine and race team operations). Haas, with bases in the USA, Italy and UK provided full disclosure; the others did not.


The teams’ ability to obfuscate their spending will change when (or if) budget caps are applied. Then teams will still be able to ‘fudge’ expenses such as marketing and certain salaries, but the balance will be known either through inclusion in the cap, or simple deduction. The reasons teams withhold such information are manifold, but generally point to embarrassment over their lap time value for money – which we calculate as the ‘bang-for-buck’ ratio.


After the sport’s first full year under Liberty Media as commercial rights holder in 2017, F1 enthusiastically anticipated this season for much was promised. These included high-profile marketing activities, a long-awaited over-the-top (direct-to-consumer) TV streaming service and significant progress on F1’s bugbears – inequitable finances and an engine-dominated spectacle.

The reality proved somewhat different, and is reflected in the FWONK/FWONA share price, which peaked and valleyed between a $38.82 high in February and $29 low shortly before the final race in Abu Dhabi. True, stock market indices across the world took hammerings in 2018, with most shares registering slides of 15 per cent, but F1’s share price drop was double that before settling at $32.40 as this is written.

The crucial factor, though, is not so much the stock’s value, but its volatility, which illustrates just how susceptible F1 has become to investor sentiment, as outlined previously. Where once decisions were taken on sporting or technical grounds, it is not unforeseeable that in future they are taken primarily to ally markets.

Formula 1’s revenues are disbursed according to a complex formula as outlined in the bilateral agreements – euphemistically, but inaccurately, referred to as ‘Concorde Agreements’ – as entered into between the CRH and teams individually. The basic prize fund is made up of 47.5 per cent of F1’s earnings after deduction of all the sport’s operating expenses, before income tax, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA).


To this amount are added constructors championship bonuses (CCB) as at signing in 2013 (Red Bull Racing / McLaren), Ferrari’s Long Standing Team (LST) payment, double champion (DC) bonuses as may have been earned by a team since 2013 (Mercedes), and a $10m heritage bonus (HB) paid to Williams.


The basic fund is divided into two ‘columns’, with teams that were classified in the top ten of the FIA Constructors Championship at least twice over the previous three years receiving an equal share of ‘Column one’, while ‘Column two’ is disbursed according to the decreasing table as previously described. 2018 Columns one and two are expected to total around $330m each, providing for a basic prize fund (before bonuses) of $660m.

The prize ‘pot’ amounts to approximately 66.6 per cent of EBITDA, so around $960m disbursed in 2018 – pointing to a $300m bonus pot paid to qualifying teams – with Liberty retaining the rest ($480m) to settle whatever loan and shareholder obligations the company has. The ‘pot’ is disbursed to teams in ten monthly tranches between March and December, save where a team has entered a cessation event (bankruptcy).

A crucial point: as Liberty expands in its quest to develop F1, so ballooning expenses incurred by plush offices, increased head counts, improved technologies, etc… hit EBITDA, resulting in the “pot” contracting by an estimated four per cent over 2017. This factor, coupled with projected decreases in hosting fees/broadcast income, understandably caused teams to increasingly voice their concerns as 2018 wound down.

TV ratings, too, are down, with a move to pay-TV in Italy said to be the primary factor. Streaming service F1 TV arrived late, was beset by problems and failed to compensate for lost eyeballs.


The consequences for teams were plain to see on logo-less flanks and wings. Martini’s decision to exit F1 even before Williams’s dire performance manifested itself provided just one indicator.


Although Liberty reported a three per cent growth in spectator numbers over the first 16 races, these statistics are based upon promoter figures, which are known to fluctuate widely. F1’s acid test will be the release of Liberty’s 2018 ‘eyeball’ report – purified TV audience rating by territory – expected early next year.

That Force India plunged into administration despite F1’s billion-dollar prize fund and its global appeal via races in 21 countries is symptomatic of two ills: an inequitable revenue structure and the exorbitant costs of competing, to wit keeping pace with Mercedes and Ferrari – the biggest beneficiaries (by far) of the former. Both issues lie within the control of Liberty, yet little (visible) corrective progress was made during 2018.

After two seasons under Liberty, and barely two to go before current covenants expire and F1 finally casts off the shackles imposed by previous rights holder CVC Capital Partners, virtually all the sport’s commercial metrics are headed in the wrong direction, even if some only marginally so. This despite improved on-track action and a title chase that see-sawed until September. That was F1’s saving grace in 2018.

2018 Formula 1 team budgets and income
Notes:

1) This report is split in two: places 10 to six in the championship, with the top five teams coming under scrutiny next week. In addition, next week will include our unique financial indices, which not only examine performance relative to budget (B4B), but also the costs of lap time improvements over 2017.

2) Team budgets exclude engine divisions where applicable, with the assumption made that the FIA’s guideline charge of approximately $25m for an annual two-car supply is applied internally. However, tyre charges of $1.5m for a season’s two-car tyre supply are included in overall budgets.

3) Currencies have been converted from Euro (Ferrari/Toro Rosso), Swiss Francs (Sauber) and Sterling (others) to US Dollars as Brexit has played havoc with rates, particularly given that most sponsors contracts are US$-based, with Liberty dispensing prize monies in the US currency. For ease of comparison the rates used are: $1 = €0.88/SFr1.00/£0.80

4) ‘Bang-for-buck’, i.e. how much they spent to score a point in 2018. Lap time index: How much they spent per second of lap time gained over their 2017 performance.









https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/...2/williams.jpg


2018 proved a torrid year for Williams: Despite being powered by Mercedes, FW41 regularly proved a tail-ender due to aerodynamic imbalances, with long-time title sponsor Martini exiting at season-end. However, the main metrics remained constant year-on-year, although headcount climbed 10 per cent.



Williams
2018 Budget $150m
2018 Income $150m
2018 Profit/Loss Breakeven (Group)
Employees 630 F1 only
Points 7
Bang-for-buck $21.5m/point
Lap time index $450m/sec (-0.33s)

Martini, Rexona and sundry other sponsors contributed around a quarter of non-FOM income – itself half the budget – with income linked to drivers Lance Stroll / Sergey Sirotkin providing the balance. George Russell / Robert Kubica replace them, with the latter expected to provide funding via Polish sponsors: crucial, as FOM revenues are likely to drop by $15m off tenth place in 2018.

Williams restructured its technical department and made substantial capital and process investments during 2018, and is hopeful of landing a major sponsor to sustain the team through 2019/20. Thereafter Williams will be right-sized for post-2020 F1, when budget caps will be phased in over three years, eventually hitting $150m/annum.

The team says
Despite a challenging year on-track, we continued to manage the business well commercially, and look forward to 2019. Managing an independent team’s finances is a high wire act due to Formula 1’s financial environment, a situation that can only be properly addresses through fair revenue distribution and cost controls.

Note: As a listed company Williams stresses that for legal reasons information provided is indicative, and does not constitute forward projections.



https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/.../tororosso.jpg

Pierre Gasly and Brendon Hartley after a period of retaining drivers for numerous seasons. For 2018 a further development role was added: preparing Honda for Red Bull Racing from 2019.



Toro Rosso
2018 Budget $150m
2018 Income $150m
2018 Profit/Loss Breakeven
Employees 460
Points 33
Bang-for-buck $4.54m/point
Lap time index $131.5m/sec (-1.14s)

The team further expanded its Faenza base, and recruited accordingly for the main operation and its Bicester (UK) wind tunnel. Headcount increased 15 per cent over 2017 – as per the previous year – with the budget rising 10 per cent: new partner Honda contributed cash and power units while enabling Red Bull to reduce its contributions, with sundry sponsors (primarily Acronis and Casio) and FOM income making up the rest.

2018 was a trying year as Honda ramped up its effort for the good of the greater group, and this is reflected in the team’s ninth in the championship: two places down on 2017. STR has recalled Daniil Kvyat for 2019, pairing the Russian with rookie Alex Albon, who put in a strong F2 season. With improved Honda power and the benefits of sharing technologies with Red Bull Racing, things can only get better in 2019.

The team says
We will fully exploit the synergies [with Red Bull Racing] within the framework of the regulations. The co-operation is already fully on target.



https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/.../12/sauber.jpg

The 2018 season marked a turning point for Sauber, being the Swiss team’s first full season under experienced manager Frédéric Vasseur. His immediate move on appointment in 2017 was to scrap a pending deal with Honda and sign for current-spec Ferrari powertrains. This proved profound: not only did Sauber benefit from arguably the best engine, but gained the services of Ferrari’s ace junior Charles Leclerc and funding from Alfa Romeo.



Sauber
2018 Budget $135m
2018 Income $135m
2018 Profit/Loss Breakeven
Employees 400
Points 48
Bang-for-buck $2.8m/point
Lap time index $54m/sec (-2.5s)

During 2018 the team’s owners, investment group Longbow Finance, spun off Sauber. It now falls under Islero Investments AG, albeit with the same shareholders, who simultaneously increased third-party business in order to boost income. Headcount grew 11 percent year-on year – similar growth to 2017.

The net effect was that Sauber moved from 10th to eighth in the constructors’ championship, aided, though, by Williams’ slump and Toro Rosso-Honda’s teething pains. Their benchmark remains Haas, fitted with the same rear-end installation, against which Sauber fell short despite Leclerc’s sterling efforts. The Monegasque has been promoted to Ferrari for 2019, while Kimi Raikkonen moves the other way.

Therein lies Sauber’s immediate challenge: Improving on, rather than simply consolidating, eighth place.

The team says
We do not comment on our financial situation.


https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/...forceindia.jpg

After Force India plunged into administration in July, fashion billionaire Lawrence Stroll’s consortium was chosen as the successful bidder for the assets of the best-performing independent team of recent times. However the consortium did not purchase a ‘going concern’: this had ramifications worth up to $60m which have yet to be resolved.



Force India/Racing Point
2018 Budget $120m
2018 Income $125m
2018 Profit/Loss Went into administration
Employees 405
Points 111*
Bang-for-buck $1.08m/point
Lap time index $96m/sec (-1.24s)

During early races it was clear performance was hamstrung by lack of budget due to team boss Vijay Mallya’s legal travails, with updates being delayed, or not filtering through. At season’s end team principal Otmar Szafnauer reckoned the team was “always one update behind.”

Their early performance was rendered moot when the team’s points were reset at mid-season when they returned to F1 under new identity Racing Point. Nonetheless they missed a clear opportunity to beat McLaren to seventh (or fourth on a combined basis). Without its legal issues the team may have repeated its fourth place of the last two years despite (now) having the tightest budget in the paddock.

the 2019 F1 season could well be tougher unless the consortium ups its contributions. Stroll’s son Lance has joined the team as partner to the funded Sergio Perez, but FOM income is likely to drop by $20m – even before that contentious $60m.

The team says
Delivering a virtual fifth place is an bigger achievement than our past fourth places given the circumstances.

*Note: Force India scored 52 points after the 59 points they scored prior to the Belgian Grand Prix were deducted. Had they counted all the points they scored in 2018, they would have been fifth in the championship.



https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/...12/mclaren.jpg

Although 2017 was embarrassing, McLaren balanced its books through Honda’s marketing contribution and free engines. Having canned that deal and signed for customer Renault power units, money now flows the other way – until the end of 2020 – while performance barely improved.

True, McLaren moved from ninth to sixth in the championship, but bare numbers overlook that Williams slid massively backwards and Force India’s tally was split in two. Discount those factors, and McLaren would have been eighth.

The numbers point to a $50m underwrite (and counting) unless CEO Zak Brown pulls hefty sponsor deals out of a large top hat. Although headcount increased slightly year-on-year, savings were the order of the year, with Fernando Alonso’s stipend partially covered by a barter deal with his Kimoa brand, and freedom to race for Toyota in WEC to earn hard cash. That saved an estimated $20m.

Raising cash will prove challenging without star drivers: Alonso and Stoffel Vandoorne have been replaced by Carlos Sainz Jnr and rookie Lando Norris. Although its FOM income will improve marginally, McLaren seems poised to tread water for a couple of seasons.

The saving grace is profitable automotive and advanced technology divisions, Middle Eastern shareholders with very deep pockets and a combination of bond and Michael Latifi’s cash injection. Without these factors McLaren Racing would potentially be facing extinction.

The team says
We have a plan to recover over the next [three-four] years as we improve performance that will come with improved cashflow from Formula 1 and also knock-on improvements within sponsorship. For that period we have to fund it and that’s what the equity came in to do



https://www.racefans.net/2018/12/19/...2018-part-one/





https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/...-part-2-01.jpg

Competing in F1 for its third year, Haas qualified for FOM Column 1 monies for the first time in 2018. This boosted its income by $30m which eased the burden on machine tool magnate Gene Haas – who uses F1 as marketing platform for his machine tool empire – and provided for a 10 per cent headcount increase. Theirs remains the lowest in F1 by virtue of Haas’s unique listed parts business model.



Haas
2018 Budget $130m
2018 Income $130m
2018 Profit/Loss Breakeven (Group)
Employees 250
Points 93
Bang-for-buck $1.4m/point
Lap time index $68m/sec (-1.89s)

Stability has been further factor in Haas’s rise up the order. The team has retained Romain Grosjean and Kevin Magnussen for a third year in 2019. It will also receive two budget boosts after improving its championship position from eighth to fifth and signed Rich Energy as title sponsor in a three-year deal worth $15m/annum.

Haas’s business model means its primary asset is a filing cabinet containing contracts: with Dallara for listed parts, and Ferrari for powertrains and non-listed parts. Thus its operating costs – and, by extension, budget – are the lowest on the grid by a substantial margin; hence Haas comfortably walks our B4B index.

The team says
In our third season we further streamlined the team and improved efficiency, while an increase in budget enabled a headcount increase of 10 per cent. Having qualified for the full spectrum of FOM monies, we were able to improve on-track performances despite being a young team.



https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/...-part-2-02.jpg

Following its acquisition of Lotus ahead of the 2016 season, Renault had a ‘ramping-up’ year in 2017 and this season concentrated on consolidating its efforts. Thus headcount has grown marginally despite a budget boost of $10m. This suggests prudence: the level matches future cost cap projections, while $190m is in line with F1’s budget cap glide path.



Renault
2018 Budget* $190m
2018 Income $190m
2018 Profit/Loss Breakeven (Group)
Employees* 625
Points 122
Bang-for-buck $1.55m/point
Lap time index $157m/sec (-1.21s)

Improvements to the team’s facilities continued through the year. But there are concerns about the future after the arrest of CEO Carlos Ghosn. If the cost-saving alliance with Nissan and Mitsubishi splits, its $20m from Infiniti would go missing. Unsurprisingly the team downplays this situation but it remains a real threat, especially if its performance fails to improve.

Funding is derived from three primary sources: Renault’s main company, which subsidises group motorsport activities to the tune of $200m per annum across all categories, half of which is earmarked for F1; FOM income – up by $10m due to improved 2017 performance, and set for another boost next year; and commercial funding. FOM income ensured that Renault’s subsidy remain stable despite the budget increase.

Signing Daniel Ricciardo for 2019 should aid performance and commercial prospects although, strangely, Nico Hülkenberg’s German following remains untapped. Threats are that McLaren – with Renault power – comes good, that Haas continues its upward trajectory and Racing Point reverts to its previous giant-killer ways. It made hard work of taking fourth in the championship, and could easily have been sixth.

*Excluding engine operation

The team says
Renault is the largest carmaker involved in Formula 1 – full stop. So we can afford anything as long as it makes sense. It’s just a question of value for money, and whether it makes sense to spend that given where we are in the development of our team.


https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/...-part-2-03.jpg

Red Bull’s UK-based operation draws on two interlinked companies: Red Bull Technology (800 employees), which provides components and technical services to Red Bull Racing (60), the race team entity. However RBT also supplies certain permitted technologies to Toro Rosso and provides services to other group companies – plus partners Aston-Martin on the Valkyrie hypercar project – so ‘purified’ figures for the budget and headcount are offered above.



Red Bull
2018 Budget $310m
2018 Income $315m
2018 Profit/Loss Breakeven (Group)
Employees 780
Points 419
Bang-for-buck $0.74m/point
Lap time index $236.6m/sec (-1.31s)

Despite using customer Renault engines (badged ‘TAG Heuer’ for the final time in 2018), Red Bull held its own against ‘works’ operations mainly on account of tight commercial controls which focussed F1’s third-largest budget on crucial areas: chassis design, racing operations and the best available drivers.

During 2018 Red Bull, which earns in dollars (sponsors/FOM) and Euros (Red Bull), gained from the drop in the value of sterling caused by Brexit, but did not grow its sponsor portfolio significantly. Therefore Red Bull upped its contribution. Driver costs should fall next year as long-time Red Bull junior Pierre Gasly replaces Ricciardo. Max Verstappen has freedom to find (non-conflicting) personal sponsors, suggesting he has a lower basic wage than the Dutchman demanded. Dutch fashion company G-Star RAW is his first major deal.

With both Red Bull teams sharing Honda power from 2019, significant synergies and cost-savings are mooted. Toro Rosso plans cuts at its Bedford wind tunnel and greater use of parts shared by the two teams is planned, but management is adamant that levels of co-operation will not hit Ferrari/Haas levels. All-in, Red Bull Racing expects a performance boost as its Honda relationship evolves, and that will improve future finances.

The team says
Responsible regulations are the key. When you look at what are the cost-drivers in this business, it’s the technical regulations that drive the cost.


https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/...-part-2-04.jpg

Uniquely, Ferrari produces its Formula 1 car within one complex. Facilities, R&D and manufacturing are shared with its road car division, which supports the Gestione Sportiva in lieu of marketing.



Ferrari
2018 Budget* $410m
2018 Income $410m
2018 Profit/Loss Breakeven (Group)
Employees* 950
Points 571
Bang-for-buck $0.72m/point
Lap time index $344.5m/sec (-1.19s)

This makes reporting its financial arrangement complicated as separate details for the F1 operation are not available. Furthermore, its October 2015 New York Stock Exchange listing provides further excuses for refusing co-operation, allegedly for ‘fear’ of insider trading.

How will this square with F1’s much-vaunted budget cap remains to be seen, as clearly Ferrari will have to comply in the same fashion as their rivals. Our suggestion is that future sporting regulations include clauses stipulating that F1 entrants be standalone financial entities with independent profit / loss reports and purchase ledgers. If Ferrari does not toe the line, it always has the option of racing elsewhere.

Commercially, the team benefits from the largest slice of FOM revenues – pocketing 20 per cent of the ‘pot’ – with Shell and UPS complementing $100m provided by Philip Morris in exchange for its ‘Mission Winnow’ message and access to the team for promotional purposes. Licensing tops up the $410m budget.

The untimely death of president/CEO Sergio Marchionne in mid-July clearly knocked Ferrari, while replacement Louis Camilleri has yet to make an impact on performance. The immediate signs were not good for the team: after the Italo-Canadian’s passing Sebastian Vettel lost the title initiative and its share price plunged from $140 in early July to under $100 a week ago.

All this suggests that Ferrari is in for a torrid time once budget restrictions are introduced, for thus far it has been able to purchase performance courtesy of having F1’s largest headcount and biggest FOM bonus. However, where Marchionne’s threats to exit F1 were to be taken seriously, Camilleri has adopted a softer approach. Thus Ferrari is likely to remain in F1 regardless of budget cap.

*Excluding engine operation

The team says
We do not comment on our financial situation.



https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/...-part-2-05.jpg

Daimler-Benz’s F1 activities are split into two: Mercedes Grand Prix (race operations) and High Performance Powertrains, situated separately and operating independently. The team is owned 60/30/10 by Daimler, motorsport director Toto Wolff and non-executive chairman Niki Lauda. Significantly, the company carries forward a $100m assessed tax loss.



Mercedes
2018 Budget* $400m
2018 Income $405m
2018 Profit/Loss Breakeven (Group)
Employees* 950
Points 655
Bang-for-buck $0.61m/point
Lap time index $353.5m/sec (-1.13s)

Parent company Daimler’s year-on-year contributions increased marginally, as did sponsor income, with headcount showing a commensurate increase. Save for Tommy Hilfiger as replacement for Boss, no major new deals were announced; thus increased turnover suggests escalated income per sponsor. As champions, Mercedes receives the largest slice of FOM pre-bonus revenues, but trails Ferrari on overall pay-out.

Wolff and Lauda’s contracts are expected to end in 2020, coinciding with the expiration of F1’s current agreements. That indicates head-scratching in Brackley corridors about the team’s future, particularly as outgoing CEO Dieter Zetsche is to be replaced by Olla Källenius, previously head of HPP and AMG before moving up to the parent company. Whether the Swedish engineer considers F1 to be good value now or in future is key to the future commitment of the team which is dominating F1 at present.

*Excluding engine operation

The team says
As a high-technology company, the team can adapt competitively and commercially to changes in its operating environment, and will continue to invest in its capability and culture to ensure medium- and long-term success both on- and off-track.



Conclusion
Clearly a massive performance gap exists between the ‘big three’ – Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull – and the rest. No team outside this trio has won a grand prix in the 100 races since FOM (then under the control of CVC Capital partners) began making its inequitable team payments. This is reflected in the size of their budgets.

However when it comes to the business of making their cars quicker year-on-year, most of the smaller teams have made greater progress on their budgets. Sauber leads the way, having spent £54m per second of lap time it found compared to last season. This not only points to the new-found efficiency of the team under Frederic Vasseur, but also to the relevance of this performance metric. That Haas is second on the list underscores its accuracy.


Due to restrictions on race team strength, wind tunnel/CFD usage, engine and tyre costs, bans of testing outside of official sessions and other costs inputs, it costs around $100m to design and race two cars over a grand prix season, with the delta to budget spent mainly on development.


On that basis teams such as Racing Point and Haas have around $25m per annum discretionary spend for development; Mercedes and Ferrari $300m. The latter found 1.13 and 1.19 seconds respectively. Clearly they are feeling the diminishing returns of the current regulations more keenly than their smaller rivals, but does this kind of spending really serve the sport’s best interests?

On our Bang-4-Buck index, Mercedes comes out tops despite its budget advantage over independents. This is predominantly due to weighting of the points table in favour of wins, of which Mercedes had plenty, and the fact that the top three generally locked out the big points places – from seventh to 10th the spread is six points in total, or a quarter of a win. Still, Mercedes did the business for the fifth year in a row, so hats off to the team.

The challenge for Liberty and the teams is to grow sponsor and television revenues while cutting costs to ensure profitable teams. Significantly, only two teams posted (modest) profits, and then only after inflated shareholder subsidies – reduce these, and red ink flows, so in real terms they’re paper profits. F1’s imperative is to build profitable, sustainable teams which don’t rely on the largesse of billionaires or blue chip boards.

The building blocks required to achieve that need in time for F1’s promised (by Liberty) 2021 rebirth need to be in place within the next 12 months. But the last 24 months have seen little tangible progress towards that vital goal.

https://www.racefans.net/2018/12/26/...2018-part-two/

[Kingdom Hearts]

Jesus dude, don't post the whole thing, lol

[jgonzalesm6]

Jesus dude, don't post the whole thing, lol

I was bored. It's the slow season of F1.

[aroutis]

I think at this point it is clear that when Aroutis says he is posting "facts", he is in fact posting bull

I could answer to you the same point you 're "calling me out". However, this is exactly what you want.

Just being rude will not make you right, but you know this already don't you? ;)

[jgonzalesm6]

Motorsport Italy: The 2019 Ferrari car might have a longer wheelbase due to the larger fuel tank (5kg more fuel is allowed), Mercedes will try to work on the rear end to keep the same wheelbase length as in 2018 despite the larger fuel tank.

"Ferrari project leader Cardile and chief aerodynamicist Sanchez have pushed for the 2019 car to have a slightly longer transmission, moving the engine away from the rear wheels and have an even more extreme rear end."

"The new radiators are arranged in a different way, thus improving the aerodynamic efficiency of the car.
In short, the 5kg more fuel addition could have affected the 2019 Ferrari car more than you think."


Ferrari 2019: passo più lungo non solo per i 5 kg di benzina in più

[wisepie]

Motorsport Italy: The 2019 Ferrari car might have a longer wheelbase due to the larger fuel tank (5kg more fuel is allowed), Mercedes will try to work on the rear end to keep the same wheelbase length as in 2018 despite the larger fuel tank.

"Ferrari project leader Cardile and chief aerodynamicist Sanchez have pushed for the 2019 car to have a slightly longer transmission, moving the engine away from the rear wheels and have an even more extreme rear end."

"The new radiators are arranged in a different way, thus improving the aerodynamic efficiency of the car.
In short, the 5kg more fuel addition could have affected the 2019 Ferrari car more than you think."


Ferrari 2019: passo più lungo non solo per i 5 kg di benzina in più

Surely an even longer wheelbase could hamper performance on tighter circuits? I know nothing of aerodynamics but just a thought, I hope they know what they're doing!

[FerrariF60]

Surely an even longer wheelbase could hamper performance on tighter circuits? I know nothing of aerodynamics but just a thought, I hope they know what they're doing!

i'd be OK with losing to what is it, 3-4 races with tight corners.....like monaco, singapore and maybe 1 more or so.....if we will WIN the rest of them due to having a longer wheel base and be better at high speed circuits, then we'll BAG the WDC for sure....maybe even WCC

[Brembo]

Surely an even longer wheelbase could hamper performance on tighter circuits? I know nothing of aerodynamics but just a thought, I hope they know what they're doing!

Having a more extreme rear end is usually a great thing! Anyway; that's a lot of changes with the entire car just to accommodate 5kg's more fuel. I too hope they know what their doing ! Wisepie; I know less than you for sure about aerodynamics, all I believe in is more HP. The slightest hit seems to change the cars areo at times.

[FerrariF60]

Having a more extreme rear end is usually a great thing! Anyway; that's a lot of changes with the entire car just to accommodate 5kg's more fuel. I too hope they know what their doing ! Wisepie; I know less than you for sure about aerodynamics, all I believe in is more HP. The slightest hit seems to change the cars areo at times.

or just like the EL COMMENDATORE used to say, "aerodynamics" is for people who can't BUILD engines.....sadly, in today's FORMULA, you need BOTH, a good engine (or power unit as they call it nowadays) but also a good AERO car

[jgonzalesm6]

or just like the EL COMMENDATORE used to say, "aerodynamics" is for people who can't BUILD engines.....sadly, in today's FORMULA, you need BOTH, a good engine (or power unit as they call it nowadays) but also a good AERO car

Yep, but Enzo ended up hiring aerodynamacists during his reign at Ferrari F60.

[Brembo]

Yep, but Enzo ended up hiring aerodynamacists during his reign at Ferrari F60.

FF to 2018, 2019, for sure everything counts, a rainbow of tire colors, areo, and more. But 5kg's more fuel merits all that change to the car? That blast off the line when in 1st place to me is what's up. Getting 2 seconds ahead makes for a Sunday drive as long as the HP gets and keeps you up, up , and away. The car sounds good too !!

[jgonzalesm6]

FF to 2018, 2019, for sure everything counts, a rainbow of tire colors, areo, and more. But 5kg's more fuel merits all that change to the car? That blast off the line when in 1st place to me is what's up. Getting 2 seconds ahead makes for a Sunday drive as long as the HP gets and keeps you up, up , and away. The car sounds good too !!

It definitely adds more ballast to the car as well as a "longer" tranny. Suspension(rear) upgrades are a sure thing. We, and Mercedes, will probably eat through tires the first couple of races.....signs might show up during training at Catalunya....until we get the bugs worked out.

[FerrariF60]

It definitely adds more ballast to the car as well as a "longer" tranny. Suspension(rear) upgrades are a sure thing. We, and Mercedes, will probably eat through tires the first couple of races.....signs might show up during training at Catalunya....until we get the bugs worked out.

you're probalbly right...hopefully Merc more than us.....and once the teams work the bugs out, we'll be back to boring and predictible ONE stopper races......

FIA will either have to mandate 2-3 stops mandatory OR ask pirelli to make the tires more fragile so teams will have no choice but to do 2-3 pitstops......OR bring back refueling....MAN to i miss those days

[IulianFerrari]

you're probalbly right...hopefully Merc more than us.....and once the teams work the bugs out, we'll be back to boring and predictible ONE stopper races......

FIA will either have to mandate 2-3 stops mandatory OR ask pirelli to make the tires more fragile so teams will have no choice but to do 2-3 pitstops......OR bring back refueling....MAN to i miss those days

They see refueling as a hazard these days.

[stefa]

To all you guys happy New Year!!!

All the best wishes to you and your families!!!

And hopefully this will be that year when Ferrari will win CWC and WDC!!!

[wisepie]

To all you guys happy New Year!!!

All the best wishes to you and your families!!!

And hopefully this will be that year when Ferrari will win CWC and WDC!!!

We live in hope, Stefa, it's about time Merc and HAM were put in their place, but nothing comes easy! The same wishes and prayers for a Happy New Year to all tifosi, let 2019 be special!

[Rob]

They see refueling as a hazard these days.

no, they wanted to go down the route of cost saving, as it cost "alot" to ship the fuel rigs around, and they wanted to show F1 as a fuel efficiency marketing. But lets face it, F1 races and strategy has become alot more boring since refuelling was done away with.

I see, trying to change all tyres in less than 2 seconds more of a hazard.