I agree, about 20 Grands Prix should be the limit. One of the reasons they're considering moving the young driver test to Silverstone in July is to avoid the burnout that the team personnel suffer from at the end of the year in Abu Dhabi. Adding more races will just make this much, much worse. If we have significantly more than 20 (25+) then teams will probably drop out. I, for one, would definitely prefer 20 races and more teams than 25+ races and about 8 teams.
I know he was never World Class, but Bernie raced somewhat competitively for a good 10 years. Surely he raced or at least drove at Spa during that time?
why would they drop out? Look at any other sport that has a high number of match days. Football for instance, if 11 players can't play 50+ games a year, you just develope a squad. If there are more races, then more money is generated. If this is larger than the cost of having two teams of mechanics then it is a profitable venture, therefor the cost cutting is irrelevant. Cost cutting is proportionate to income. At the moment its very costly to have a team because revenue streams are low due to the world economic state, if more races gets more fans, track money, sponsership money and makes having an F1 team an asset like having a premier league/champions league standard football team, and every team is financially secure, then it can't be a bad thing. I see teams growing, not leaving. As an aside, I do think there should be a leveller for back row teams to improve, perhaps in season testing?
News just in from Le Castellet: the French PM has confirmed that France will continue to be located at the top left of Europe for the foreseeable future.
I wonder what will happen if (hopefully) Spa digs in. We know that Valencia has financial issues and sought a similar deal with Catalunya; perhaps we could swap that round and have Valencia and France alternate instead.
I disagree, for teams like Hispania and Marussia etc. having more races will not make them suddenly get sponsors. They've had few or no sponsors for virtually three years now and an increase in races isn't going to change that. It may help the top teams but not the smaller teams.
I agree. Only in extreme circumstances like 2009 are sponsorship deals done on a per race basis and even then for very little income and when a team is surviving hand-to-mouth. I doubt it would benefit even the top teams, though. Most deals are long term partnerships spanning a number of years so more races means more cost but no more income. Ferrari has virtually halved its running costs in the past few years despite being the best funded team on the grid. The sponsorship required to support the kind of field we had in the mid-2000s simply isn't there. Even FOM recognises that increasing the number of races isn't viable, hence brokering race-sharing deals between Valencia and Barcelona, Nurburgring and Hockenheim, or Spa and Paul Ricard, and Ecclestone's statement that he envisages only five races in Europe in the future. Add to that the moves to introduce customer cars to give the illusion that there are more teams competing than there actually are and you will appreciate that, even with twenty races, the strain on twelve two-car teams is too great.
Key part of that article: it is not yet certain which race it will alternate with. pleasebeValenciapleasebeValenciapleasebeValencia
Valencia is sharing with Barcelona, though sharing it our more so we only get it every 3 years would be better
I was woriied this new French administration could effect the French GP returning. I would much rather Paul Ricard than Magny cours but any is fine. I dont understand why france is not open in arms for F1. It has a big automotive history with Renault, Citreon and Peurgeot. and drivers like Prost, Alesi, Arnoux, Pironi, Bourdais, Leob, Auriol and Laffite. What about Le Mans! The FIA and The Champagne!!!
