The Problem with Ferrari Owning Formula 1

"Tim (Fractal Footwork)" (fractalfootwork)
04/07/2014 at 17:20 • Filed to: Screwderia, Formula 1, Ferrari, F1, Luca di Montezemolo, Bernie Ecclestone, OppositeLock

The Scuderia has the power to strong arm the Formula 1 regulating group more than you might realize, both through contractual agreement and subdued pillow talk. With the new controversial regulations providing !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , Luca di Montezemolo is taking this moment to steer Formula 1 back into Ferrari's favors.

We all know !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! on the road, but their control over our beloved motorsport may end up harming Formula 1 more than we expect, and stripping us of some of the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! .

Why Did the Rules Change?

Renault was about to leave and Honda wanted back in. In order to keep these names in Formula 1, the regulations needed to provide an outlet for manufacturers to show that the sport was relevant to the vehicles they sold to the average consumer.

There is a reason that teams want a Formula 1 that is relevant to road car production: road car sales. According to !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ) !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ,

If the consumer is exposed to an advertisement, the message can be regarded as an observable effect which can be attributed to an underlying cause, such as (1) the desire of the advertiser to sell his particular brand, or (2) the actual characteristics of the brand being advertised.

If the message is attributed to the advertiser's desire to sell, the consumer would be uncertain about the actual characteristics of the brand and the probability of her purchasing it would be expected to decrease.

If these manufactures can't show that their F1 outlet shares "the actual characteristics of the brand being advertised," then why bother? If a manufacturer, such as McLaren, Mercedes, or Ferrari, can't show that the technology from their racing makes its way into something you can buy, then why bother?

Examples of this trickle-down-technology are all apparent in the three new Hypercars from Porsche, Ferrari, and McLaren, though Porsche's racing outlet lies with GT and LMP cars.

The McLaren P1 has a DRS button on the steering wheel as well as "torque fill" electric battery and motor to fill the gaps in power of their twin-turbo V8 when the turbo is coming up to speed (not entirely the same as the ERS system on the 2014 F1 chassis, but nonetheless similar). LaFerrari, on the other hand, utilizes a classic V12 with a simple kinetic energy recovery system (as seen on the last generation F1 cars).

Why Doesn't Ferrari Fit Any Longer?

These new Formula 1 regulations are least relevant to the Scuderia. Ferrari have the luxury of being owned by a larger firm, Fiat-Chrysler, while the likes of McLaren or Mercedes do not. Ferrari don't have to think about reducing emissions in their road cars to comply with the 54.5 by 2025 CAFE standards because the base Fiats, Chryslers, Alfas, and other sub-brands will fill that void for them.

When was the last time Maranello produced a turbo V6? A hybrid? Made a dramatic step to reduce fuel consumption? The 2014 Formula 1 regulations do not provide an outlet for the other side of the Maranello garage. Formula 1 is no longer fit for Ferrari, and Ferrari is no longer fit for Formula 1.

Ferrari have been the most vocal about the new regulations !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! .

83% are disappointed with the new format, dismissing it mainly because of the drivers being forced to lift off to save fuel. In addition, the fans don't like the noise from the new engines and are confused by rules that are too complicated.

However, !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , claiming

The data is untrustworthy, the procedure used to collect it is flawed, and the conclusions Ferrari have drawn from it are highly spurious.

Nowhere in the poll did Ferrari ask about the impact of the fuel rules, the noise of the engines or the complexity of the new formula. The poll results give Ferrari no justification for asserting that fuel conservation, noise or complexity are why those who responded are [criticizing] the sport.

The poll options also did not ask how strongly fans hold their views. Professional polling [organizations] use five- or seven-point scales to gauge how deeply people care about particular subjects.

So why would Ferrari slip these results to the public, to the FIA, to Formula 1's management?

The sound of Formula 1 cars was the last foundation that Maranello thought it had in Formula 1, until the the rev range dropped and the turbos stifled the noise. No longer does your Enzo, F12, 458 sound, drive, or run like an F1 car.

And don't for a second think that these regulations were a way to slow down the Formula 1 cars as the Ferrari boffins claim, !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . If anything, the 2014 regulations made the cars more difficult to drive.

Ferrari have the most to lose with Formula 1 switching ethos, and you can bet they wont go down without a fight.

What Power Does Ferrari Have Over Formula 1?

Ferrari receive more money at the end of each season for being Ferrari, despite where they finish in the constructors' championship. In 2011, Ferrari was awarded $29.3 million from its 2.5% stake in Formula 1, and this share has since risen to 5%; that is the operating budget of some of the smaller teams ( !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ).

Most concerning, the Italian brand from Maranello have the power to veto any choice for Bernie Ecclestone's replacement. According to !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ,

Italian newspaper Corriere dello Sport claimed that Ferrari has a veto over any change to F1's regulations and it added that Max Mosley, former president of motor sport's governing body the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA), awarded the privilege to the team in 2005 to prevent it leaving.

If Ferrari in fact does have a veto, it means that they ultimately have the ability to pick their own successor to Bernie Ecclestone on their own accord or veto any alternative that is suggested. We best forget about Christian Horner, and expect Ferrari to support a replacement that does what Maranello tells them.

Contrasting to the contractual stipulations that let Ferrari strong arm Formula 1's decisions is their brand's weight. Ferrari's presence in the sport brings fans from all over the globe, and has arguably helped Formula 1's expansion into the far East; this form of advertisement brings with it gifts from powerful people in an attempt to keep Maranello in the sport, as noted above by Max Mosley's gift of veto power and Ferrari's increase in share ownership of Formula 1.

If Ferrari wanted to leave Formula 1, the sport would no doubt be in shambles and struggle to make deals with host tracks and television networks.

So, What's the Big Deal?

I like roaring V12s, you like screaming V10s, and we all love !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , but more than that, Ferrari loves winning.

I am coming to terms with these new 2014 regulations, with the confusing power units and strange aerodynamic regulations, but Ferrari have landed on the back foot, and need to show that they are a winning team; without that, their sales drop and they must lower the price of their vehicles, the Tifosi buy less meaningless Ferrari attire, and they are ultimately less influential.

As a viewer, I'd love for something to be done about the sound, be that from better microphone placement to even higher rev ranges or new engine regulations entirely, but I'd rather take better microphone placement for the time being and see if the noise can be fixed with placement.

Ferrari is using this slight distaste to spin the regulations back toward their favor through twisting the fans' voice and using their influence during Formula 1's transitional ownership.

Is that necessarily bad? We'd bring back wailing V12 engines and make Formula 1 real racing again!

...or would we?

The Bahrain Gran Prix was the best race I've ever seen, and the fuel conservation was miles less apparent than the tire conservation of 2013 (as seen when Lewis Hamilton was passed by a back-marking Williams FW35 in an attempt to conserve his tires). If the fight between Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg for 1st place and the scuffle for 3rd place between the six Red Bulls, Williams, and Force India drivers wasn't real racing in Formula 1, I don't know what is.

If Ferrari gets their way, and you can bet they'll get part of it, then the almighty 'road relevance' will wash away from most of the F1 teams with ties to road cars and they will be forced to leave the sport due to a lack of funding, not to mention that most of the engine manufacturers would leave the sport; Honda and Renault would most certainly be out, making Mercedes the option engine manufacturer ( Update : !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ).

Formula 1 would be a Ferrari party of one.

I fully expect the regulations to change in about 3-5 years to something more appealing, but if something changes sooner, you can guarantee Ferrari was behind it.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Images from !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , and !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! respectively.

DISCUSSION (12)

Brian Silvestro > Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/07/2014 at 09:41

This way a great article, really interesting stuff. Nice job.

avens > Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/07/2014 at 09:50

The edge Ferrari had was testing.

Also this is one of those things everyone knows but prefer to not make a fuss about it. For example the gentleman of the penultimate photo won his first championship 100% cheating in very disgusting ways, which mind you wasn't the only year with fishy stuff from him and his teams, but anyway.

Soloburrito > Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/07/2014 at 10:11

Good read.

I'll have to disagree with F1 having any impacts on Ferrari's business of selling cars. Their sales are only tied to one thing, global wealth creation.

OtherBarry > Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/07/2014 at 10:56

I think the best thing F1 could do is play this season out and then up the rev limit to 18k or so and increase the fuel amount and minimum weight of the cars. Giving the store away to Ferrari (more than F1 already has) would not be good after everyone has spent all of this money creating the new power plants.

For Sweden > Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/07/2014 at 17:27

I'm confused by one of your points. You state that the F1 turbo V6 engine development doesn't help Ferrari 's road car development, then say that Ferrari has the luxury of being a part of FCA. Why wouldn't FCA use Ferrari F1 engine R&D in their other marques?

Tim (Fractal Footwork) > For Sweden
04/07/2014 at 17:32

Ferrari in Formula 1 is an advertisement for Ferrari, not FCA. I'm not talking R&D here (thats another matter), just the advertisement of Formula 1 to consumers.

Unless Fiat/Chrysler sticks a huge logo on the sidepod, the benefit of Ferrari running a turbo V6 is absent.

For Sweden > Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/07/2014 at 17:35

I doubt Ferrari will sell fewer cars because they have quiet F1 engines. Ferrari will sell fewer cars because they're scaling back production in the name of exclusivity.

BeaterGT > Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/07/2014 at 18:05

Good read. I wish Mercedes would be able to fill those shoes if Ferrari were to drop out. Have younger generations appeal to the younger chaps in F1 instead of old farts like Luca.

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/08/2014 at 00:07

Anyone have a photo of Luca pissed off when Alonso said he was down on power?

Ferrari hates it as they have nothing to use their turbo technology in. Oh and they aren't winning so its the rules that suck.

Cole Paquette > Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/14/2014 at 05:02

Ferrari has a 5% stake in F1 that pays out more than the budget of some of the small teams?

Okay, here is an idea for F1-give all teams a small equal stake in F1, maybe 1-2% each. F1 does well globally and they all get more money, meaning small teams have more to compete with against the larger teams, and all teams have incentive for F1 to do well, as it's more money back towards them.

Or a greater percentage of F1 per team, but budget limits or require them to only use what they earn from holdings! Then you have a bunch of teams trying to compete in the rules to make the whole series do well so they have more money for future developments.

getchapopcorn > Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/22/2014 at 22:15

How did I miss this post?!?!

Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius > Tim (Fractal Footwork)
04/30/2014 at 21:23

Formula One needs to be more like LeMans P1. There is an energy per lap. Get there however you may. Want a 1.0l V12 spinning at 22K? Do it. Want a 7 liter LS motor? Do that, too. Hybrid? Sure. Crazy energy recovery, fly wheels and turbine energy recovery and batteries or capacitors, then spend the money and win.

When we think back to the glory days of Gran Prix, Le Mans, CanAm, Group C, there were 5-10 engine TYPES out there. Some people hit the mark, others missed it. Gaps in talent and technology create opportunity.