MONACO Grand Prix 2009 - Race 6/17 - Page 2

Glaucus · 20-05-2009, 15:33

I like Monaco. It might not be a circuit with much over taking. But it is a curcit to test the drivers. No huge run offs like the new tracks. I would hate to see Monaco go.

Flibster · 20-05-2009, 15:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by AcidHell2

I like Monaco. It might not be a circuit with much over taking. But it is a curcit to test the drivers. No huge run offs like the new tracks. I would hate to see Monaco go.

The huge tarmac run-offs is one of the things I hate about new tracks. There is no penalty for going off the track now. It used to be walls and gravel.

If you go off the track - you should bloody well stay off the track unless exceptionally lucky.

Glaucus · 20-05-2009, 16:19

I agree.

AboveTheSalt · 22-05-2009, 08:53

Monaco = Scalextric; perfecting boredom in F1.

Although, having visited Sophia Antipolis on a number of occasions, I can quite understand why anyone would want to spend time in that part of France

Flibster · 22-05-2009, 17:36

Breaking news...

ALL teams to withdraw from the 2010 season if the proposed £40 million budget cap is not dropped.

Glaucus · 22-05-2009, 19:42

Absolutely brilliant news.
The cap is retarded and they haven't fully ruled out the two tier system, but that at least looks unlikely.

divine · 22-05-2009, 21:21

A cap is needed really, else the team numbers are just going to get ever smaller and the disparity between front and back is just going to grow ever larger. £40 million is too small though.

£100 million would be better, maybe £150 million. Cheap enough that new teams and lesser existing teams can compete on a closer level but also enough money that the big boys can still get decent stuff done with perhaps a bit more efficiency in the way they go about things. I'm pretty sure a big chunk of the £300 million plus budgets is effectively wasted money because it can be.

Glaucus · 23-05-2009, 00:13

even 150mill is to small. it should be a maximum cap. Not a cap every team can achieve.
If you think factory staff cost 24mill, 2 drivers could cost 40+ mill, aerospace materials will be very expensive. So on and so forth.

divine · 23-05-2009, 08:16

What would be the point in a cap that didn't lower it to a vaguely achievable area? That would be utterly pointless as it would achieve nothing bar cutting about 4 teams budgets by a tiny amount.

I thought driver salaries were excluded anyway?

Besides, much like Football these things cost so much because currently they can. If there was a need to be cheaper you can be damn sure it would be achievable even if they didn't particularly want to.

Where would you place the cap then? £400 million?

Glaucus · 23-05-2009, 08:36

more like 200mill. wages are excluded for the minute as are engines and advertisement.

The sport does not need such a huge cut. F1 is inheritantly expensive.

20-05-2009, 15:33	#11
Glaucus Absinthe Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 1,855	I like Monaco. It might not be a circuit with much over taking. But it is a curcit to test the drivers. No huge run offs like the new tracks. I would hate to see Monaco go. __________________

20-05-2009, 16:19	#13
Glaucus Absinthe Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 1,855	I agree. __________________

22-05-2009, 17:36	#15
Flibster Moonshine Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 3,388	Breaking news... ALL teams to withdraw from the 2010 season if the proposed £40 million budget cap is not dropped. __________________

22-05-2009, 19:42	#16
Glaucus Absinthe Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 1,855	Absolutely brilliant news. The cap is retarded and they haven't fully ruled out the two tier system, but that at least looks unlikely. __________________

22-05-2009, 21:21	#17
divine Moonshine Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Southampton Posts: 3,201	A cap is needed really, else the team numbers are just going to get ever smaller and the disparity between front and back is just going to grow ever larger. £40 million is too small though. £100 million would be better, maybe £150 million. Cheap enough that new teams and lesser existing teams can compete on a closer level but also enough money that the big boys can still get decent stuff done with perhaps a bit more efficiency in the way they go about things. I'm pretty sure a big chunk of the £300 million plus budgets is effectively wasted money because it can be. __________________

23-05-2009, 00:13	#18
Glaucus Absinthe Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 1,855	even 150mill is to small. it should be a maximum cap. Not a cap every team can achieve. If you think factory staff cost 24mill, 2 drivers could cost 40+ mill, aerospace materials will be very expensive. So on and so forth. __________________

23-05-2009, 08:16	#19
divine Moonshine Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Southampton Posts: 3,201	What would be the point in a cap that didn't lower it to a vaguely achievable area? That would be utterly pointless as it would achieve nothing bar cutting about 4 teams budgets by a tiny amount. I thought driver salaries were excluded anyway? Besides, much like Football these things cost so much because currently they can. If there was a need to be cheaper you can be damn sure it would be achievable even if they didn't particularly want to. Where would you place the cap then? £400 million? __________________

23-05-2009, 08:36	#20
Glaucus Absinthe Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 1,855	more like 200mill. wages are excluded for the minute as are engines and advertisement. The sport does not need such a huge cut. F1 is inheritantly expensive. __________________