R.I.P. Formula One (1950-2014)

[Malbec]

This is a comment where you just are not "with it". You idea of what F1 should be doing, it's power, and it's place worldwide is delusional. You have no understanding why in the meantime, F1 are incompatible with those countries.

"I've got an idea! Why don't we send the most expensive competition on the planet. The competition that represents huge excess, and send it to poverty stricken China?" "With F1 also being hugely flaunting, why don't we also go to the socially rigid Middle East too? It's be a sure-fire winner!"

China and the Middle East are at least a number of decades away from being able to embrace F1, regardless of how much money is spent. These areas must develop a popular domestic motorsport culture first, where F1 then arrives with acceptance. These countries don't have a motorsport culture, so F1 will remain with minimal popularity. But you don't get that, don't you?

Hmmm so you think a sport that flaunts its expense and wealth is incompatible with Middle Eastern culture.... okay. Nothing more needs to be said there.

Given that the size of the Chinese middle class is greater than the entire population of the USA, that luxury car sales there have overtaken Europe and threaten to overtake the USA and the country is the second largest economy in the world your stereotyping of the Chinese as poverty-stricken is rather outdated. This is a country where flaunting wealth is the norm and where there is a lot of interest in cars, the largest car market in the world. There are a lot of poor people there but F1 isn't really interested in reaching out to them, but it isn't interested in poor people in developed countries either.

The Middle East does have a motorsports heritage BTW, rallying, drag racing and an informal street racing culture. However the relative lack of motorsports heritage in both should not be a significant factor. Most fans in traditional F1 following countries do not follow other forms of motorsport, the question is how should F1 promote itself in countries that it has not previously raced in. At the moment the sport does little and leaves it completely up to local promoters who in most cases are not capable of doing so, this is something that can be remedied.

You should not be discussing off-track stuff yourself. I'm not worried about F1's popularity. If it is going through a period of lower popularity, then it's just a trough. Unlike you, I don't have an expectation that it must consume the world.

Again, strawman. I have no expectation that F1 consume the world. It can however be better promoted.

Also I do not share your complacency re: F1. 30/40 years ago F1 was only one amongst several types of motorsport popular globally including Group C sportscars, rallying and to a lesser extent Indycar. It rose to the top largely through Bernie grasping the importance of TV rights and to a ruthless suppression of the other formulae's access to TV through various means. Bernie clearly hasn't grasped the importance of the internet and social media while other sports, not just motorsports, have and therefore F1 stands to lose out in the future.

You talk like F1 is a living organism and that it'll die. It won't. Its be around for decades, hundreds of years. As the designated no1 motorsport competition in the world, F1 is fluid. The only thing that does count, is if Alonso can beat Hamilton next year.

Designated by who or what? There is nothing inherently superior about F1 (except over other single seat open wheel formula) except the way it has been marketed and exploited by Bernie over the previous three/four decades.

Indycar was the most popular form of racing in the US. Where is it now? No form of any sport is guaranteed popularity anywhere.

I know quite a bit about Nascar and the way it's marketed. I've often seen it's "propaganda" on tv here, and I've seen V8Supercars try to copy it.

What you don't understand, is why this is happening. Nascar makes every effort to be relevant, because it's never been relevant in it's whole history. It may be enjoying a purple patch atm, but that's all it is.

So educate me, what are the factors behind the 'fact' as you seem to see it that NASCAR is doomed to failure?

[Malbec]

Irrelevant because it's irrelevant. Comparing income streams for the drivers is beyond logic. Drivers get an excess of income, now matter what the economy is. I can't even think of an analogy to express such irrational reasoning. You've just found a reason to suit your prejudiced opinion.

Oh dear.

Do you think drivers would be getting astronomical fees if the sport they were in had negligible money flowing in? Have you wondered why F3 drivers, even the most talented, are almost entirely pay drivers while the best F1 drivers are not? Hadn't you wondered why the number of pay drivers in F1 has increased and whether it has anything to do with the slowdown in the global economy since 2007 and is at all related to the trouble even teams like McLaren are having attracting sufficient sponsorship?

This isn't about whether drivers are paid too much or whether they deserve the money. They are paid what the market deems they are worth. If there is little free money in the market then the amount they are paid goes down. Simple economics. It is because of this that it is relevant that NASCAR drivers can expect to earn money on a par with F1 drivers. Driver salary is one marker amongst several that indicates the financial wellbeing of a sport.

Given that NASCAR is largely limited as its name implies to North America and therefore accesses a smaller market than F1 the fact that its finances are so robust is an indicator that it offers very good return for the money for sponsors and promoters interested in the American market. Why is that?

Advance the sport? Where the **** do you think it's going? It's the world championship. That's it. It's reached it's zenith long ago. It can't go anywhere else. Those dodgy dictatorships are willing to pay those hosting fees because F1 is relevant. x amount of money is supposed to equal x amount of relevance. But this is not what's been happening for a couple of decades now. Nascar is ok, it has it's "strengths", but it is not relevant worldwide.

And how do you define 'relevance'? Because FOM says its the most important championship? Or because it can currently boast a huge fanbase in the wealthiest countries in the world? What do you think happens to that 'relevance' if the fanbase goes down?

NASCAR is not relevant worldwide, however F1 can learn from aspects of the way the sport is run and promoted, after all it is a sport that has increased market share in a difficult financial climate and does things very differently to F1 in terms of distribution of revenue which is far better geared towards longterm viability.

[schmenke]

... The competition that represents huge excess, and send it to poverty stricken China?" ....

China is poverty stricken?

[Franky]

China is poverty stricken?

Wealth distribution in China is near awful. And if it gets worse, I doubt the poor will stay silent.
One article about the wealth distribution from last year - http://english.caixin.com/2014-08-04/100712733.html

[Doc Austin]

I have to admit, as for their points systems, NASCAR and F1 both screwed up with the way their finales were set up this year. (NASCAR - reset top 4 to a tie on points. F1 - double points)

Thankfully the double points had little, or no, effect on the final standings. Thankfully it will be gone next year.

However, I think it could have been implemented a little differently and it would have been ok. Monaco, Silverstone and Monza (and maybe Spa) are probably the most prestigious events on the calendar, so they probably deserve double points. I certainly would rather win one of those than any Abu Dabi race. The only thing that has ever made Abu Dabi special in any way is that it's the final race.

Nascar's new playoff, however, could not have played out any better for nascar itself. Every week there was some sort of drama. Everyone was facing elimination and was totally stressed out. You could see it in the tension on and off the track, and lots of times it simply boiled over. I have absolutely zero interest in nascar, but every weekend there was a story about a fist fight in the pits or someone putting someone in the wall on purpose or threatening to retaliate next week. There might be a bit of professional wrestling type hype thrown it there too, but it kept it interesting and nascar fans loved it.

I ended up watching it just for the hell of it, and even if it was fake, pretentious and phoney, it was still entertaining if for nothing else than to see what kind of pile of dog poop everyone would step into next.

The whole chase thing is artificial, which is supposedly why F1 fans hate it. This is why I am so surprised that F1 fans don't raise more hell about the artificial benefits of the DRS, or why teams are forced to artificially use a second tire compound in the race. Both of those are just as artifical, contrived, and full of crap as anything nascar does, but we just swallow it and keep watching.

In the end, people are going to watch what entertains them and ignore what doesn't. As long as big money drives the sport, it's going to have to entertain enough people to generate that big money, even if it has to do so artificially. Sucks, but true.

[journeyman racer]

Hmmm so you think a sport that flaunts its expense and wealth is incompatible with Middle Eastern culture.... okay. Nothing more needs to be said there.

Given that the size of the Chinese middle class is greater than the entire population of the USA, that luxury car sales there have overtaken Europe and threaten to overtake the USA and the country is the second largest economy in the world your stereotyping of the Chinese as poverty-stricken is rather outdated. This is a country where flaunting wealth is the norm and where there is a lot of interest in cars, the largest car market in the world. There are a lot of poor people there but F1 isn't really interested in reaching out to them, but it isn't interested in poor people in developed countries either.

The Middle East does have a motorsports heritage BTW, rallying, drag racing and an informal street racing culture. However the relative lack of motorsports heritage in both should not be a significant factor. Most fans in traditional F1 following countries do not follow other forms of motorsport, the question is how should F1 promote itself in countries that it has not previously raced in. At the moment the sport does little and leaves it completely up to local promoters who in most cases are not capable of doing so, this is something that can be remedied.

The point is, those countries have no relationship with mainstream motorsport/circuit racing. Therefore they don't have a relationship with F1. Middle Eastern countries do have a culture of rallying. Therefore it would make sense for the WRC to go there.

Again, strawman. I have no expectation that F1 consume the world. It can however be better promoted.

Also I do not share your complacency re: F1. 30/40 years ago F1 was only one amongst several types of motorsport popular globally including Group C sportscars, rallying and to a lesser extent Indycar. It rose to the top largely through Bernie grasping the importance of TV rights and to a ruthless suppression of the other formulae's access to TV through various means. Bernie clearly hasn't grasped the importance of the internet and social media while other sports, not just motorsports, have and therefore F1 stands to lose out in the future.

It could be promoted, but it's not as important as you make out. Once you go down the promotion path though, you are beholden to it and must keep doing it (like Nascar is always doing it). The best promotion is relevance.

It's all very well to embellish BE influence. But the major advantage he had was that he was looking after the leading motorsport series anyway. Had all the motorsport classes had equal TV time, more people would still gravitate towards F1 because it's the designated leading motorsport class.

Designated by who or what? There is nothing inherently superior about F1 (except over other single seat open wheel formula) except the way it has been marketed and exploited by Bernie over the previous three/four decades.

Indycar was the most popular form of racing in the US. Where is it now? No form of any sport is guaranteed popularity anywhere.



So educate me, what are the factors behind the 'fact' as you seem to see it that NASCAR is doomed to failure?

There's a key misunderstanding of your pov right here. "There is nothing inherently superior about F1" Well, in actual fact, there is. The fact they're 15 secs a lap quicker than anything else (about 3min a lap quicker than a Nascar) is what makes them inherently superior to everything else. That's how it goes in sport. The higher levels are higher because they're quicker, speed is the key factor. Add that it's the World Championship, the only genuine one. Then there's it's history, but speed is the defining factor.

Regards Indycar racing. You are confusing the interest in the series, the cars, the drivers, and all the peripheral stuff, as the be all, end all of American motorsport. You ignored what's relevant. What was relevant was the Indy 500. All of American motorsport revolved around Indy. The other stuff was just a development of Indy. Tony George ******* the relevance of Indy, is the single biggest factor of the supposed popularity of Nascar.

I'm not saying Nascar is doomed for failure. I'm saying there are key factors against it from being the no1 motorsport series. Just because it's the flavour of the month, doesn't mean it's a threat to F1.

[journeyman racer]

Oh dear.

Do you think drivers would be getting astronomical fees if the sport they were in had negligible money flowing in? Have you wondered why F3 drivers, even the most talented, are almost entirely pay drivers while the best F1 drivers are not? Hadn't you wondered why the number of pay drivers in F1 has increased and whether it has anything to do with the slowdown in the global economy since 2007 and is at all related to the trouble even teams like McLaren are having attracting sufficient sponsorship?

This isn't about whether drivers are paid too much or whether they deserve the money. They are paid what the market deems they are worth. If there is little free money in the market then the amount they are paid goes down. Simple economics. It is because of this that it is relevant that NASCAR drivers can expect to earn money on a par with F1 drivers. Driver salary is one marker amongst several that indicates the financial wellbeing of a sport.

Given that NASCAR is largely limited as its name implies to North America and therefore accesses a smaller market than F1 the fact that its finances are so robust is an indicator that it offers very good return for the money for sponsors and promoters interested in the American market. Why is that?

Which part of this do you want me to answer?

And how do you define 'relevance'? Because FOM says its the most important championship? Or because it can currently boast a huge fanbase in the wealthiest countries in the world? What do you think happens to that 'relevance' if the fanbase goes down?

NASCAR is not relevant worldwide, however F1 can learn from aspects of the way the sport is run and promoted, after all it is a sport that has increased market share in a difficult financial climate and does things very differently to F1 in terms of distribution of revenue which is far better geared towards longterm viability.

F1 is the most important title, because the rules were drawn up for it to be so. The cars have changed many, many times, but it's still the World Championship. Being called (F1) World Champion is the highest title you can achieve in motor racing. Regardless of it's economy, depth of entries, popularity, relative to other motorsport. You can't escape it. Being a Nascar champ is nice, but it means little.

[Doc Austin]

F1 is the most important title, because the rules were drawn up for it to be so. The cars have changed many, many times, but it's still the World Championship. Being called (F1) World Champion is the highest title you can achieve in motor racing.

Agreed.... for the most part, that is.

Being a Nascar champ is nice, but it means little.

It means little to you. To most Americans, is does mean something.

In the states most people can name the Nascar champ, and even a lot of the drivers. I don't hardly even watch it, but I know most of the drivers because they are on TV all the damm time. They are ESPN sportscenter, NBC sports channel, NBC, CBS, Fox, and on and on and on. You simply cannot escape it, much like there is no escaping soccer in Brazil or Cricket in the UK.

However, if you go around America anywhere but Austin, Texas, asking who Sebastien Vettel is you will get a lot of blank, empty stares and confused looks. You would probably even get a lot of that in Austin too. In America, the F1 championship might be nice, but it means next to nothing compared to the Nascar championship.

I get it that some people hate Nascar and think it sucks, and to a point I am one of them, but their is no denying their success and popularity. You can go into any supermarket and find dozens of cereal boxes with Nascars stars on the. Nascar lighters. Nascar dinner plates. You can buy Nascar air fresheners. I think you can even buy a Nascar feminine deodorant! If Nascar means very little, how do you account for this kind of marketability?

I get it. Non-Americans feel like their kind of racing is superior, but mostly Americans don't care what the rest of the world thinks. This is coming from a guy who aspired to race in F1 and LeMans, so I don't quite think that way. I have just observed it.

[Malbec]

F1 is the most important title, because the rules were drawn up for it to be so. The cars have changed many, many times, but it's still the World Championship. Being called (F1) World Champion is the highest title you can achieve in motor racing. Regardless of it's economy, depth of entries, popularity, relative to other motorsport. You can't escape it. Being a Nascar champ is nice, but it means little.

You and I approaching this from completely different angles. We're not talking about the same thing at all.

You are talking about the kudos attached to driving in F1. I'm not discussing this at all, I'm referring purely to F1 and NASCAR's business model. You stated clearly that F1 has absolutely nothing to learn from NASCAR. As Doc Austin has pointed out re: promotions and marketing actually F1 has a lot it can learn from NASCAR. You might well feel that circuits should be squeezed dry of cash and driven out unless they can get a state or dictator to fund F1 races, I think F1 can learn from NASCAR where race-hosting fees are low enough that privately owned tracks have an incentive to bid for races knowing they can turn a profit. Not having an investment fund suck out 40-50% of the income at source is another, or giving a single team such an inbuilt contractual advantage that they can veto rules and get $100 million or so just for being Ferrari every year.

Those are obvious flaws in the way F1 is run, don't tell me you think all that is great and the way NASCAR is run is worthless.

[Malbec]

I get it. Non-Americans feel like their kind of racing is superior, but mostly Americans don't care what the rest of the world thinks. This is coming from a guy who aspired to race in F1 and LeMans, so I don't quite think that way. I have just observed it.

Actually in terms of the governance and business aspect of the sport NASCAR is highly regarded over here because it puts F1's embarrassing governance to shame and has increased market share despite an extremely difficult business environment. I've read quite a few articles about the business side and I've been impressed even though I can't name a single NASCAR driver, except maybe one or two who have migrated from F1.

That said as some posts here have proven there is a great deal of snobbery regarding NASCAR and unfortunately a lot of that comes from inside F1 itself. Its a shame because it would be to F1's advantage to take a close look at how they made NASCAR a success over in the US and learn from it.

Obviously since F1 is so superior to NASCAR in all aspects I'm sure it will be purely a matter of time before F1 becomes the dominant form of motorsport in the US