So it happens again.

[MAX_THRUST]

They said when all the big manufacturers come into the sport costs spiral out of control and then they all leave....and it's happening again. How can this be allowed to happen again in the future and what can F1 do to prevent this from re-occuring.

[UltimateDanGTR]

unfortunatly like most motorsports, manurfacturers are just out for a publicity drive, and if they are not getting that or at least once they have succeeded, they quit. Its the independents that are the proper teams-they race for the passion of racing, not car sales. Manufacturers are doing business and you cant blame them for that-although it is annoying when they just up and leave without little thought for the sport they are leaving behind.

some ofcourse are the exception. Ferrari are the prime example-they race for racings sake. They dont need any more publicity for car sales. Porsche were for many years much the same with sportscar racing, until Max and Bernie destroyed the WSCC in the early 90s just for F1's benefit.

in F1, the 'independents' are as much of the sport as manufacturers, which is a good thing. there are plenty of proper racing teams ready to take a manufacturers place, although not for next year obviously.

In terms of preventing this, well, thats not up to me, although id like to see more manufacturers just supplying engines to the independents, with mercedes and ferrari and renault the exceptions.

[CNR]

Q: should they look at bringing the rule that no manufacturer can own more than 33% of a team i do not see why a manufacturer needs to own a team to be naming rights sponsor

[ioan]

Q: should they look at bringing the rule that no manufacturer can own more than 33% of a team i do not see why a manufacturer needs to own a team to be naming rights sponsor

Everyone has the right to own a team, so why a manufacturer shouldn't have the same right?

[Hondo]

Expanding and in some cases even splitting up the paddock areas while allowing the teams to field only one car and driver would go a long, long way to reducing F1 costs. You would double the size of the engine market and probably reduce the costs of development and production. The same with tires if more than one brand was approved and available. In addition, the bickering over driver status and equality within the team would go away. You would bring greater diversity to the field through the expanded number of teams along with the different ideas of the team owners.

I am all for manufacturers being in all forms of racing. I am against and always have been against rules, rule modifications and any other regulatory devices that favor and benefit manufacturers only, not only in fact, but in spirit also. If you have a modification, legal for all to use but far too costly for anyone without a manufacture's resources to actually implement then that modification favors manufactures. These budget caps will have more holes than a pair of fishnet stockings and won't necessarily address all of the issues. Example: JD Steel Company develops a new alloy stronger and lighter than carbon fiber. In addition, it's heat disipation properties are amazing. A team could use this stuff and create a braking system that would neither fade or wear out over the race distance on any race course. The problem is that it is a budget buster. This alloy is hugely expensive to the point nobody can afford to use it. Now comes Fordolet, a manufacturer that also owns it's own race team. Fordolet can afford the stuff but not without breaking out of the budget cap. Turns out Fordolet gets 95 percent of it's steel for production cars from JD Steel Company. If JD Steel wants Fordolets continued business, it will have to provide Fordolet the new alloy at a reasonable price. Done deal. Next thing you know the manufacturers are all running bulletproof brake systems and JD Steel is running 3 shifts to keep up with production orders.

Just a thought.

[Malbec]

Q: should they look at bringing the rule that no manufacturer can own more than 33% of a team i do not see why a manufacturer needs to own a team to be naming rights sponsor

Manufacturers enter F1 for more than publicity. Many want to be technically involved so they can develop technology and train their own staff. Honda started off entering for publicity and ended up buying a team because its the only way they could get technically involved. Ditto BMW. Why stop them? Is it any different to a guy like Eddie Jordan finally being found out as a liar and having to sell his team because he couldn't find sponsors?

[Sonic]

In answere to the title thread; yes it has happened again, and it will probably happen again in the future. As has already been stated, the big car makers do not enter motorsport for the "sport" they enter to sell more cars. When they spend more money building race cars eaxch year than they receive in direct response to the marketing exerecise that is mortorsport they quit - regardless of success.

I for one will not be too unhappy to have half a decade or so of smaller teams before the inevitable happens and the auto makers want back in.

As to should it be stopped? No. F1 cannot run as a closed book, so if new faces want in, be it independants or Ford, GM or whoeverthen that's fine by me.

[Mark]

If it weren't for the fact that we have new teams coming into F1 I'd be worried about this. The BTCC has never really recovered from a lack of manufacturers, but F1 is a very different thing.

[V12]

Agree with those who say you can't arbitrarily ban manufacturers from entering. Plus it might get a bit of a grey area, what is a "manufacturer"? Should Ferrari be made to disband despite the fact they were a racing team before they were a road car manufacturer, what about the likes of Spyker who entered in 2007, they build road cars, just not very many of them.

Then you could say some manufacturers like Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault have "racing in their blood" more than the likes of Toyota, but I would say Honda were one of the manufacturers that had a huge racing tradition and culture, and they were the first to bolt (albeit much more honourably than say, BMW)

Also what applies to the manufacturers would also apply to Red Bull/Toro Rosso, they are in it for marketing reasons too, despite being classed as an "independent", they are in it to sell something, just because it's drinks instead of cars, the principle is the same.

And what would happen to Force India if Mallya decided to suddenly pull the plug?

Virtually all motorsport is subject to the boom-bust manufacturer cycle, we don't like it but we can't (and shouldn't try to) change it, and motorsport has always survived it.

[race_director]

The only problemi with manufacturer'sleaving is that the series will be fullof small business people ,who will be so money minded. Forget technologies, willbecome another smallracing league

[DazzlaF1]

If it weren't for the fact that we have new teams coming into F1 I'd be worried about this. The BTCC has never really recovered from a lack of manufacturers, but F1 is a very different thing.

The BTCC though you could say has benefitted from having some of the best independently run operations in the world of touring cars in its series, its also proved that you dont need a multitude of manufacturer run teams to provide great racing.

As for lack of manufacturers in F1 lowering its worldwide appeal, i would think it would be the opposite, this is not the 1970s where you had the odd team that basically built their car practically in a garden shed, these teams coming in are ambitious and (if you believe them) have plenty of cash to play with. The only problem i see is that its unlikely that every small minded follower of F1 will not be giving these new teams time to bed themselves in and will be on their backs right from the start, which is wrong. They will need time in order to make themselves competitive.