After my rant about those who complain about the rise of so-called 'pay drivers' without a feasible suggestion of how to do things differently, I actually decided to look back in time to see if F1's current situation - where seven of the teams are financially insecure - is anything new. It's not.
F1 is coming out of a boom era of money being spent on the sport. In early 2008, just before the world went bust, there were 11 teams. Five were majority owned and funded by car manufacturers. Then there was McLaren (part owned at the time by Mercedes). Another two teams were funded by Red Bull. These eight teams all had drivers who brought no sponsorship.
Force India were contesting their first season, and as well as the investment of their owner Vijay Mallya, they had a driver in Adrian Sutil who brought some sponsorship to the team. Williams had Kazuki Nakajima, who brought with him Toyota engines.
That leaves Super Aguri. For the 2007 and 2008 seasons they had Takuma Sato and Anthony Davidson as drivers, neither with any personal sponsorship as such. The team had support from Honda for running Sato, but still went bust after four races.
So, to clarify, out of ten financially secure teams, six had car manufacturers as shareholders, two were funded by Dietrich Mateschitz and two had help from drivers who brought money to the team.
In 2007, Spyker used Sutil and the sponsored Cristijan Albers, before his money ran out and they replaced him with full-blown pay driver Sakon Yamamoto. Then they sold to Mallya. Spyker themselves had bought out Midland, who in 2006 used Albers and Tiago Monteiro, both with sponsorship.
Midland had bought Jordan. Jordan had been able to use two unfunded drivers for a period (e.g. Frentzen and Trulli in 2000) thanks to cigarette sponsorship. Once this ran out, Sato appeared in 2002 with help from Honda engines. Narain Karthikeyan and Montiero were then used in 2005, their last season.
2005 was also the last season for plucky backmarkers Minardi before selling to Mateschitz. They had a history of using signing drivers based on the money they brought (e.g. Alex Yoong), even if they also had drivers like Fernando Alonso and Mark Webber when they could (just about) afford it.
The manufacturer boom started in 2002, when Toyota and Renault came in. As well as them there were Ferrari, McLaren-Mercedes, BMW-Williams and Jaguar.
Sauber seemed to manage without any sponsored drivers for a period between 2001 and 2005 (when they were bought by BMW) but they did enjoy strong sponsorship from Petronas (who badged their Ferrari engines) and Red Bull. Thanks to their cigarette company owners, BAR went without sponsored drivers from their arrival in 1999 until becoming Honda for 2006.
Jordan, as we said, had Honda-supported Sato alongside Fisichella, and Minardi had the aforementioned Yoong alongside Webber. Arrows had Red Bull-backed Enrique Bernoldi in addition to a major title sponsor in Orange, but they still went bust.
The mid-to-late 1990s tells a similar story for independent teams. Larrousse, Pacific, Simtek and Forti all came and went, despite plentiful use of proper pay drivers. Ligier became Prost, who collapsed at the end of 2001 after the loss of money brought by Peugeot and a cigarette company. Tyrrell was sold to become BAR.
In essence, in the past 20 years, no team has survived for long without the involvement of a car manufacturer, a cigarette company, Red Bull, or drivers who have brought sponsorship.
You do it better
The news that Sergey Sirotkin could race for Sauber next year has been met with widespread disapproval.
Having the view that he would be stepping up too soon for his own good is a very fair one. Having the view that he isn't good enough, even though you only heard about him for the first time a few hours ago, is just plain wrong. Having followed Sirotkin for the past two years, I tackled these issues earlier here.
With Sirotkin's father one of the new investors in Sauber, some have categorised them along with the Chiltons as nepotism and something unacceptable in F1.
In the case of Marussia, and fellow 'new' boys Caterham, the argument has been made before by some that F1 would be better off without them and their 'pay drivers'. Yeah, never mind all the people employed in Banbury and Leafield...
But the new Russian investment comes at Sauber, the popular, independent team. The money that helps Sirotkin into the team secures their immediate future. A team that reportedly had a budget shortfall just to see out the season.
Do the people upset at the rise of 'pay drivers' want to see Sauber fall? Williams crumble? No, of course they don't.
Yet here they are, complaining about the side-effect of the very money that secures these teams, whether it's from Russia, Mexico, Venezuela or Reigate. And the only suggestion of how they would do things differently? Have a more deserving driver.
I'd love to see a deserving driver like Robin Frijns get an F1 seat. But without his own sponsorship, there's no way of making it happen. This isn't teams being greedy, this is just the teams ensuring their safety.
Take away the Mexican brands only there because Esteban Gutierrez is, and Sauber have virtually no sponsors. And it can't be for a lack of trying. No other team from Lotus down to Marussia boasts a big-money sponsor that isn't tied to one of their drivers.
Does F1 need to look in the mirror and ask why it cannot attract sponsors in any other way? It probably does.
But in the meantime, having the likes of Sirotkin are a small price to pay for the security of the F1 teams.
So put up with it, or do it better yourself.
Having the view that he would be stepping up too soon for his own good is a very fair one. Having the view that he isn't good enough, even though you only heard about him for the first time a few hours ago, is just plain wrong. Having followed Sirotkin for the past two years, I tackled these issues earlier here.
With Sirotkin's father one of the new investors in Sauber, some have categorised them along with the Chiltons as nepotism and something unacceptable in F1.
In the case of Marussia, and fellow 'new' boys Caterham, the argument has been made before by some that F1 would be better off without them and their 'pay drivers'. Yeah, never mind all the people employed in Banbury and Leafield...
But the new Russian investment comes at Sauber, the popular, independent team. The money that helps Sirotkin into the team secures their immediate future. A team that reportedly had a budget shortfall just to see out the season.
Do the people upset at the rise of 'pay drivers' want to see Sauber fall? Williams crumble? No, of course they don't.
Yet here they are, complaining about the side-effect of the very money that secures these teams, whether it's from Russia, Mexico, Venezuela or Reigate. And the only suggestion of how they would do things differently? Have a more deserving driver.
I'd love to see a deserving driver like Robin Frijns get an F1 seat. But without his own sponsorship, there's no way of making it happen. This isn't teams being greedy, this is just the teams ensuring their safety.
Take away the Mexican brands only there because Esteban Gutierrez is, and Sauber have virtually no sponsors. And it can't be for a lack of trying. No other team from Lotus down to Marussia boasts a big-money sponsor that isn't tied to one of their drivers.
Does F1 need to look in the mirror and ask why it cannot attract sponsors in any other way? It probably does.
But in the meantime, having the likes of Sirotkin are a small price to pay for the security of the F1 teams.
So put up with it, or do it better yourself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)