[DOF_power]

Teams to fund budget cap accountants
Mosley pushing on with policed budgets
f1-live.com
31/01/08 09:27

F1 teams' financial experts will meet in Paris with the FIA on Thursday to determine an appropriate budget cap for the 2009, 2010 and 2011 seasons.

It is expected that the budget limitations will phase in over the initial three year period, with FIA President Max Mosley to preside over a special department of 30 forensic accountants to police the cap.

Mosley will headhunt the experts from the UK's customs and tax department and its equivalents in Italy, Germany, Japan and France, according to a report in the Financial Times.

The teams will fund their salaries to the tune of about $3m per team per season.

"The first reaction from the team principals will be that it is intrusive and they do not want people poking around their factory.

But when you think about it, they will be happy with the budget cap and happy to spend less because it keeps them in business," Mosley said.

The Briton said he was emboldened to seriously explore the budget cap issue after the FIA's forensic investigation of McLaren last year as part of the espionage scandal.

"The experience with McLaren taught us that if you can deploy the resources and you have sufficient expertise, you can find almost anything and the chances of someone doing work we could not find traces of is very small," he said.

Source GMM
© CAPSIS International

[Bob Tanner]

Where do I begin...?

Let me get this straight...they're hiring bureaucrats from the Customs and Tax Dept's to fix something? I know we have a different culture over there than you do in EEU but let me tell you, that very thought sends chills down my spine. And Italy has had how many governments since WWII? Twenty-some I believe. That sentence alone, in the report you published, made me wonder of Mosley isn't imbibing in some sort of recreational pharmaceuticals?

They're going to access (shall we insert the word "tax" here) three million Euros per year to pay of the bureaucrat's "help?" Mosley says, ""But when you think about it, they will be happy with the budget cap and happy to spend less because it keeps them in business" Maybe I'm kind of naive but when someone takes MY money the last thing I want to hear is how happy it will eventually make me.

"The teams will fund their salaries to the tune of about $3m per team per season." Let's see, how many teams do they have in F1? Eleven? Each with two cars per team? 11 X Σ3 million = Σ33 million. (Sorry. The "Σ" is as close as I can get to the euro symbol) I know the dollar id down at the moment but even with that, the Σ33 million seems kind of pricey for bureaucratic bean counters.

Colour me pessimistic but as reported, this entire thing has, to me, the prospect of turning into something more suited to Cirque du Soleil than it does the world's premier racing series.

[Racer Duck]

I think I've missed some key piece of information. Is Mosley doing this because of any reason other than he can? Or is one (or more) of the teams crying about being outspent?

My position on this type of thing is, "let them spend what they want, and if someone else beats them while spending less, then the problem isn't the money." It appears to me the problem is one of innovation and security of technology that's causing the major problems. That's solved with rules to clarify boundaries and penalties, not spending caps.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

I think I've missed some key piece of information. Is Mosley doing this because of any reason other than he can? Or is one (or more) of the teams crying about being outspent?

My position on this type of thing is, "let them spend what they want, and if someone else beats them while spending less, then the problem isn't the money." It appears to me the problem is one of innovation and security of technology that's causing the major problems. That's solved with rules to clarify boundaries and penalties, not spending caps.

I admit to not being up to speed on the F1 World but past experience tells me that very few problems are solved by throwing money at them. (Especially Σ33 million worth of money!) They might be much better served to look at the rules, decide where they want to be, then adapt the rules and fairly and rationally enforce said rules.

The formula in racing, ever since I first took an interest in it is, "money = success." Removing "money" from that equation will, IMNSVHO, also remove "success," in any meaningful form.

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

I think I've missed some key piece of information. Is Mosley doing this because of any reason other than he can? Or is one (or more) of the teams crying about being outspent?

My position on this type of thing is, "let them spend what they want, and if someone else beats them while spending less, then the problem isn't the money." It appears to me the problem is one of innovation and security of technology that's causing the major problems. That's solved with rules to clarify boundaries and penalties, not spending caps.

Well the teams were about Mosley's restrictions on technology to "reduce costs", so now Mosley (taking after somebody from Jaguar/Ford years ago) sugested that he'll free the regulations instead of adding more restrictions.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

Well the teams were about Mosley's restrictions on technology to "reduce costs", so now Mosley (taking after somebody from Jaguar/Ford years ago) sugested that he'll free the regulations instead of adding more restrictions.

I'll be interested to see how all this plays out.

[DOF_power]

The only events in that reduced costs in the 100+ years of Grand Prix racing were:
1] WWI
2] the Great Depression
3] WWII
and after that costs started going up again. And only those events really reduced costs (temporarely), everything else failed (miserably).

So I say be carefull what you wish for.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

The only events in that reduced costs in the 100+ years of Grand Prix racing were:
1] WWI
2] the Great Depression
3] WWII
and after that costs started going up again. And only those events really reduced costs (temporarely), everything else failed (miserably).

So I say be carefull what you wish for.

We are of like mind.