![]() Lotus followed suit with Gold Leaf sponsorship at the Spanish Grand Prix, five months later. The first driver to exploit the new regulations was John Love, a privateer who sweet-talked the Gunston tobacco brand into covering the costs of competing in his nearest round of the world championship, the South African Grand Prix. Then, in 1968 F1’s rules were changed to permit commercial sponsorship. What is the difference between privateers covering their own costs, those supported by benefactors (think Lord Hesketh / James Hunt) or commercial support? Essentially none. This trend continued into the late sixties, with many a team running third cars for paying individuals, or even selling cars outright to privateers, who covered their own costs. The balance were wealthy privateers or individuals bankrolled by benefactors. The 1950 British Grand Prix, the very first world championship round, had 26 starters, of which just nine drivers were entered by “works” teams. Paying drivers have been around for as long as F1 has existed. To denigrate a world champion as a ‘pay driver’ is clearly absurd, but those familiar with the sport’s history will know he isn’t the only one who arguably fits the model. Italian nobleman Giovanni Lavaggi (memorably nicknamed Johnny Carwash) is a celebrated example thanks to his three non-qualifications from six attempts with Minardi in 1996.Īlonso is attractive to sponsorsBut some have applied the same all-embracing term to the likes of Fernando Alonso, who attracts support from sponsors because of his high-profile status within the sport. There have been past examples of true ‘pay drivers’, whose only qualifications were fat wallets able to cover the costs of reasonable results in lower categories. Some of these have unfairly been tarred by the ‘pay driver’ brush. Increasingly teams are resorting to budget-linked drivers. Imagine, then, the commercial pressures on current team principals, who carry such responsibilities over and above the duties of running cutting-edge businesses that are publicly audited by rabid fans every fortnight with fortunes that change dramatically – as they did for Manor – in split-seconds.į1’s plummeting TV ratings plus a commercial rights holder who siphons off around a third of the sport’s £1.2bn annual underlying revenues (turnover of around £1.6bn – operating costs of ±£400) ratchet the pressures to a point greater than at any point during this millennium, yet overall global interest in fossil-fuelled sports is tailing off. Go back just 30 years, and the average team F1 strength was closer to 80. Consider their families and something like 2,000 lives would potentially be affected if one folds. ![]() Therefore F1’s mortality rate is roughly equal to that of cheetah in the wild, and thus current teams require preservation of sorts, particularly as they employ an average of 500 heads each. True, some were subject to takeovers – think Tyrrell/BAR/Honda/Brawn/Mercedes, all of which share the same company number, or Stewart/Jaguar/Red Bull (ditto) – but the purified figure is estimated at 80 start-ups. Indeed, so acute are the cost versus performance challenges at the pinnacle that over 130 F1 entrants have attempted the sport during the FIA world championship’s 68-year existence. Simply put, without money it would be impossible to enter motor racing, unlike tennis where the only requirements are racquet and ball, or soccer, where the only cost is for a leather bladder. Since that first recorded motor race in 1895, run between Paris and Bordeaux and back, the rich (and famous) have always held an advantage in the sport. Indeed, the only events run for contemporary cars are rounds of the F1 world championship. For numbers, refer to last week’s feature on F1’s costs.Ĭomplaints about “pay drivers” are “incredibly naive” – WilliamsIt has always been thus: regardless of numerous attempts by the governing body, the FIA, to reduce the costs and barriers to entry, the fact is that all four recent entries into F1 folded within four years, while various domestic F1 series that once prevailed are no more. Therefore, the costs of competing in the fastest (and most glamorous) category of all, namely, Formula 1, are truly astronomical. To these could be added a third: The faster you go, the more expensive it gets. There are two overriding truisms is motor racing: The sport is (increasingly less) dangerous, and it is (increasingly more) expensive. But, as explains, not all pay drivers are alike, and without them it’s doubtful some teams could continue. Several of Formula One’s smaller teams have been criticised for employing ‘pay drivers’.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |