Tom_Spangler wrote:
And I agree with Keith, COTA's ticket prices aren't out of line for a major event like that. They certainly aren't the reason I've only been there once. It's because the place is too far away for me.
But, if you're going to host one race in the US, it would make sense to have it fairly central. Although Austin is a bit south, it's still about the middle of the country.
For me, the prices are kinda high, but I also don't attend major events, anyway. My son and I went one year. We had main grandstand seats for Friday practice (bought of Craigslist) and GA seats for Saturday and Sunday (again, bought off Craigs). While it was cool to say we were there, I really missed being able to see all of the action at once like on TV. I wonder how many people feel the same way? Especially since we don't get access to anything because we're not paying the big ticket prices. And I will say, the swag prices are stupid expensive in comparison......
We've also attended the vintage races and the first V8 Supercars. Plus, our first Indy race at TMS. For all three (ok, Indy was special), we were able to walk the "pits" and see the drivers and cars. For us, if we could do that at an F1 race, we'd be much more likely to attend.
-Rob
AIUI, you used to be able to walk the pits on Thursday when they held the USGP at Indy.
There is no "one race to a country" rule. When Bernie was pushing the race in NY it was supposed to happen during the term of the COTA contract, so there would have been two races in the US for at least a few years. COTA will continue to have F1 for some time, if they can just figure out a way to make money.
I've been to a few of the COTA races, but only because I got free tickets. If I had to pay for tickets I'd watch it on TV where I could FF the boring bits and walk from my couch to the fridge instead of driving 6 hours round trip to attend.
1-Bernie will give a race to anybody that will pony up enough dough. That's why all the new races are in tin pot/kingdom style places. If Putin wanted to spend a couple of trillion, I'd bet we would have 22 Russian GP's.
2-Are the radio rules too strict? Would it harm the competition to tell your driver which button they inadvertently pushed, so they can unpush it and have their power back?
3-Did you catch the lips on the First Lady? The official Azerbijani collagen injection doctor needs to be sent off to a gulag somewhere.
The radio rules are stupid. "The driver must drive the car unassisted" -- fine. I'm perfectly OK with not giving the driver tips on which corners he's getting wrong, but setting the engine mapping modes is not "driving the car" any more than adjusting the angle on the front wing is.
It's kind of a mute point with COTA after this year anyways. I'll be very surprised if the race is there next year. They will have to just clean up on the Taylor Swift show after qualifying. I hope I have a different corner than last year so I don't get trampled by tweens rushing to get up front at the stage. HAHA
I'll be working my 3rd straight USGP this year. It's fun and only a 30 minute commute. Nothing beats driving right down the front stretch in the middle of the grid girls as they are setting up for the race. The closest I'll ever come to gridding a car at a GP even if it's only in an F350. 
I've had some extremely memorable experiences even last year with all the rain. I can't wait to do Singapore next year. Would I pay to go as often as I have? Probably not but that is more due to the support series (Or lack there of) than anything else.
I do have to admit I think the radio rule is pretty stupid honestly. It just doesn't make much sense to not allow the teams to help the driver problem solve. It was said though that it only effected Hamilton .2 sec per lap though.
bmw88rider wrote:
It's kind of a mute point with COTA after this year anyways. I'll be very surprised if the race is there next year. They will have to just clean up on the Taylor Swift show after qualifying.
So, you're not the only one to say that. But, you might be a little closer to the truth. I"ve heard the "this is the last race" at COTA statements since the first one.
Last year was horrible because of the rain and (supposedly) the Mexico GP took away Mexican fans. Plus, the whole fiasco with the events fund, but with a re-assesment of taxes, they were still able to come up with the funds. Then they hire a bunch of (what I think) are non-car guys who seem to use it as more of a concert venue than motor racing.
Finally, we always have the Bernie factor where he likes to move things around just because he's nuts.
With the obstacles, they seem to overcome. What do you (or anyone else) think will be the thing that kills it? Is it a combination of everything?
Motorsports spectating in general is on a decline. As we move more towards self driving cars, I think the interest in racing will continue to decline. I'd love to be proven wrong.
Will F1 ever survive in the US? I assume there are still more fans going than in Baku, China or Malaysia? Is that because the governments of those countries are funding more?
(We can dump this to it's own thread if it gets too big)
-Rob
They had to do some debt refinancing that has a few interesting terms to it. Combine that with them losing the X-Games which was a good money maker and the PWC, SVRA, and lone star lemans weekends are at best break even events. The horrible contract that they have with F1 makes it really rough because it's 5M a year more to host the race. I was honestly very surprised that they are hosting this years race after last year. Oh well, If it goes away, I've got some good contacts in Mexico and it's not a long flight to mexico city to go work the WEC and F1 there. 
It was funny last year I heard more advertising for the Elton John show after the race than the actual race themselves. I'm sure we will hear the same thing this year with the T. Swift show.
Bake to Baku for a sec. I posted that Hammy didn't switch modes and cause the issue like Nico did so he didn't know how to undo it. That was incorrect, it was something they both did and Nico figured out how to resolve it. My bad.
On to racing. I'd put money on it that COTA will continue. For all the posturing and bluster plus negative comments from Bernie, the US is still the wealthiest per capita country in the world and the money that funds F1 in the form of sponsors and manufacturers sell a metric E36 M3 done of stuff here. They want a race here to promote their crap and to justify it to their boards so it will continue. Remember that while Bernie is saying nasty things about this continent right now, it wasn't long ago he was bending backwards to help make the NJ race happen, including arranging for the armco from Turkey (I think, could be wrong) to be sent over to help make it happen. Just look at what Rolex, Mercedes and Ferrari sell here alone.
In reply to Adrian_Thompson:
The question is whether that increased sales is enough to force Bernie to lower his cost to have a race.
Given the most recent European race held in Asia, and in a small country without much of market, I can't be nearly has optimistic as you are about the USGP. Bernie is too much like FIFA and FOCA- too many small countries with no real economy are getting races with no fans showing up to see that the US should get a race just because.
If it really were about Rolex, Mercedes, and Ferrari- the US would have never lost a race in the first place. And would still have one in the two regions with the most money- North East, and South West.
Besides Bernie wants to go back to Vegas anyways. Have a repeat of this great event:
In reply to alfadriver:
Good point. It’s going to be interesting to see where F1 goes post Bernie. I don't think he can live forever, but he may yet prove me wrong. Bernie and CVC capital got control of F1 in a very different period. They've raped and pillaged it with the full support and agreement from the FIA and the teams for over two decades now. The world has and is changing. Tobacco money has gone. I don't know how long alcohol money will last and the shift to pay per view has worked for them short term, but I think it's going to hinder them long term. The British public have been rabid supporters of racing and F1 since the beginning, but with it moving to Sky viewers have dropped. China moved from free to air to PPV and its viewers plummeted. A few years ago half a billion people watched, then 450 million, now down to less than 400 million.
How people consume media is changing at an astonishing rate. Cord cutters are gaining #'s. It was only 10 years ago that 90% of household had cable, already it's dropped below 80% I think. Worse (for the ndustry that is) than people cutting the cord is that new households are never getting cable to start with.
I think over the next 10 years F1 management and teams are going to hit some kind of crisis. How do you attract new fans when you don’t get eyes on the product when they don't have cable, let alone premium channels? One time PPV streaming? Great, but how do you persuade people to pay for the first time? I think they will have to go to some kind of free to internet scheme even if it's time delayed. But even then, how do you get people interested for the first time if it all happens on the other side of the world? I think, and this is my opinion which stunningly has been wrong on occasions!!! That they will have to have race(s) here in the States with free viewership or they will lose this market and the sponsors that go with it.
Also before we just demonize Bernie (although it is fun) about the cost to host a race. The teams are just as guilty. A big portion of the hosting fees go to the prize pot which all teams from Ferrari down to Manor are reliant on to fund their cars are sponsor money is harder and harder to find.
I think F1 has been walking a tight rope since tobacco money went away and they are going from one hail Mary pass to another to keep the money flowing and it can only last so long. Something has got to give in the next few years. Once it implodes I'd like to see free to internet watching and a better distribution of races to countries that suit the fans (and hence sponsors) with correspondingly lower hosting fees so tracks and countries that matter can get races without begging to the government.
Stepping down from the soap box as my audience he left to feed crumbs to the pigeons.
^I agree with most of that.
I haven't watched F1 legally since about 2009. I got tired of the packages I had to own to get the channel with F1 on TV. I quit watching illegally (t0rrents) in 2014 as it was no longer worth the hassle.
And I'm someone who used to wake on weekends as a kid to watch Senna and stuff.
I, too, know I can live without F1. Did for quite a while when Speedvision came into being, and we never got it. It makes some vacation options less likely- as we still have some plans to visit Monaco and maybe package Spain on the same trip.
But if that happens, that happens. For sure, more than a cable subscription, I'm not paying to watch F1 on TV. Or any other sport, for that matter.
Adrian- your observation about the teams trying to rake in money is interesting in the idea that it kind of flies in the face of the actual sponsors- ALL of the top teams are sponsored by companies who make a lot of profit in the US, and little in places they race. So it appears that it's team "greed" driven more than the sponsors. Not something I would have expected, but based on where they race, and the lack of forcing in big markets, well....
In reply to alfadriver:
Good point, but they agreed with each step up until now. I think the locations will become more important though once the current model stops working.
There was an interview in the back of one of the big US car mags with the guy who was running Indianapolis Motor Speedway in the F1 era. He made a comment that Bernie wasn't a race promoter, his goal was different and was not to sell seats. It was not elaborated upon, but it does help explain races like Baku or the endless stream of races in generic desert locales on generic characterless circuits. He's looking to sell to the TV networks, so he doesn't care if it's local to the viewers. Heck, the exotic locales only add to the glamour.
I would probably pay for a streaming pass if I could watch the race without interruptions and without the idiot NBC announcing team. Heck, I already do that for Le Mans and Bathurst. As it is, I tend to use a VPN to watch the Channel4 coverage when it becomes available to stream instead of watching on broadcast TV and the incessant commercial breaks.
In reply to Adrian_Thompson:
We have to get to a point where venues are not willing to pay F1's going rate. Not sure when that will get reached- it happens in developed countries- to the point where VERY traditional venues are being threatened to lose their date (Spa and Monza), but constantly new venues come and go in areas where not much commerce is going on.
Once Silverstone gets a real threat to lose a race, a place where ALL the teams but a few have their HQ's- then we know something is going on. I think that will be a breaking point. (Monaco will never lose it's date)
Until then, we will see a continued use of marginal developing countries on new tracks dominate. Which is FIFA and FOCA's model....
Personally, I would never invest in a race here in the US. Much like I would never apply to host the Olympics or World Cup. This country can host those events with a very short time window- all the facilities are in place. Just waiting for a disaster- see a few countries drop an F1 date at the same time- Indy can fill in REALLY easily. Or COTA, or even Long Beach.
Call us when you are ready...
Adrian,
I do agree with a lot of what you said. The heyday of tobacco driven motorsports is over. All of the series are seeing it and not just F1. Save the 100th running of Indy this year and the long beach mega event, It's been more about racing to half empty tracks that are a shell of the excitement and energy of 10-15 years ago.
I've got to say if it weren't for COTA being in my back yard, I wouldn't be much of a fan. F1 was always something that I'd catch if it happened to be on or my DVR could actually find it based on the schedule bouncing around. I'm more of a GT racing kind of guy but I do have respect for the F1 series and would be what is called a casual fan. If they went PPV or anything like that, I wouldn't probably watch the series at all honestly.
Adrian_Thompson wrote:
Bake to Baku for a sec. I posted that Hammy didn't switch modes and cause the issue like Nico did so he didn't know how to undo it. That was incorrect, it was something they both did and Nico figured out how to resolve it. My bad.
Oddly I keep reading that Hamilton started in the "bad mode" so he didn't switch to it mid race but started in it. Then some other issue with the car PLUS that bad mode caused the car to go into a state where the car would not fully deploy the recovered/stored energy. Nico started in a less aggressive mode that did not react the same way with the "other issue." But then he went into the aggressive mode (badly programmed mode) which combined with the "other issue" to then also caused the lack of full energy deployment. He thus could realize just go back to where you were and race there. Hamilton just knew that the car wasn't fully deploying so he didn't know what was wrong or what to change.
Makes me wonder how the settings work. Could he have chosen a setting that breaks the powertrain? Or are they designed to all be "safe" as in he can just keep clicking the two or three switchs one step at a time until he gets what feels the fastest with no major failure.
As far as attending races. I think I enjoyed all the races I have been to except for the ones at INdy. Indy felt distant and seeing how intimate mexico looked makes me wonder if it was something they could have fixed at Indy to make it feel closer to the fans. Plus the biggest part of making a race weekend work is the side show. If the community is involved it is very fun. Spa and Montreal are like that, lots of community involvement it felt like. Heck there was a huge party tent at Spa where some of the people I talked to (during the race mind you) didn't even have a clue about the race.
So I can see the plan for Austin. Make the event relevant to the community and it will survive and be fun.
Austin needs more supporting races. I was stoked for the historic F1 cars last year but they got completely pooched by the weather. Otherwise, it's just Spec Porsche and Spec Ferrari. I wanted to see a full weekend of racing with F1 as the main event, but instead we got The F1 Show with a little bit happening in between.
In reply to Keith Tanner:
That's not too unusual. British GP support races on the Sunday are:
GP3
GP2
Porsche Super cup
While they may be higher caliber than Austin its still a similar # of races. It would be nice if we could see GP2 or maybe everyone put away their butt hurt and if not Indy car then maybe the Mazda Road to Indy or possibly IMSA?
In reply to Adrian_Thompson:
Same race at SPA and Monza when we were there. Plus a F-Renault race and a Spec 500 or Mini race. Lots of races to be seen for Euro stop.
IIRC, Austin 2014 had Spec Ferrari and Spec Porsche. Austin 2015 had Spec Ferrari and historic F1. Three races for a full weekend seems a bit thin when you figure how many races and classes run at the Mitty every year.
While I would like to see more support races, as well, I don't think it adds much to the COTA or F1 coffers.
Lotsa good points made. Even Bernie admits that the way money gets distributed is nuts, though as long as a significant chunk lands in his pockets he doesn't want to fix it. He'd rather do one-off contract adjustments with the tracks than treat them all the same. He knows the countries that really want the prestige of the race will pay out the nose, regardless of the economics, while the business operations like COTA need help with a little generous renegotiation of terms. He can't put everything into the contract with one track without the others getting wind of it and wanting the same treatment.
As someone points out, besides the track surviving just enough to keep putting on the show, he doesn't care about attendance. The track gets only the gate and concessions while F1 gets all the TV and sponsorship money. It's crazy that the track then pays for the privilege of hosting the show at a fixed rate (that Bernie may unilaterally reduce if absolutely necessary). And then a track like COTA has to compete with cheap street courses like Mexico and Baku.
COTA's problem isn't really F1, it is everything else they do or don't do with the track outside of the F1 race. The other racing series they have sponsored haven't been very lucrative, particularly since they are still all spectator-driven and racing in this country, outside of NASCAR, just doesn't attract spectators. I understand that the X-Games, while supposedly successful, didn't really generate much revenue for the track, either.
They've got to find a way to get butts in seats. For example, the SVRA deal isn't all that well attended because it isn't marketed and the track is passively letting SVRA do it as a driver's event. Despite the high entry fees, it doesn't make much for the track. However, if they could develop it as a Goodwood Revival or Mitty type deal, then it has the possibility of bringing more people in. You've had a lot of non-racers in management that seem to never have attended events like that to understand what works and what doesn't.
