Formula 1, from the viewer’s point of view, is a championship in which drivers fight to win on the track, surrounded by intelligent people who design and configure their cars.
However, we must not lose sight of the big picture. At the moment, the highest category of motorsport is in a very healthy situation, largely because there is a cost limit that controls the expenses of all the teams on the grid and that obviously slows down the biggest ones a little more.
If this limit had not been introduced, it is a fact that more than one team could have disappeared in the last two years. Instead, what it has caused is that many investors have now become interested in being part of the championship.
“There is an argument that F1 is now too cheap,” says Alfa Romeo’s Fred Vasseur . “For me, it’s completely wrong, because I think we are precisely in a good moment of form because we have the budget limit.”
“If it were removed, I’m not sure if we would be the same. F1 has always had ups and downs, okay now we are going up, but surely at some point another phase will come.”
“To go no further, I think F1 was pretty close to the abyss two or three years ago. We could have easily lost three teams,” he said.
Frederic Vasseur, director of Alfa Romeo Racing, at the team managers’ press conference
It would be naive not to accept that the financial regulations now have as much weight as their sporting and technical equivalents in Formula 1, so breaking them should be punished.
The big difference between these regulations is the time lag. Assuming that nothing strange happens, the sports results should be final on the night of November 20 after the last race of the season.
However, the financial terms of this course will not be known until well into 2023. In theory, breaching the financial regulations could trigger a retroactive punishment that will affect this year’s championship, so that would be a bit chaotic and possibly end with a complicated legal fight if the sanctioned team does not accept the penalty.
There is an important precedent in the history of the top flight regarding a significant change in the sporting results of a season after it has finished.
Following his infamous accident with Jacques Villeneuve at the 1997 European Grand Prix at Jerez, Michael Schumacher lost his second place in the world standings, a punishment that could have meant much more had he lost the title.
Although it hasn’t happened in Formula 1, other sports have seen a champion dethroned long after his success on more than one occasion. The Olympic Games and the Tour de France are two of the most famous examples. So why couldn’t this happen in F1 if a team “cheats” with its spending?
If the F1 Commission had not agreed to the increase in the original spending cap figure, it was inevitable, according to some team bosses, that several teams would have gone over the budget cap and thus face the consequences.
The 3.1% increase isn’t a huge figure, but it has given that little breathing space some teams needed to keep their spending under control. Despite this, it remains to be seen if everyone can stay below the new limit, since nothing guarantees it.
Initially, the cost limit for 2022 was 140 million dollars (138 million euros). That is the figure that several teams told the FIA they would not be able to reach, due in large part to inflation, which has increased the usual, day-to-day costs.
The key was how far they were going to miss that goal. Under the FIA’s financial regulations, exceeding the limit by at most 5% is considered a “minor excess”. While exceeding that 5% is considered a “significant excess”. The list of possible sanctions for the latter case is much stricter, and could even mean the exclusion of a team from the world championship.
The 3.1% increase for inflation equals $4.3 million, which supposedly raises the cost cap to $145.5 million. With this figure, exceeding it by 5% means spending around 152.7 million dollars (€150 million).
In Austria, where the increase in the spending ceiling was confirmed, the word that was repeated the most was “commitment”, with the bigger teams asking for more and the smaller ones asking for less.
“Obviously, the positions have been quite far apart, there were those who did not want any change and also those who asked for a higher increase,” said Andreas Seidl , whose team, McLaren, was one of those who had assured that he could not meet the limit. original budget.
“In the end, in a way, we’ve reached a middle ground. And that’s why it’s called a compromise.”
“We are happy, because also for our part, we wanted an increase, because we were facing problems similar to those of Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari and other teams. We have found a practical solution, at least for this 2022”.
“The best thing is to have found an intermediate solution for this year, so as not to end up with several teams breaching the cap in only its second year of validity, due to very delicate circumstances, so what has been done now is sensible.”
The three teams that have spent the most in recent years were also satisfied with the increase, although they obviously wanted it to be higher.
“It’s positive, because finally a decision has been made,” said Ferrari’s Mattia Binotto . “Because in the last meeting with the F1 Commission, we discussed a lot, but without results.
“I think in terms of time, we were at the limit. Some teams were already over the budget limit this year, so getting a deal was important.”
“As a big team, we are always looking for more, but I think this increase is enough to give us a new, more realistic target. Yes, it will still be tight, but it’s positive that it has come to this.”
“Of course it helps,” said Red Bull’s Christian Horner . “There were different opinions, so it was important to find a middle ground. And it’s not just about this year, it’s about the next year and the years after that.”
Of the bosses of the three great teams, Toto Wolff was perhaps the one who was most against.
“It’s very little for the big teams, I think,” said the Austrian. “Because the prices of everything, inflation and transport costs are through the roof.”
“But maybe it’s too much for the small teams. So no one is really happy, and I guess as a result, it’s a good thing.”
“I think there are three teams that are well over [the limit], and that means that cost savings will still be necessary. So yes, it has been positive to reach an agreement. But does it solve our problems? No.”
Before reaching this agreement, there was talk that up to seven teams could exceed the spending ceiling, so having to penalize so many teams would have been something of a mockery for the top flight itself. Would CCAP really be willing to do that?
However, if only one or two teams exceed the new limit, while the others are below it, the governing body would surely not be so sympathetic to these teams. And that is the risk that the largest structures now face.
Do you want to read our news before anyone else and for free? Follow us here on our Telegram channel and you won’t miss a thing. All the information, at your fingertips!
