Third car in F1: Irrational for Mallya, too late for Boullier
The discussions around the third car have been ongoing for several months, but such a project is far from unanimous: Vijay Mallya and Eric Boullier, presenting different arguments, are pushing back on the idea without completely ruling it out.
Faced with the real risks of seeing several teams disappear, which would automatically result in falling below the minimum requirement of 20 cars and thus a risk of challenging the current system of division of skills and revenue in the premier discipline, a provision of the Concorde agreements (valid until 2020) between the FIA, teams, and FOM could foresee the implementation of a third car among the remaining teams to reach the quorum.
The opposition to the implementation of such a rule is significant. Only the Ferrari team has positioned itself in favor, motivated by the survival of the aforementioned agreements that ensure it a substantial sum (at least 5% of F1’s profits) just for participating in the championship, regardless of its results. Bernie Ecclestone has also supported such a hypothesis, with the thought that the agreements could be called into question, potentially allowing the FIA to regain control over the current system.
For several directors, however, a third single-seater per team would create risks both economically and practically.
Compensation in case of a third car
Vijay Mallya, the co-owner and director of Force India, highlights the irrational aspect of the approach being promoted, while emphasizing that other solutions exist to improve the paddock situation: « I know it has been discussed at every race, at every opportunity in the paddock about whether certain teams will survive or not. Why this uncertainty? This uncertainty results from the imbalance and a certain irrationality in the way revenues are shared. »
Indeed, the distribution of income in the premier discipline favors large structures that are also the most victorious because they are the most competitive. Thus, Red Bull, Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes, and Williams have alone shared 63% of the revenues—with bonuses linked to victories over the past three seasons (7.5% of the revenues), in particular—while the six other teams have to be content with the remaining 37%. And among these, only Lotus sits on the F1 Strategy Group (a tripartite body composed equally of representatives from the FIA, FOM, and the teams), which is responsible for all decisions concerning the future of the premier discipline.
« The big teams take a significant share of the pie, and the smaller teams have less as a result. That’s what adds to all this speculation, » explains the Indian to ESPN F1. « The best way to do this is to create a more rational Formula 1 that gives everyone a chance not just to survive but to be competitive, making F1 even more interesting. »
The director of the Force India team hopes for compensation in case of being required to run a third car: « We are asking for compensation to build a third car, we are not going to do it for free. I am sure the holder of commercial rights is aware of this, it must be made economically viable. »
He also fears the arch-domination of a team under these conditions: « This year you see the two Mercedes ahead of everyone. In recent years, we had the Red Bulls ahead of everyone, so now you want a podium to be entirely occupied by one team. That doesn’t make much sense, does it? »
« The DNA of Formula 1 – you read books, you watch films, see the era of Jack Brabham or the old McLaren era or when Bernie had a team, Williams when Frank was running the team – these are stories that give you chills. They are very exciting, it’s the evolution of Formula 1. Now, it’s not a question of technological development, » he laments. « A constant question throughout the paddock is who will or will not survive. »
« I have never said that a rational revenue sharing ensures competitiveness. But I can afford to talk about myself: I spent half as much money and I am still competing with McLaren. Williams spent half as much money and is ahead of Ferrari. So, I have never tried to tell people that the revenue sharing in Formula 1 should make the teams competitive. But it is a constant question of survival, then the resulting questions about the three cars, etc., could be eliminated once and for all: it is not good for the sport. The DNA of the sport has always been to have manufacturers and private teams. I do not know of any private team that has spent more than a manufacturer in the last 40 years, » he concluded.
Too late for the third car
For Eric Boullier, the director of racing at McLaren F1, implementing a third car also poses practical problems; he believes that teams could not be ready for the start of the 2015 season if the green light is given in the coming days: “I think the driver is the easiest to find,” he explained to several media outlets during a teleconference. “Regarding the chassis of the third car, the logistics, and the people around, we would need at least six months.”
The Frenchman believes, for *Autosport*, that only necessity will lead to three cars: « It’s a debate that is not timely because we must wait. If there is a need to run three cars, then we will see. You can question a lot of things regarding revenue, but if one day we are asked to help F1 by running three cars, then we will have to do it. »
