1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Ferrari to receive more prize money than Red Bull?!

Discussion in 'Formula 1' started by Chris Jenkins, Dec 4, 2011.

  1. Chris Jenkins

    Chris Jenkins
    Driving til the wheels fall off

    Hey guys. I just saw this on The F1 Times.
    What a joke!

    • Like Like x 3
  2. knew about this for a long time. Its no big deal Ferrari add soo much to f1 that its worth it.
  3. What do they add? Two cars to the grid, nothing more... I could easily live without F1 Ferrari team in the grid.
  4. Which other team has been on the grid since the start of F1? Eh?


    See? Probably haven't really read about the history of F1, it goes deeper than that. Ferrari not on the grid? Would be strange.

    If that's a reason to get more money, dunno. Although that's called committment.
  5. F1 needs Ferrari and Ferrari needs F1.

    Think of it like this, if you are at work. You have worked there for 5 years, just starting to impress the boss.
    Compared to Joe who´s been working there for 55 years and have a good relationship with the boss.

    Who do you think gets more paid? :)

    Red Bull don´t complain, they can´t really but they understand why Ferrari makes this much money (and in my opinion, rightfully so) and they are not mad at Ferrari either.

    Would you rather win an F1 season with only privateer teams with not so great budgets or do you want to have a piece of paper where it says you beat the legends Ferrari and Mclaren over 20 races?
  6. Chris Jenkins

    Chris Jenkins
    Driving til the wheels fall off

    I understand it, but I don't agree with it.
  7. Bernie said "F1 doesn't need Europe" :p
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Bernie likes to talk :)
  9. It's not fair, but - if Ferrari can use that money to make a car that can compete with the RB, I'm totally cool with it :D
  10. Chris Jenkins

    Chris Jenkins
    Driving til the wheels fall off

    What've they been doing with the money since 2007 then? :)
  11. Xosé Estrada

    Xosé Estrada
    Premium Member

    No Ferrari no F1.

    Some ones will love it, someones will hate it, but it must be there.
  12. Chris Jenkins

    Chris Jenkins
    Driving til the wheels fall off

    I don't really like how Ferrari is all take and no give.
  13. I love Ferrari legacy and these kinds of things tarnish that in a big way. Totally not cool, bro.. Everybody needs to be on a level playfiel, no behind the curtains deals where one team gets to run the show. I say, boot Ferrari out, see if anyone cares. Maybe they'd learn some humility.

    No ferrari no F1,, really? Boot everybody else out then, let F1 one be one make series. I really can't understand those opinions that say Ferrari can have extras.. Why, give me one legitimate reason that isn't based on sentimentality.
  14. Noooo!!!!! Don't give those red cars more money!!!!
  15. Agreed 100%. If the FIA want to give the slower teams some extra cash to help them catch up, fair enough. If they want to hand out awards based on championship success, fair enough. But it doesn't really make much sense throwing in exceptions like this.

    Besides, F1 has survived for a long time despite losing some very significant teams over the years. Lotus have had no representation in Formula 1 until recently, and there's no sign of BRM, Cooper, Brabham, etc. on the field right now. But the sport's still going strong. If Ferrari want to participate in F1, I'd like to think it's for better reasons than favoritism.
  16. They have been in F1 since the second ever race.

    61 years.
    832 races.
    16 Constructor titles.
    15 Driver titles.

    That's loyalty right there
  17. Second race? Not good enough then!

  18. I will repeat myself but..
    For the first season of F1, 7 GP, all in Europe except Indianapolis. Including Grand Prix de France (Reims-Gueux) and Belgium (Spa).

    What about this part of the history of the F1 ??
  19. Chris Jenkins

    Chris Jenkins
    Driving til the wheels fall off

    I don't understand the question
  20. The question is :

    If the history of Ferrari in F1 is so important, why the history of the circuits is not also ?

    Remember Bernie's talk ;)