Formula 1 talk.

[Inthehighdesert]

Take it for what it’s worth. Not sure a mil up to start is not compensated well. I’d bet just being an F1 driver on even the low side gets them 2-3 times there salary off the track. I’ve never understood why so many give two shxts what others make or how they spend it. Some of them are genuinely decent people and do all kinds of things for others out of the limelight. And then there’s the others, which it is what it is. I do think it’s hilarious at times who the sponsors hire to push what product.

https://motorsporttickets.com/blog/f1-driver-salaries-how-much-formula-1-drivers-earn/

I just said the low end of drivers and team principles aren't very well compensated.

Sponsored

 

[sk47]

If there was no sponsorships there would be F1. Or any sport for that matter.

Hello; I am going to figure he meant to say there would not be F1 without sponsorships. Not sure if I can recall a time when ticket sales at the gate was the major way sports made money. I do recall when there was a minor league baseball team in Middlesboro KY. My grandfather ran a concession stand. I walked around selling stuff from a tray. Had one of those little change devices on my belt. I was 11 or 12.
Pretty sure gate receipts was all the money.
I seem to have imagined that early in such racing F1 was a gentleman's sport of a sort. Nothing like it is today.

On to Jeff Gordon. Never did like him as a driver and lately not as an announcer. I was an Earnhart SR fan during his time. Before him it was Fearless Freddy Lorenzen. While I did not like Richard Petty early in his career, I did come to admire him. saw him race at dirt track in TN. A driveshaft or some such part came off a car and went thru his windshield. Did not hit him so he kept on racing. would not happen today.

 

[Vlad Soare]

If there was no sponsorships there would be F1. Or any sport for that matter.

Oh yes, there would be. And there was. Most of the sports we love used to be much, much better and honest and likeable and relatable back in the days when money wasn't their utmost goal, and when sportsmen and sportswomen were normal people, with day jobs, who just happened to have a passion and to work hard for it in their spare time, rather than filthy rich TV superstars living in a parallel world. Money has ruined most of the mainstream sports.

If you really have such an issue with it just do not buy the products they are advertising.

Nah. I choose my products based on what they do for me, not on slogans or public image.

And you better check every single product in your home and I absolutely guarantee someone in there is sponsored by an inexcusable prostitute.

I have nothing against advertising. If some poor part-time actor can make extra money by promoting a product, so be it. Good for them. Somebody has to do it.
I only find it inexcusable when you do it simply for greed (or possibly addiction, as Randy points out). In other words, when you aren't doing it as a job in the proper sense of the word, but as a quick and easy means to stuff extra money in some already overfilled pockets.

I’ve never understood why so many give two shxts what others make or how they spend it.

I don't. They can earn as much as they want for all I care. I'm not even saying they don't deserve it. They certainly do.
All I have a problem with is when they then resort to cheap, lowly tricks to make a few extra bucks, just because enough is never enough for them.
Being one of the best-paid football players of all time, and then grinning at me on a billboard to say, "please buy this shampoo, because I will become a tiny bit richer if I tell you to", is disgraceful. Because I know how rich you already are, I know you're in absoluely no position to have an informed opinion on the quality of a specific shampoo (i..e. you're not a doctor, or a chemist, or the like), I know you most probably aren't even using it yourself (or if you are, it's only because you're getting it for free), and I know full well that you're in it solely for the money.

If you want to promote something, then go ahead and promote a specific brand of football. Or of football boots. Or some training equipment that a footballer might use to keep himself in top shape. Something you have experience with. Something I might believe you're using yourself and you know what you're talking about. If you're an F1 driver, then promote a specific brand of tires. Or a specific car brand. Or a specific kind of driving gloves. You name it. But shampoo? Suitcases? Perfume? Come on, give me a break. You're exactly as qualified as I am to have an opinion on those, so what makes you think your grinning face on a poster will make me buy them?

 

[Bikeman315]

Take it for what it’s worth. Not sure a mil up to start is not compensated well. I’d bet just being an F1 driver on even the low side gets them 2-3 times there salary off the track. I’ve never understood why so many give two shxts what others make or how they spend it. Some of them are genuinely decent people and do all kinds of things for others out of the limelight. And then there’s the others, which it is what it is. I do think it’s hilarious at times who the sponsors hire to push what product.

https://motorsporttickets.com/blog/f1-driver-salaries-how-much-formula-1-drivers-earn/

Well, while we are at it. Honestly the numbers are mind boggling.

https://www.forbes.com/lists/athletes/

 

[Inthehighdesert]

You’re not wrong without a doubt.

Well, while we are at it. Honestly the numbers are mind boggling.

https://www.forbes.com/lists/athletes/

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Oh yes, there would be. And there was. Most of the sports we love used to be much, much better and honest and likeable and relatable back in the days when money wasn't their utmost goal, and when sportsmen and sportswomen were normal people, with day jobs, who just happened to have a passion and to work hard for it in their spare time, rather than filthy rich TV superstars living in a parallel world. Money has ruined most of the mainstream sports.

I really enjoy watching F1 racing filmed in the 50s or 60s. I mean other than when the price is paid for poor car or track safety. But damn today's multiple cameras per car, drone cameras, instant replays, real-time info make up for all the cons of today's racing. Even by the late 80's I chose to watch the Phoenix race where rookie Alesi schooled Senna on TV rather than in person with free admission for working the event. The odds of seeing that multi lap exchange in person was zilch. I spent the whole day there Friday and Saturday but not for the race. The atmosphere was so much better than today. Between track sessions, I could walk thru the pits with my 3 year old and the mechanics didn't bat an eye over him laying hands all over the cars (when engines were cold) and equipment. He liked the 7-Up livery cars the best. He even got to meet Senna and Burger when they arrived on track one of those days.

But TV gets the engine sounds wrong; I have to assume on purpose. I mean wrong in other than unavoidable ways. The only F1 race I watched live was Austin in '13 or '14. The engine sounds were completely different than other races that year on TV. On TV the engines always sounded very smooth. In person engines sounded similar on full throttle but with all kinds of noises from missing badly off throttle and resultant mechanical backlashing you wondered when they would grenade. That had to be filtered out on purpose for TV. Maybe pushed by engine manufacturers who don't want viewers to associate that with their road going engines.

 

[Bikeman315]

I really enjoy watching F1 racing filmed in the 50s or 60s. I mean other than when the price is paid for poor car or track safety. But damn today's multiple cameras per car, drone cameras, instant replays, real-time info make up for all the cons of today's racing. Even by the late 80's I chose to watch the Phoenix race where rookie Alesi schooled Senna on TV rather than in person with free admission for working the event. The odds of seeing that multi lap exchange in person was zilch. I spent the whole day there Friday and Saturday but not for the race. The atmosphere was so much better than today. Between track sessions, I could walk thru the pits with my 3 year old and the mechanics didn't bat an eye over him laying hands all over the cars (when engines were cold) and equipment. He liked the 7-Up livery cars the best. He even got to meet Senna and Burger when they arrived on track one of those days.

But TV gets the engine sounds wrong; I have to assume on purpose. I mean wrong in other than unavoidable ways. The only F1 race I watched live was Austin in '13 or '14. The engine sounds were completely different than other races that year on TV. On TV the engines always sounded very smooth. In person engines sounded similar on full throttle but with all kinds of noises from missing badly off throttle and resultant mechanical backlashing you wondered when they would grenade. That had to be filtered out on purpose for TV. Maybe pushed by engine manufacturers who don't want viewers to associate that with their road going engines.

Have you ever watched a race movie on a large screen with a super high end audio system. Believe me you can hear the engine. TV's do not have the bandwidth capability to reproduce the dynamics of an F1 engine. Or an Indycar or even a NASCAR. That's a good part of why you go to the races in the first place. It's about the sounds and the smells. You cannot that on TV.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Have you ever watched a race movie on a large screen with a super high end audio system. Believe me you can hear the engine. TV's do not have the bandwidth capability to reproduce the dynamics of an F1 engine. Or an Indycar or even a NASCAR. That's a good part of why you go to the races in the first place. It's about the sounds and the smells. You cannot that on TV.

TVs could definitely reproduce the missing and clanking from parts slamming into each other because of the missing. I was there at Austin. I recorded with my phone. I could hear all the missing and clanking playing back on my phone and PC el cheapo speakers.

Sponsored