Formula 1: Why Bernie Ecclestone Should Rethink Grand Prix Locations

The Formula 1 season has not yet started, and reporters, critics, as well as fans alike have much to discuss and criticize. 

Even media personalities such as the Top Gear presenters have taken shots at Formula 1.  Apparently the Stig will be this year's only attendee at the Bahrain Grand Prix, having surprisingly secured some rather inexpensive tickets.

The Bahrain situation is just one of the stories surrounding the 2011 F1 season, a season that has not even started.  From Robert Kubica's accident, to Lotus vs. Lotus, to Bahrain, to Infinity's entry; the period between the 2010 season and beginning of 2011 has certainly not been boring to the avid F1 fan by any means.

While it would be fascinating to examine technological innovations that have been introduced by each team to make their cars faster, visible innovations such as Renault's ingenious exhaust system or other hidden technological developments are the more interesting developments concerning the actual racing season. 

The cancellation of this year's Bahrain Grand Prix, the race that was set to open the 2011 season, proves that yet again politics, economy and world affairs affect F1.

The postponement or cancellation of the first race of the season demonstrates the instability and uncertainty of F1 races held outside of Europe, especially those hosted by Asian nations.  What it clearly demonstrates is that despite what Bernie Ecclestone may think, preach and try to sell, F1 needs Europe. While away races such as Bahrain and Shanghai may offer a bigger bang for the buck, their stability and future remain in question.

Europe can be clearly identified as the cradle of F1 birth and development; F1 started there, nearly all F1 teams have been formed/exist in Europe and there are more F1 fans per capita in Europe than in other countries.  Yes, there are large followings of the sport in Japan, the Americas and Australia, but MPs in Australia are considering cancelling their nation's only Grand Prix, the Turkish Grand Prix has never sold out and Shanghai remains accessible to the rich elite. As a result, countries such as Germany are forced to eliminate one of their GP's, despite being sold out year after year. 

Has the Autodromo di Monza ever had vacant seats or empty general admission sections during the Grand Prix? 

If the answer is "no," then why does Bernie insist on holding more races in Asia at the expense of European GPs?

Outside of the capital of the Champagne region of France, stands the only remnant of the infamous Rheims course.  It was described by participants and fans alike as one of the most amazing road circuits, yet the "racetrack" was from a by-gone era, a time when F1 race circuits were either road circuits or large, purpose-built tracks (the Nordschleiffe was massive, even by those standards). 

As safety became more important, and F1 cars became more futuristic prototypes, large racetracks no longer suitable for F1 became obsolete.  As F1 became more of a business and sponsor logos were more and more present, racing cars had to be visible more often; Marlboro wanted to sell more cigarettes, and greater exposure was key. 

Would a company enjoy greater exposure if the two cars bearing the sponsor's logos drove by every few minutes and could be ignored as simple background noise?

Or, what if fans sat in large grandstands viewing the same cars every one and a half minutes as they flew by, only to continue following them on large screens at various sections of the track?

Establishing smaller circuits proved beneficial to F1, and F1 has also become one of the most desired sports.

It seems every month there is an article about another country wanting to host a Grand Prix within a few years; Vietnam was the latest country vying for a spot on the GP calendar in the future.  Of course the costs of hosting a Grand Prix are staggering, but the projected returns are even greater.  While future Formula 1-specific tracks such as the one currently built in Austin have guaranteed stability, in reality, there are no guarantees in the F1 world. 

No race organizers should rest on their laurels, especially not organizers of Asian races, because comparing the history of American races and the Asian Grand Prix shows the figures are very different.

The United States' romance with F1 has been a love/hate relationship.  Its failures are perhaps the result of a combination of F1's character and success of American motor racing.  The American race-going public has always followed oval racing much more, and the idea of turning right was just far too European, as was the idea of smaller and lighter racing cars. A proper car should go around an oval, be very powerful and be a direct reflection of the automobile driven by the average citizen.

That is why NASCAR rules, and open-wheel racing scours for the crumbs.   

Yet F1 has been very successful stateside. Yes, critics will cite the 2005 US Grand Prix as the ultimate example of failure, but that was a race failure in itself, not just in America.  Americans will come see races if properly sold and advertised. 

In Europe, this is not required because there is such a following that fans know when to fill the grandstands.

But if the Asian scenario is examined, even advertisement campaigns do no help fill the seats if there is no following, no knowledge and no interest.

Signing a contract for any number of years will mean that a race is planned, but as race organizers have to pay Bernie per year and receive very little income as a result of empty grandstands and unsold tickets, can race organizers afford to hold races year in year out?

While the lack of attendance at an Asian circuit may threaten its presence on the calendar in subsequent seasons, the climate and weather have threatened the organization of the race in the past.

In 1977, the Japanese GP was nearly canceled as a result of a cyclone; cyclones and torrential rains have interfered with a race weekend in the past and continue to do so.  As more races are held in Asia, cyclones, torrential rains and even sandstorms can affect a weekend. 

Thus far F1 has been lucky. Sandstorms have only affected preseason test sessions, and weather has not forced a cancellation of the actual race.  Should the worst happen, the loss of profit would be immense.  The mild climate of Europe in comparison to that of Asia gives races held on the old continent an advantage;  Silverstone and Nurnberg may experience rain-filled weekends, but the weather has not come close to the severity of Asia. 

Currently, a multitude of conflicts ail the world, and new revolutions seem to be sparking up more often.  While the goals of the events are similar, for the most part these conflicts are separate from each other.  Yet, as the situation grows more dire from country to country, F1 Grand Prix as well as GP2 races are affected by the political situation outside Europe.  Although Bahrain was the only race cancelled at this time, it still serves as an example of what could happen.

In Europe, on the other hand, F1's stability is guaranteed. 

Regardless of the political system in place, races are held, and if a race is organized, it will sell out.  The Hungarian Grand Prix was organized in Hungary while the Communist government was in power, and race grandstands were never empty. 

The current economic situation in Europe is uncertain, as Greece, Ireland and perhaps even Portugal's economic futures are in doubt, but neither the economic nor political stability can deteriorate to the current state of Bahrain, Egypt and Libya.  A stable system like the one in place in Europe guarantees F1's stability and future.

What Bernie Ecclestone and F1 is currently faced with are two scenarios that they must decide upon: the first scenario is a guaranteed stable future, while the other is one of unstable, yet aggressive growth.  Bernie may not be concerned with the future of the Shanghai, Turkish or even Abu Dhabi GPs after their contracts have expired (and not renewed), but then again, the average investor does not concern himself with the state of a stock after selling his shares or what may happen to the company in 10 years if he is looking for a quick income spread over five years.

Bernie should nevertheless rethink the situation and not give up on Europe.

In the end, Europe may give up on Bernie and his product.