Ferrari has questioned Formula 1’s future direction after Liberty Media’s revealed its plans with new engine proposals for the 2021 season.
The team has threatened to quit in the past, but is committed to the championship until the end of 2020 under bilateral agreements.
That has led to the return of the old debate over whether ‘F1 needs Ferrari more than Ferrari needs F1’, but is it true?
The topic has been debated on the Autosport Forums and F1 fans have had their say:
ArrowsLivery: F1 needs Ferrari a lot more than Ferrari needs F1.
Nustang70: Ferrari needs F1 just as much as vice versa. Ferrari needs a sport that can absorb a great deal of profligate spending.
Ferrari may complain because it isn’t winning championships, but so long as they can outspend and outperform nearly everyone else, they’re comfortable enough.
Where else can they get that environment? Le Mans is the only other option.
RPM40: I’d be sad if Ferrari left. It is a huge brand, it wouldn’t take much for F1 to be relegated to teams like IndyCar currently has, without much in the way of a clear identity.
While the hardcore fans may not care as much, it’s a big draw for the casuals to hear a name they know.
GrumpyYoungMan: Who is to say any other manufacturer would actually put its money where its mouth is and actually join F1?
Ferrari has been in F1 since the start and the only reason it sells cars is to pay for F1, so can’t see it working without it!
johnmhinds: If Ferrari left F1 where exactly would it go? We all know the F1 TV fanbase has been shrinking and F1 is becoming less appealing as a marketing platform, but no other racing series is fairing any better.
kosmos: I don’t think Ferrari or another team, or other super-successful drivers leaving the sport will harm F1 in any way.
How many people excluding Ferrari fans are watching F1 just for Ferrari? I hope Liberty don’t bend the knee for Ferrari or another team, F1 is above all of them including Ferrari.
I think Ferrari needs F1 more than F1 needs Ferrari. F1 is a great marketing platform for Ferrari, it won’t find something like this in other competitions that appeal globally.
learningtobelost: It’s not a simple case of F1 needs Ferrari or vice versa. Both deliver significant value to the other. Without F1, Ferrari’s brand power would diminish, as F1 is its unique selling point in a very crowded marketplace.
Without Ferrari, F1 would lose a household name and probably a subset of more casual fans.
I assume, like others, this is political positioning for when Liberty inevitably sweeps in and addresses the frankly ludicrous team payment system.
chunder27: But surely it is the same as Williams not being there, or McLaren? To most people watching they are as perennial as Ferrari.
Plenty of successful names have gone – Brabham, Tyrrell, Lotus, Cooper, March – all who sold more race cars than Ferrari ever has.
I appreciate its history, but it has enough power already, it certainly doesn’t need more which is what this is likely about.
Timstr11: The manufacturers are powerful. That is fact. It would be bold, and reckless, of Liberty Media to alienate them.
Augurk: What a mess that has been created when Ecclestone gave Ferrari the advantages it has. There’s no way out without a loss of face.
How are Ferrari supposed to explain to shareholders that they will accept the loss of its “longest-standing team bonus” and its veto on regulation changes?
They [Ecclestone and Ferrari] manoeuvred themselves into a position where there will always be a loser.
Risil: I guess Porsche has been able to do well without the exposure of F1, so maybe Ferrari could too? Maybe.
It’s a big risk. And if Ferrari thinks it’s hard to get back to the top of F1 now, imagine how hard it’ll be having pulled out of the sport for 10-15 years.
PayasYouRace: F1 without Ferrari would be strange. But Ferrari without F1 would be stranger still. It would become just another manufacturer of sports cars.
7MGTEsup: They obviously don’t have the story of “the boy who cried wolf” in Italy.