If you’re a Melbournian, you’ll already be familiar with the ranting and raving that tends to crop up at this time of year as to whether or not Formula One is worth our time (and, more importantly, money).
Inevitably, the hype will build to a crescendo on Friday, we’ll have the race on Sunday, and the following week the newspapers will report on how everyone had a generally good time. And then life goes on.
Of course, the closer we get to the expiry of our contract at the end of 2015, the more we need to engage with the arguments for and against. Both sides of the debate are generally well covered by the city’s major media outlets, but here’s the briefest of summaries:
For: International media coverage, puts Melbourne on the world stage, increases tourism.
Against: Costs outweigh the benefits.
So now you’re up to speed.
A little extra excitement was injected into the argument last week, however, when former F1 driver turned commentator David Coulthard chimed in to the debate via the AGPC’s official podcast, and promptly called Melbournians (or those disinclined against the Grand Prix, at very least) ‘selfish and small-minded’.
“For the one week of inconvenience, or whatever it is people don’t get the access, then they shouldn’t be so selfish, quite frankly,” he said.
“They should think of the greater good, what it does for the local economy, what it does to inspire young schoolchildren to want to be engineers, designers, whether it’s in engine design, tyres, whether they want to be drivers.
“You don’t inspire people by not giving them a taste of what is out there in the world.
“If people want to be small-minded and not look beyond their personal needs then that’s disappointing.”
This made me think: those who protest against the Grand Prix aren’t bad people – I’ll be the first to say that any major spending of government money ought to be scrutinised – but are they selfish?
Fact: Melbourne has a contract, like it or not, to stage the Grand Prix.
Fact: Having a Grand Prix guarantees Melbourne international media exposure.
Why, then, are we wasting that exposure on presenting to the world a bitter, bickering city when we could instead be welcoming the event with open arms, and debating the cost and wroth when the time comes to talk contracts?
Australia, I’m disappointed to say, has a habit of portraying itself as a bit of a joke when the spotlight shines upon it. In 2011, we had a unique opportunity.to showcase Mark Webber and his Red Bull charging across the Bolte Bridge – a publicity stunt that should’ve looked spectacular.
“No, no,” said Melbourne. “You must obey to speed limit when on the bridge.” So the car pootled along in first gear, much to the amusement of the rest of the world.
And again this year, concerns were raised that the closing of parts of Victoria’s scenic Great Ocean Road to film a promotional video for the race might be “a lovely advertisement for hoon driving”, according to a local councillor.
This is the side of us we want the world to see? This is the best we’ve got? Give me a break.
Each time the race’s antagonists publicly hold back an opportunity for the Grand Prix to do its thing, it is they who are limiting how much this city gets in return for its investment.
Each time one of them knocks back the opportunity to have the race promoted around the world, they reduce the race’s value.
For every poorly informed, inflammatory comment made about the race, a team, a driver, or about Bernie Ecclestone, our race is worth a little less, and a little more of the Grand Prix’s good work is undone.
We’re not paying for Formula One just watch some cars race around a track, we’re paying to promote our city’s image – and every time word of our bitterness about the cost makes its way to the international press, that image we’re working hard to promote becomes stained and tarnished.
So rather than this perpetual ranting and raving, Melbourne ought to exercise patience. Argue tooth-and-nail at the right time, with the right people. And in the meanwhile, seize this spotlight while it lasts, make the most of it now – because if you, who argues against this race, gets your way, that spotlight will be gone forever.
Angelo
Guest
@Mark, That's the problem, there are NO official figures only pie in the sky over inflated ones. There is no official counting of attendances or attendance break downs, ie Corporate, public, free tickets etc etc.. Every major sporting event counts attendances. The Clipsal 500 had 286 000 people at the 2013 event, sold out on the final race day with 95 000 attendances. That is for a DOMESTIC Motor sport event. So yes you are getting conned.
Mat Coch
Roar Guru
Would be curious to know your sources as nothing has been heard of New Jersey in months. The Mexican event still has a lot to do. Bernie is not opposed to any race. However apart from having some influential people involved it is nothing but a concept. It's a good plan which capitalises on Perez and Guitierrez but until we know more it is no more real than a London GP. Ultimately Bernie wants any race with budget to go ahead as it increases FOM's earning power. However he does make sweeping statements which should be taken with a grain of salt at very least.
Willam
Guest
I've been told Bernie expects the Mexican, New Jersey and Thailand to go ahead as they have struck a deal between the organisers. Melbourne is really a guessing game until we know at a closer date and also Malaysia as well as they had that red flag last year for hours or it might of been Silverstone. I expect CT to not happen. They will be well advance in their construction working progress as it should definitely be finished on time as pit stop building should be finished and they are on track to get it finished at New Jersey and Sochi
Mat Coch
Roar Guru
I for one would not describe Formula One fans as bogans. Typically the demographic is middle aged, upper income earning males. There are others who attend the event and a lot of advertisers promotion seems based on libido, but to make such a sweeping statement is unfair. As far as price tag justification goes; Victoria spends $50m on the event but reaps rewards several times that in terms of economic impact. It's a difficult concept to fathom that spending that sort of money in one place earns significant benefits in another, but that is the benefit Formula One provides. It ultimately turns a profit for Victoria.
Mat Coch
Roar Guru
The degradation at the moment is a result of cold weather forcing tyres to work outside their operating window. Conditions during the season will be 15 to 20 degrees warmer than pre-season testing and that will make all the difference. Paul Hembery told me he expects 2 to 3 stops in Melbourne, and for most of the season (interview will be available via Pitpass.com podcast in the next day or so). As far as New Jersey goes, that one appears to be still born. I for one do not expect that to go ahead. Mexico is possible, though a lot of work needs to be done to that circuit in advance, but there are some important and influential people involved in that project. Cape Town won't happen and a Thailand Grand Prix at this stage seems wishful thinking. It has no venue or contract and just 2 years to sort it out. Seems a long time, but it's not to get these sorts of things done.
Willam
Guest
It could be a exciting year yet as per the tyre degradation, we could see between 7 and 10 pit stops per driver. As Pirelli really stepped up instead of a one to a 3 stopper. New Jersey Grand Prix in 2014, Mexican Grand Prix in 2014, Sochi Grand Prix in 2014, Cape Town Grand Prix in 2014 and Thai Grand Prix in 2015
Mark Jones
Guest
Crowd figures bottomed in 2009 and have been climbing since. Over 313,000 last year, highest since 2005 I think. Is it still a con?
Mark Jones
Guest
Fears that Albert Park will be destroyed? That might have been a relevant point pack in the late 1990s when the Grand Prix first moved to Melbourne, but 17 years later does the Park look destroyed to you or does it look rejuvenated compared to what it looked like in the early 1990s? You might want to update your opinion by say... a decade.
Mark Jones
Guest
Allanthus, While you make some points, the Australian Tennis Open is not subjected to anywhere near the same level of criticism. How much scrutiny is given to its funding and international coverage? The original Albert Park racetrack of the 1950s was assasinated by press coverage and it became a loss with repucussions not realised until many years, even decades later.
delbeato
Roar Guru
I like F1 and was thrilled when Melbourne first got the GP. I've been to the race a few times and it was a blast. "Wow! The noise is incredible, what a rush!" I'd never experienced F1 racing before - the speed, noise and amazing cornering ability, acceleration etc. But the novelty wore off after a while. The noise stops being so exciting, you can't follow the race from trackside, the attendance figures have progresively dropped. And let's be honest withourselves - it's predominantly a bogan sport. You wouldn't go to the GP to meet women, although the strip clubs are always out in force handing out promotional material. I think it's run it's race here. I know there are more enthusiast fans who would disagree, but they are progressively in the minority and no longer justify the price tag. Most of the world just tunes in when the cars are gridding up - Melbourne doesn't get any special exposure out of it.
Kev
Guest
The argument about diverting money to health and education is a tired and at best, a thin one. The question that is never asked of the health and education sectors is, what are you doing with the millions if not billions in funding that you receive each and every year that require you to stick your hand out for more money?
Kev
Guest
Funny you say that because your comments describe the NIMBY's in and around Albert Park perfectly.
Mat Coch
Roar Guru
Bernie would not have prompted the comments from DC. He doesn't need to. FOM has little to no interest in public opinion of the event, just what it can extract from the promoters. Keeping the event popular is the sole responsibility of the Australian Grand Prix Corporation. Michael is correct in a number of events have recently negotiated new deals with more favorable terms. Singapore, Canada and Great Britian spring to mind. Many of the current deals were struck when the market was stronger and signed for the long term. That guaranteed the sports future earnings which has safe guarded it, and has built its value, however in the current market FOM has had to be more open to negotiation, and it has been. The trend I expect we will see going forward is a move to somewhat reduced hosting fees but a growing move towards pay-TV deals like those in the UK, France and US. Formula One has historically been free-to-air as it maximises sponsorship exposure for teams, but with 500m+ viewers globally there is a lot of money to be made by moving to pay-TV. There was talk a decade or so back about Foxtel having the television rights to F1 in Australia. Indeed I seem to recall the Malaysian GP shown on Foxtel one year as a stand alone event (1999 perhaps?). Ultimately the Grand Prix in Australia boils down to an opportunity/cost equation. Does what it's spending on it justify what it provides as a return?
Jawad
Guest
We will sell Victorian jobs overseas and invest in a rubbish ticketing system for public transport, but can't hold an event which attracts so many supporters every year from all over the world who will spend their money on local hotels, restaurants, public transport and what not. I might as well pack my bags and head off to Europe where Motorsport is appreciated properly unlike here.
Runkle
Guest
Why doesn't any point out the money flushed down the wazoo on the tennis tournament and all those floundering dead business models, like the aluminium industry, the cotton industry, the building industry? Then let's talk about "the arts". I mean, they get a lump of dung, fling it against the wall and all of a sudden it is "art". Come on now, and we pay a fortune for it. My only regret about the GP, is that it is not a 24 hour race like Le Mans. Now that would stick it up the latte sipping bludgers.
Mat Coch
Roar Guru
Michael, excellent article and a unique perspective I've not seen before. You raise some extremely good points. To provide a little further context*; Pro: - In 2012 Formula One had more than 500million viewers globally - Australia has 3.4million viewers - Direct economic impact of $125m in 2010 (254% return) Con; - In 2010 the Victorian Government spent $49.2million - Ticket prices are the second most expensive all year, after Bahrain - Overall attendance has been gradually waning since 2008 The hosting fees the Australian GP Corporation pays Formula One Management are bang on average. Further, Australia has a better deal than many; - Korea ($45m) - Abu Dhabi ($49.5m) - Malaysia ($50.2m) - China ($40.3m) - Singapore ($51.9m) - Japan ($44m) As for Webber over the bridge, it was only ever going to be a local stunt. The international media has little to no interest in it, unless he stuffs it in the wall or says something interesting. It's something which adds colour to the event during its build up. So too, for that matter, was the Great Ocean Road stunt. However, in saying that the AGPC does have something to answer for. It wins no fans by running 2-seater demonstration laps at 8am when there is no advertised running until the following day. Formula One engines are noisy. People tend to notice. *I work for Formula Money.
Dizza
Guest
Fears that Albert Park will be destroyed (see the Save Albert Park campaigners) aren't related to the GP? Fears that the state's finances will somehow combust (see any GP-related article from the Herald Sun) aren't related to the GP? It may not be a direct fear of the event itself, but it doesn't take much to see the link between publishing articles designed to inflame and scare people and the hysteria around the GP.
Fussball's AFL tracking spreadsheet
Guest
There are entirely legitimate arguments in favour and against hosting the GP, but the idea that the latter are motivated primarily by selfish, NIMBYesque attitudes is very 1990's. There hasn't been a single meaningful protest against hosting the GP for decades, the save Albert Park mob retired along with Jeff and apart from some mild grumbling about traffic re-directions no-one's particularly bothered. In fact that's the entire problem, no-one's particularly bothered by ANYTHING to do with the GP. Far from holding passionate views on the topic, Melburnians for the most part are completely and utterly bored of the event. A tedious procession of identikit teutonic automatons actng more as IT systems managers than drivers and where success is determined almost entirely outside of the cockpit. If it's such a fantabulously wonderlicous event that brings a deluge of riches upon the hosting city then let some other deserving souls have it. In fact it's SELFISH for Melbourne to deny this magnificent opportunity to others!
Fussball's AFL tracking spreadsheet
Guest
People are afraid of the GP?? Err, might want to rethink that one.
Dizza
Guest
There are two things about some sections of Melbourne's media that I find infuriating. One is the rather comical accounts of what seems to happen at soccer matches, which I somehow miss every time I'm there. The other is the constant barrage of anti-GP propaganda in the lead up to the race which, if you read nothing other than the Herald Sun, would lead you to believe that this actually equates to a significant proportion of the state's annual expenditure. Both of these irrational positions are based on one thing: fear. At the end of the day, nothing sells papers like playing on people's fears! When you can see past the emotional hysteria, it's easy to see that the benefits of the GP for the city of Melbourne are immense. Unfortunately, phrases like "return on investment", "boost for tourism" and "international exposure" don't quite stir up the emotions like "waste of taxpayers' money" or "what about our hospitals and schools". It's a shame that so many Melbournians have been influenced by this negative line of thinking, primarily advocated by the likes of the Herald Sun, rather than actually enjoying the event and the positive image of Melbourne that it sends to the rest of the world.