Ready for F1 in Singapore?
-
becareful of TP, thats a hot spot these dayOriginally posted by citymax:i juz now oso got try out the road at marina, really shiok with the curving road.
but my max speed juz now is oli 90km/hr -
yup, but that one was not exactly marketed broadly to all, especially the youth.Originally posted by Gazelle:we used of have a endurance kart event at sentosa sometime back right?
i think if you wanna sustain F1..u need the local base . -
my personal opinion
street races are the most boring .... very few places to overtake .. once you take the lead thats it.. barring poor refuelling tactics .. once ur take pole u win ...
Monaco F1 race .... boring
I am all for a purpose built race track
-
I will be getting my international B licence in July. Its been too long a wait. I've been focusing on my work and other commitments here. I had a chance to take my international B 5years ago when i did my stint in a formula ford academy, but i was still a uni student then, couldn't afford to spend 500pounds a day on it.Originally posted by rojak12:Do you have the necessary competition licence to participate? This is not your typical Kart World outing.
As for TUAS, it is history already. No more. Guess you are not connected to the motorsports scene in Singapore.
You don't even know who is Hafiz.
I did some karting during my university days when we took part in the UK uni kart championship. It was a really tight championship with 40 entries per race. It was a very competitive series with then TKM champions, Spanish F3 drivers, BTCC drivers all racing for their own uni, everyone were friendly, but it was no mercy on the tracks. it was great exposure especially racing in the UK wet weather in full slicks. No wonder european drivers are known to have better wet track control than most. We hogged out in the winter cold for the 2 precious testing days with sub 10degree temperatures, fingers freezing from the wet gloves!!
Does Hafiz drive in Kart world? If its the same person, then i've met him a few times over the years when i visited Kart world. I think its been almost 10years now so he probably dont remember me, but i am glad he has moved up to fomula renault. His father is very supportive too, and i hope to see more and more support from parents.
Motorsports must start from a young age and parents play a huge role in it. As we all know, motorsports is an expensive hobby, so without parent's support, its impossible to make it.
I'm definitely gonna be a supportive daddy when the time comes. Well, unfortunately i can't have it the way i wanted for myself, so my lucky boy or girl will be the one. -
Street racing is dangerous, too many variables not under your control. Any pedestrians can just pop up on the roads, and the trees are the most deadly.Originally posted by citymax:i juz now oso got try out the road at marina, really shiok with the curving road.
but my max speed juz now is oli 90km/hr
I think singapore should build a proper race track. It will be a safe and controlled environment for us to enjoy serious speed and possibly dent our own egos at the same time, just like geylang doing its purposeful job for the needy.
-
Whoa, who are you ah? Are you talking about FIA B Licence or a National 'B' licence?Originally posted by footprints:I will be getting my international B licence in July. Its been too long a wait. I've been focusing on my work and other commitments here.
To qualify for an INTERNATIONAL 'B' licence:
Qualification for Grades A and B
4.1 Grade A or B licences are issued by the driverÂ’s ASN, after it has
verified that the driverÂ’s results, competence and conduct are satisfactory.
4.2 To qualify for Grade B the driverÂ’s ASN must ascertain that,
within the 24 months prior to the application he/she has finished
and been classified in at least 5 national championship or
international races.
Are you the current SMSA supergrade champion? Then I know who are you! -
To start with, F1 is not about overtaking. Do you see a lot of overtaking during the race in other circuits?Originally posted by borgkilla:my personal opinion
street races are the most boring .... very few places to overtake .. once you take the lead thats it.. barring poor refuelling tactics .. once ur take pole u win ...
Monaco F1 race .... boring
I am all for a purpose built race track
Monaco usually show you who is the best driver out there. It is the best race to watch! -
We are (should be!) building one. But not for F1, maybe not for A1 too.Originally posted by footprints:Street racing is dangerous, too many variables not under your control. Any pedestrians can just pop up on the roads, and the trees are the most deadly.
I think singapore should build a proper race track. It will be a safe and controlled environment for us to enjoy serious speed and possibly dent our own egos at the same time, just like geylang doing its purposeful job for the needy.
It will be a big mistake to build a F1 track. -
let's start smaller, go for a general track (up to Formula 3, V8 and touring car championship standards) first. Why build an F1 track? It will be a white elephant in no time.Originally posted by rojak12:We are (should be!) building one. But not for F1, maybe not for A1 too.
It will be a big mistake to build a F1 track.
Sustainability and lower cost + higher volume from track rental and usage should be the way forward. A smaller track is cheaper to maintain and run, and subsequently more affordable for groups to make use of. -
I agree with you and rojak about the circuit. I dont think we need to jump in the deep end and spend hundreds of millions on a modern F1 spec race track. A circuit designed to accomodate the lower formulaes like A1GP, F3, F3000, touring cars, Super GT etc should suffice. But it should have the option to be upgraded to F1 standards if the need arises.Originally posted by LazerLordz:let's start smaller, go for a general track (up to Formula 3, V8 and touring car championship standards) first. Why build an F1 track? It will be a white elephant in no time.
Sustainability and lower cost + higher volume from track rental and usage should be the way forward. A smaller track is cheaper to maintain and run, and subsequently more affordable for groups to make use of.
I think F1 spec circuits are not all about the track itself. F1 tracks have more stringent safety requirements and run off areas, but i think a considerable portion of the costs are channelled to the infrastructures like the media tower, garages, and hospitality suites. So, if we're going to build a modern race circuit, the track/circuit itself shouldn't be far off from the F1 track designs.
I think a good location for a race track will be around the tanah merah ferry terminal area. There is a huge plot of reclaimed land and while we're waiting for the sand to settle, its perfect for a race circuit. Reclaimed land takes like 10 to 15years to settle down if i'm not wrong.
rojak, I made a mistake about the international B licence, its in fact a MSA national B. My Bad!
I will have to upgrade later after some more race experience, but i'm not sure if SMSA will recognise a foreign national licence. I think it should, since the MSA and SMSA are both governed by the FIA. -
Is there a business case for a racetrack? Land is scarce in Singapore. If we build a racetrack, how do we recover costs unless we charge exobitant prices for its usage. Who will benefit apart from the very wealthy and in any case, I cannot see how much profit that will generate.
-
You will be surprised. A racetrack (with the correct size, NOT F1 please) can be very profitable.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Is there a business case for a racetrack? Land is scarce in Singapore. If we build a racetrack, how do we recover costs unless we charge exobitant prices for its usage. Who will benefit apart from the very wealthy and in any case, I cannot see how much profit that will generate.
There will be a huge interest if the government ask for a RFP.
And, there will be only 1 permanent track in Singapore. No competition.
Already D3 from Australia had indicated their interest.
If the design/allocation allow for motor workshop, car dealers, accessories shop, race teams, resturants, Petrol Station, 24 hours Mart, separate go-kart area, Drift Area, Night-Drag races.......this place will rock!! -
Correct. This is assuming that it is an intermediate track for touring cars up to Formula 3 or V8. We could then host SEA legs of Japan GT Touring championships too. It should be a multi-use track, for karting and Moto GP class events too. This track need not stand alone, but be part of an integrated facility.Originally posted by rojak12:You will be surprised. A racetrack (with the correct size, NOT F1 please) can be very profitable.
There will be a huge interest if the government ask for a RFP.
And, there will be only 1 permanent track in Singapore. No competition.
Already D3 from Australia had indicated their interest.
If the design/allocation allow for motor workshop, car dealers, accessories shop, race teams, resturants, Petrol Station, 24 hours Mart, separate go-kart area, Drift Area, Night-Drag races.......this place will rock!!
Maintanence and operation will probably be done on a partnership basis with private investment and operation taking the major shareholding.
Any RFP will more or less be easily snapped up, I totally agree.
Better to race on the track, and allow for a safe avenue for like-minded petrolheads to use, than for them to speed on the roads. It will create and foster a more responsible motorsports attitude, especially amongst the young drivers.
Lastly, this track need not be more than 1km in length. Remember that a track winds inwards. -
If it is so profitable, let the private sector make the investment and start one. I have no objections as long as it benefits the economy through taxation and tourism.
Do you have figures to show that it is profitable? -
HERE is the million-dollar question: Why is the Government spending so much to help race promoter Ong Beng Seng stage a Formula One car race?
That is what seems to be bugging some Singaporeans ever since the announcement on next year's Singapore Grand Prix was made - that the Government is using taxpayers' money to co-fund what is seen as a private entrepreneur's business deal.
Last Friday, the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) announced that it will pay 60 per cent of the estimated $150 million cost.
In return, the Government expects the race to generate incremental tourism receipts of $100 million a year, part of which will be paid by hotel guests in the form of a special F1 cess on the hotels lining the 5.2km route.
The STB believes that F1, with all its hype and hundreds of millions of television viewers, will add lustre to the name of Singapore, with the resulting branding leading to intangible benefits for the island's image, tourism and business.
This point has been strongly emphasised, but some still maintain that as a businessman, Mr Ong is in it for the money, and yet he somehow managed to convince the Government to foot the bulk of the cost.
But this is too simplistic a conclusion to make, given the complicated nature of the F1 business mechanism.
There are several issues at work here. One is whether the Government could have sealed the F1 deal without Mr Ong, who is a personal friend of F1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone. Mr Ecclestone said no; he would not have signed on the dotted line if not for Mr Ong.
Two: Does Mr Ong stand to make a bundle of money by getting the Government to take such a huge stake? He said no. Given his low profile, we may never know that. But from past experience in other countries, race promoters do not break even, and hence need government support to make the whole thing work. So the conclusion here is that Mr Ong did not want to overextend himself financially and would have withdrawn entirely if not for the Government's support.
Three: Why even go into something like this when nobody makes any money, and an event like the F1 is so disruptive to those living in the host country? Three reasons: Prestige, prestige, prestige. Conclusion? Prestige at all costs.
Given the reluctance of all parties to clarify the figures involved - which are bound by confidentiality agreements - perhaps the next best way to look at this matter would be to examine Malaysia's experience with F1.
Compared to Singapore, Malaysia is a veteran. The 'set- up' is similar - it is a joint venture between the Malaysian government and the Sepang International Circuit (SIC), which, without the government's involvement, would run an annual deficit. Yet the SIC will mark its 10th race next March, six months before Singapore's five red lights get a chance to go out next September or early October.
The Malaysian government has been behind F1 since the first Grand Prix race in 1999.
Putrajaya underwrites it as a national project and will continue to do so because it is the country that benefits, and the money is recouped through various corporate taxes. And as part of a larger motorsports policy, the SIC's permanent track - as opposed to Singapore's street circuit - allows other events like the Moto GP, Japan GT Championship and Merdeka Endurance race to attract tourists all year round.
But even with government help, the organisers have to work hard to gain maximum mileage from F1. Just getting the fans to turn up and buy a ticket is not enough. In addition to watching the race, they have to be convinced to stay on for ancillary events like live concerts and mega street parties.
Of course, all this does not mean that Singapore's experience will be exactly the same. But to help allay people's concerns, the Government and/or Mr Ong may do well to shed light on how they derived the figures that they have thrown up.
For example, while Singapore says it will cost $150 million to stage F1 here, the corresponding figure across the Causeway is said to be about US$70 million to US$75 million, roughly $106 million to $114 million at today's exchange rates. And although Singapore is said to expect tourism revenues of $100 million, Kuala Lumpur is understood to enjoy around US$100 million.
Perhaps these variations could be easily explained by the fact that a debut race on a street circuit at night will cost more, and the tourism receipts are just a conservative estimate by the Government.
Notwithstanding the arguments for and against financial help, or the figures, what is certain is that the Singapore Government must have been convinced of F1's bigger economic gains after witnessing Malaysia's success. And that is why it is supporting Mr Ong. Now it just needs to convince the public.
BUSINESS TIMES
(Straits Times 19 May)
Indeed the government must release more figures to convince the taxpayers that this investment in F1 races will make sense and have good returns. Prestige is not enough. There many other ways to gain prestige for Singapore. The only consideration is economics. We have decided it is worth our while from the financial point of view, despite the huge initial investment. Now it is essential that the goverment brings on board the taxpayers.
Talk about a race track for other categories is far too premature when Singaporeans have not yet been convinced of the economic value of the F1. The Australia experience at Albert Park has not comvinced me that there is an ecomic case for a dedicated race track. Here are excerpts from a report on the matter (http://www.save-albert-park.org.au/sapweb/Summary%20Submission%20to%20AG.doc):
"There is no real evidence that the economic benefits of staging the Grand Prix event in Albert Park ‘far outweigh’ its cost to the Victorian public, as claimed in the 2002 annual report of the Australian Grand Prix Corporation. The cost is significant and will continue to increase annually..."
"· An indicative cost-benefit analysis carried out by Save Albert Park, using the ACT Auditor General’s methodology, showed the event produced a loss or only a relatively small profit.
· The event incurs a substantial annual operating loss which to date amounts to a total of over $40 million. The loss for the 2003 event is expected to exceed $11 million.
· Capital (establishment) costs, ie. 1995 construction costs, plus subsequent race related costs total over $73 million, which represents an annualised cost of approximately $4.75 million.
· There is no evidence that the media exposure generated by the event has any
significant effect in promoting Melbourne as a tourist destination." -
Because all that matters to you is money, money and more money.
-
KB, only petrolheads like us will understand. As long as there are petrolheads up there in the media and PR industries, long may the dream sustain itself.Originally posted by Kuali Baba:Because all that matters to you is money, money and more money.
Some people don't see beyond mere dollars and cents. We can't help them. -
No objections as to how you spend your own money. But if it is taxpayers' money that you are spending, the nation deserves an account.Originally posted by Kuali Baba:Because all that matters to you is money, money and more money.
I believe the government has carefully done their sums before deciding to go ahead with the F1 race. Increasing taxes on hotel rooms by 30% during the F1 period will generate some revenue and defray the public's contribution towards hosting the event. But more has to be done to convince the people that it is worthwhile economically.
As for a permanent race track, where're your sums? If it is profitable, let the private sector take it up. I do not see it in the wider public's interest to risk another big investment, based on what I have read. As other forumners have pointed out, it is certainly a step back in our efforts to save the environment. -
The race track will not be a government funded initiative. What is needed is only land allocation from SLA and the requisite support.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:No objections as to how you spend your own money. But if it is taxpayers' money that you are spending, the nation deserves an account.
I believe the government has carefully done their sums before deciding to go ahead with the F1 race. Increasing taxes on hotel rooms by 30% during the F1 period will generate some revenue and defray the public's contribution towards hosting the event. But more has to be done to convince the people that it is worthwhile economically.
As for a permanent race track, where're your sums? If it is profitable, let the private sector take it up. I do not see it in the wider public's interest to risk another big investment, based on what I have read. As other forumners have pointed out, it is certainly a step back in our efforts to save the environment. -
Economy and revenue. I've already stated in my previous arguments that the benefits are not just quantified in terms of dollars and cents.
Have you heard the latest news? Biofuels and energy recovery systems are proposed for the 2011 season. Would you rather have waited until then? The F1 circus will simply take the race to another country, without any less impact on the environment.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:No objections as to how you spend your own money. But if it is taxpayers' money that you are spending, the nation deserves an account.
I believe the government has carefully done their sums before deciding to go ahead with the F1 race. Increasing taxes on hotel rooms by 30% during the F1 period will generate some revenue and defray the public's contribution towards hosting the event. But more has to be done to convince the people that it is worthwhile economically.
As for a permanent race track, where're your sums? If it is profitable, let the private sector take it up. I do not see it in the wider public's interest to risk another big investment, based on what I have read. As other forumners have pointed out, it is certainly a step back in our efforts to save the environment. -
I hope singapore can play a part in motorsport engineering/ Precision engineering as well as alternative fuel for the automotive market. Its imperative to have a motorsport background in singapore for all these industries to grow.
I agree with OM about justifying tax payer's money for funding 60% of the grandprix. But as KB also stated earlier, its the intangible benefits we get which perhaps form the 'bigger' picture of whats to come for singapore and the direction we're heading.
The government's spending alot on sporting events to spice up singapore, so motorsports is a great area to explore.
F1 commands the 3rd largest TV viewership around the world behind the oylmpics and world cup. The exposure is there, but how we're going to reap those benefits is another matter. -
As long as the race track conforms to the relevant environmental laws and do not cause a nuisance to nearby residents in terms of noise etc, I have no issue if a private company wants to bid competitively for a site that is deemed suitable. They take the commercial risk and rent the land for a period of time for their business. I am not sure what you mean by requisite support, but as long as they follow the same rules of competition as other commercial interests do, I have no objection.Originally posted by LazerLordz:The race track will not be a government funded initiative. What is needed is only land allocation from SLA and the requisite support. -
You haven't made the case as to why allowing a semi-permanent track will benefit the environment. Motoring sports damage rather than benefit the environment. The only reason why we should bring them in is for the economy.Originally posted by Kuali Baba:Economy and revenue. I've already stated in my previous arguments that the benefits are not just quantified in terms of dollars and cents.
Have you heard the latest news? Biofuels and energy recovery systems are proposed for the 2011 season. Would you rather have waited until then? The F1 circus will simply take the race to another country, without any less impact on the environment.
If the economy does not benefit from F1, I would rather it goes away to another country. There will be less disruption to traffic and less noise pollution for nearby residents.
No, I support the F1 only because the figures appear to show it can bring in more revenue for the economy. It is an elite sport that does not improve the health and fitness of ordinary Singaporeans. I do not see any other reason for it apart from the economic benefit it can bring. Let's call a spade a spade. -
If there's a time to make motorsports a part of mainstream Singaporean culture, now's the time.
Sustainability means you have to create a base from bottom up, starting with the schools through smaller scale activities like Formula SAE, go-karting, GT race management and apprenticeship. -
Here is my view on Singapore F1
a) Will Singapore GP be a success?
Most definitely because we will be one of the first in the world to host a night race (provided there is no safety issues) and we have one of the best and beautiful infrastructure in the world to accomodate for such huge event.
b) Will Singapore benefit from F1?
Beside what has already been discussed, I believe the 2008 race will be a good marketing event for the IRs, which is scheduled to open in 2009. The success of our tourism industry will be very important for Singapore as this will be singapore new engine of growth. hence I can understand and fully support our government decision to subsidize part of the bill
c) Will OBS be able to capture F1 hosting rights without our government's support?
Most definitely not, because no private entity will be able to profit from such mega event, unless it is a consortium that owns all the hotels around Marina Bay area.
c) Will Singaporeans benefit from F1?
F1 is just part of the overall marketing strategy of our government to promote Singapore tourism industry, hence I am confident to say that Singapore is moving in the right direction to acheiving it's tourist target. And yes, this will definitely benefit Singaporeans.
d) Can motor racing be enviromental friendly?
Will smoking "Lights" cigarette make you healthier?