Backmarkers: The Rich Get Richer in Formula 1
Link: http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/32420/10055501/powering-up-f1-for-the-future
In a high octane, multi billion dollar global environment, Formula One isn’t just about winning races– you have to have the money and popularity to do so. Building a car easily costs more than a million dollars, and a more competitive car often means that you’ll have to spend more money on development-money which often comes from brand name sponsors that select teams based on how liked they are. This season, famous top teams such as Red Bull and Mercedes have more than $490 million to spend on development and other running costs, while a bottom team like Manor have slightly more than $100 million to spend. Currently plaguing the sport is a proposal to implement low budget engines or have a development cost cap so that the playing field is level between the unpopular backmarkers and the popular, sponsored front runners. Essentially, by reducing costs, F1 hopes to obstruct the rich get richer process in the sport, in which popular teams that win are more likely to continue earn more money, and thereby dominate season by season. In addition, the rich get richer phenomenon also applies to the political power that front-running teams have in the sport. Many teams opt to purchase engines from these manufacturers, but recently, the more well-known engine suppliers have exercised their power to refuse to sell their engines to certain teams whom they see as a threat to their competitiveness. By eliminating potential competition, the rich can stay rich. In a rich-get-richer graph, this might even mean that one node could “prevent” another node from forming (if this was possible) and creating problematic links.
In Formula One, the rich get richer phenomenon originates from the inherent nature of the sport. Teams that can win races and eventually, championships are most likely to get sponsored by big name companies that provide a substantial amount of money for the team to build upon. Major sponsors such as Shell, Petronas, UPS, Infiniti, and Microsoft will typically want to back these successful teams as they want to build a positive image for their brand in the sport and on the international stage (as F1 is a major international industry). In theory, sponsors are more likely to “link” with already established teams if they are new to the sport, and less likely to “link” with teams that haven’t been linked before although it is possible. This is probably why McLaren has backers such as SAP, Tag Heuer, Johnnie Walker, and Hilton, while Manor has “just” Airbnb. The popularity of some teams can skyrocket out of control and create an unequal distribution of sponsors, which in this case, is related to preferential attachment. Why not link to a node, or in this case, a team if they are extremely popular and can help market your brand in the global spotlight?