F1 drivers salary:points ratio

[Jordan]

http://autos.ca.msn.com/motorsports/gallery.aspx?cp-documentid=22582784&page=1


I thought this was a rather entertaining read. Surprise winner, then again it's more or less a moot point this season for said winner

[Phoenix]

http://autos.ca.msn.com/motorsports/gallery.aspx?cp-documentid=22582784&page=1


I thought this was a rather entertaining read. Surprise winner, then again it's more or less a moot point this season for said winner

Some of the data really shocks...
Hamilton was paid $18mil while Kovalainen was only paid $3.5mil. Eunuchus or wise?
Shockingly, Massa was paid $8mil while Raikkönen was paid $45mil. One can perfectly understand why they had little hesitance in Ferrari to replace him with Alonso, especially since, according to the article, was the driver with the lowest points/million ratio.
By the way, Rosberg was paid more than Massa last year...

[mario]

http://autos.ca.msn.com/motorsports/gallery.aspx?cp-documentid=22582784&page=1


I thought this was a rather entertaining read. Surprise winner, then again it's more or less a moot point this season for said winner

Some of the data really shocks...
Hamilton was paid $18mil while Kovalainen was only paid $3.5mil. Eunuchus or wise?
Shockingly, Massa was paid $8mil while Raikkönen was paid $45mil. One can perfectly understand why they had little hesitance in Ferrari to replace him with Alonso, especially since, according to the article, was the driver with the lowest points/million ratio.
By the way, Rosberg was paid more than Massa last year...

It is interesting to see the relative differences in pay, but there isn't that much in terms of information as to why the discrepancy in pay arises.

For example, Hamilton's salary last year was much higher then Kovalainen's - however, I believe that Mclaren have allowed Hamilton to arrange personal sponsorship deals which are then added to his pay packet. It could very well be the case that part of the difference is down to a difference in personal sponsorship.
Coupled to that, Hamilton probably would have earned himself a performance related bonus for winning two races last year, when Heikki didn't (some teams do offer bonuses as a reward and incentive for higher finishing positions, although I can't remember whether Mclaren is one of those teams).

Kimi certainly seems to have been quite handsomely paid for his work behind the wheel - even though Alonso is said to be getting a quite substantial pay packet at Ferrari (figures in the order of $20 million plus/year have been mentioned), it is clear that Kimi has profited nicely. Then again, Kimi's pay deal was struck at the height of the global stock market boom, and Ferrari have been a very wealthy team in recent years thanks to some very profitable sponsorship deals, so they could afford it. Still, it seems that Kimi and his agent hit the jackpot there.
Interestingly, whilst Alonso is getting a healthy pay packet now at Ferrari, I don't think that Massa has had a pay increase...

[Jordan]

http://autos.ca.msn.com/motorsports/gallery.aspx?cp-documentid=22582784&page=1


I thought this was a rather entertaining read. Surprise winner, then again it's more or less a moot point this season for said winner

Some of the data really shocks...
Hamilton was paid $18mil while Kovalainen was only paid $3.5mil. Eunuchus or wise?
Shockingly, Massa was paid $8mil while Raikkönen was paid $45mil. One can perfectly understand why they had little hesitance in Ferrari to replace him with Alonso, especially since, according to the article, was the driver with the lowest points/million ratio.
By the way, Rosberg was paid more than Massa last year...

It is interesting to see the relative differences in pay, but there isn't that much in terms of information as to why the discrepancy in pay arises.

For example, Hamilton's salary last year was much higher then Kovalainen's - however, I believe that Mclaren have allowed Hamilton to arrange personal sponsorship deals which are then added to his pay packet. It could very well be the case that part of the difference is down to a difference in personal sponsorship.
Coupled to that, Hamilton probably would have earned himself a performance related bonus for winning two races last year, when Heikki didn't (some teams do offer bonuses as a reward and incentive for higher finishing positions, although I can't remember whether Mclaren is one of those teams).

Kimi certainly seems to have been quite handsomely paid for his work behind the wheel - even though Alonso is said to be getting a quite substantial pay packet at Ferrari (figures in the order of $20 million plus/year have been mentioned), it is clear that Kimi has profited nicely. Then again, Kimi's pay deal was struck at the height of the global stock market boom, and Ferrari have been a very wealthy team in recent years thanks to some very profitable sponsorship deals, so they could afford it. Still, it seems that Kimi and his agent hit the jackpot there.
Interestingly, whilst Alonso is getting a healthy pay packet now at Ferrari, I don't think that Massa has had a pay increase...

Massa doesn't deserve a pay increase

[McJaggers]

From a sponsorship point of view, Massa is far more deserving of a pay increase than kimi was.

Massa pretty much did everything he was told on the PR front.

[Phoenix]

Massa doesn't deserve a pay increase

Considering he had the measure of Raikkönen until his crash at Hungary, I think he does.

[IdeFan]

Felipe's performances at Ferrari have impressed me massively.

In 2006 I didn't give him much of a chance, having not accomplished a lot in 3(?) years at Sauber. Initially it seemed I was right but towards the end of the season he was beginning to push Schumi for pace and won a couple of races.

In 2007 I thought he would be demolished by Raikkonen, who at the time I believed (and some still do) that he was faster even than Schumacher. But Felipe held a good account of himself and only fell away on points in the latter part of the season, it ended up 5-4 to Kimi on wins.

For 2008 I wrote him off partly because Kimi was champion, but mostly because of the traction control ban, Felipe had always looked a bit ragged and I thought he wouldn't cope well without TC. But he improved yet again, beating Kimi soundly on qualifying pace (Kimi was often faster in the races, but too little too late), I think he was unlucky not to have won the championship, but in fairness, had Massa won Lewis would have been extremely unlucky not to have won, one of those years I guess.

Finally in 2009 Felipe seemed to be on top against Kimi again when his crash happened, indeed it seemed to be the crash that kick started Kimi's season.

So yeah, give that man a pay rise!

[watka]

Felipe's performances at Ferrari have impressed me massively.

In 2006 I didn't give him much of a chance, having not accomplished a lot in 3(?) years at Sauber. Initially it seemed I was right but towards the end of the season he was beginning to push Schumi for pace and won a couple of races.

In 2007 I thought he would be demolished by Raikkonen, who at the time I believed (and some still do) that he was faster even than Schumacher. But Felipe held a good account of himself and only fell away on points in the latter part of the season, it ended up 5-4 to Kimi on wins.

For 2008 I wrote him off partly because Kimi was champion, but mostly because of the traction control ban, Felipe had always looked a bit ragged and I thought he wouldn't cope well without TC. But he improved yet again, beating Kimi soundly on qualifying pace (Kimi was often faster in the races, but too little too late), I think he was unlucky not to have won the championship, but in fairness, had Massa won Lewis would have been extremely unlucky not to have won, one of those years I guess.

Finally in 2009 Felipe seemed to be on top against Kimi again when his crash happened, indeed it seemed to be the crash that kick started Kimi's season.

So yeah, give that man a pay rise!

If F1 was fair, Massa would have won the championship in 2008, Hamilton would have won the championship in 2007, and Raikkonen would have won one in his McLaren years.

[Klon]

If F1 was fair, Massa would have won the championship in 2008, Hamilton would have won the championship in 2007, and Raikkonen would have won one in his McLaren years.

And Barrichello would be 2009 champion, don't forget that

[Collieafc]

Interesting question though is that if the Chello (And Button) didnt take a pay cut to guarentee a drive and help the team, would they both be as good value?

[mario]

Interesting question though is that if the Chello (And Button) didnt take a pay cut to guarentee a drive and help the team, would they both be as good value?

Probably not (although the figure for Rubens is somewhat dubious anyway - technically, his salary was $1 million, but he was also supposed to earning a bonus per point, which hasn't been taken into account), but they would probably have still been reasonably good (and certainly well above Kimi).
On the other hand, thanks to the fact that Brawn won the WCC, and received a substantial amount of cash from FOM as a result, at the moment, the Mercedes team is effectively running it's operations from the prize money it won last year. The extra amount of money Ross Brawn's team will now have would probably still outweigh the extra money that the team gets from FOM, so you could argue that they would have still offered quite good value for money.

[Ferrim]

Rosberg $8,5 million at Williams?

No. F***ing. Way.

[thehemogoblin]

Rosberg $8,5 million at Williams?

No. F***ing. Way.

And he still left.

Williamidfielders forever.

[eytl]

[Controversial]

Does anyone think F1 drivers are overpaid? In the same way we complain that business executives are overpaid.

I mean, seriously, the thought that someone gets $45M a year for racing a car is sickening. [Insert comment re global poverty here.]

For that matter, does anyone think that sportspersons in general are overpaid?

[/controversial]

[thehemogoblin]

[Controversial]

Does anyone think F1 drivers are overpaid? In the same way we complain that business executives are overpaid.

I mean, seriously, the thought that someone gets $45M a year for racing a car is sickening. [Insert comment re global poverty here.]

For that matter, does anyone think that sportspersons in general are overpaid?

[/controversial]

I do, yes, but I understand that the way I obsess about sports, I put a high value upon them, personally. It at least makes it understandable, if still inexcusable.

[Row Man Gross-Gene]

[Controversial]

Does anyone think F1 drivers are overpaid? In the same way we complain that business executives are overpaid.

I mean, seriously, the thought that someone gets $45M a year for racing a car is sickening. [Insert comment re global poverty here.]

For that matter, does anyone think that sportspersons in general are overpaid?

[/controversial]

I do, yes, but I understand that the way I obsess about sports, I put a high value upon them, personally. It at least makes it understandable, if still inexcusable.

I'm not as bothered by the amount the top drivers get paid as by the discrepancy between the top and the bottom. Or perhaps between the top and the middle. Mainly that's because you can get killed doing this. And you can get killed whether you make a hundred grand (way more money than I'll ever make) or 45 million (way more money than I'll ever make x 1000).

However, you're right that they seem to make way too much as well. In fact most of them would probably pay money to race F1 cars. It's certainly the type of career where you'd think love of it is greater than desire for money. Hell, make Kimi pay, he can certainly afford it.

[Collieafc]

[Controversial]

Does anyone think F1 drivers are overpaid? In the same way we complain that business executives are overpaid.

I mean, seriously, the thought that someone gets $45M a year for racing a car is sickening. [Insert comment re global poverty here.]

For that matter, does anyone think that sportspersons in general are overpaid?

[/controversial]

Totally true. If it was the 1960s/1970s level of mortality you could at least argue that they were doing something truely dangerous. But certainly not now. And as Row Man Gross-Gene put it, F1 (or in my view, any sport) should not be about the money. It should be about the love of the sport. Thats why any footballer who switches clubs because one will pay more than another is not a sportsman and is just out and out greedy.

This comment applies doubly to a sport like F1, where its not a good "participation" sport, in that to do any form of racing, you need a track, cars etc (compare to say football where all you need is two jumpers for goals and a ball.) There are thousands of people who really would do anything to be an F1 driver even just for 1 race.

[mario]

[Controversial]

Does anyone think F1 drivers are overpaid? In the same way we complain that business executives are overpaid.

I mean, seriously, the thought that someone gets $45M a year for racing a car is sickening. [Insert comment re global poverty here.]

For that matter, does anyone think that sportspersons in general are overpaid?

[/controversial]

Totally true. If it was the 1960s/1970s level of mortality you could at least argue that they were doing something truely dangerous. But certainly not now. And as Row Man Gross-Gene put it, F1 (or in my view, any sport) should not be about the money. It should be about the love of the sport. Thats why any footballer who switches clubs because one will pay more than another is not a sportsman and is just out and out greedy.

This comment applies doubly to a sport like F1, where its not a good "participation" sport, in that to do any form of racing, you need a track, cars etc (compare to say football where all you need is two jumpers for goals and a ball.) There are thousands of people who really would do anything to be an F1 driver even just for 1 race.

The thing is, most sports have now been inflated with cash after the econonic boom times we recently had, and it has somelimes lead to some pretty ugly results (see the recent arguments over the IPL, where there have been allegations of corruption, match fixing and questionable allocations of TV and internet streaming rights, as that sport has grown to a multi-billion dollar spectacle). When you've got somebody like Bernie, who wants to be richer then God, it is inevitable that some of that greed wil rub off on many of those involved, especilly when he has been doing his best to pump the sport full of cash. It has certainly made the sport a global spectacle, and supercharged the development arms race we see today (with teams being able to afford to update cars race by race, and sometimes even over the course of a race weekend) - but whether it has made the sport any better is another matter.

Money was said to be in part why Kimi left F1 (nobody wanted to accept his salary demands, since he is still receiving around €17 million this year from Ferrari as compensation for ending his contract early). Some drivers have effectively used it as a way of entering the sport, and for keeping themselves there (Nakajima, and the free Toyota engine supplies to Williams), and those teams which have a healthy budget are not keen to see their advantage reduced (Ferrari in particular). Unfortunately, whilst there is lots of liquidity sloshing around the sport, we will see avarice driving things, whether we like it or not.

[Phoenix]

OK, let's focus solely on F1. For me, an overpaid F1 driver is the one that's paid more than $15mil, whether if it's the best or not. If they're paid less, I find it reasonable, because admittedly with all the revenue generated and the fact they need a serious and strict preparation and some ability and (let's face it) balls...well, it's still acceptable. Kimi's case, on the other hand, is a disgrace. An utter disgrace. One has to question if it was there for the bling and glitz and for nothing else.

[mario]

OK, let's focus solely on F1. For me, an overpaid F1 driver is the one that's paid more than $15mil, whether if it's the best or not. If they're paid less, I find it reasonable, because admittedly with all the revenue generated and the fact they need a serious and strict preparation and some ability and (let's face it) balls...well, it's still acceptable. Kimi's case, on the other hand, is a disgrace. An utter disgrace. One has to question if it was there for the bling and glitz and for nothing else.

Kimi, though, seemed to be the exception rather then the norm when it came to salaries. After all, when he first went to Ferrari in 2007, he was being paid as much as the next three highest paid driver combined (I recall that two of them were Hamilton and Alonso, but I can't remember who was next - possibly Button, but I am not sure). If the 2009 salaries listed there are true, then Kimi earned almost as much as Alonso, Hamilton, Rosberg and Massa combined ($49.5 million for those 4, compared to Kimi's $45 million) - which seems bizarre.
After all, if you look at that list for last year, there were only two other drivers who earned above $9 million, which were Alonso and Hamilton (on $15 million and $18 million respectively) - and those two earned a fair amount of their money from personal sponsorship deals, which the teams simply added to their pay packet.

It is true that Ferrari were keen to replace Schumacher with Kimi for 2007, but it shows that Ferrari must have been so keen that Kimi could just name any price, and they would pay it. What Kimi's accountant and agents must be getting is anybody's guess, but they must have been doing something right...

[Phoenix]

OK, let's focus solely on F1. For me, an overpaid F1 driver is the one that's paid more than $15mil, whether if it's the best or not. If they're paid less, I find it reasonable, because admittedly with all the revenue generated and the fact they need a serious and strict preparation and some ability and (let's face it) balls...well, it's still acceptable. Kimi's case, on the other hand, is a disgrace. An utter disgrace. One has to question if it was there for the bling and glitz and for nothing else.

Kimi, though, seemed to be the exception rather then the norm when it came to salaries. After all, when he first went to Ferrari in 2007, he was being paid as much as the next three highest paid driver combined (I recall that two of them were Hamilton and Alonso, but I can't remember who was next - possibly Button, but I am not sure). If the 2009 salaries listed there are true, then Kimi earned almost as much as Alonso, Hamilton, Rosberg and Massa combined ($49.5 million for those 4, compared to Kimi's $45 million) - which seems bizarre.
After all, if you look at that list for last year, there were only two other drivers who earned above $9 million, which were Alonso and Hamilton (on $15 million and $18 million respectively) - and those two earned a fair amount of their money from personal sponsorship deals, which the teams simply added to their pay packet.

It is true that Ferrari were keen to replace Schumacher with Kimi for 2007, but it shows that Ferrari must have been so keen that Kimi could just name any price, and they would pay it. What Kimi's accountant and agents must be getting is anybody's guess, but they must have been doing something right...

Quite disturbing; this is a harrowing example of Ferrari's uncontroled might: they can settle for abusive requirements like it was nothing. Incredible.

[DonTirri]

An old finnish saying goes... "Ei se oo tyhmä joka pyytää, vaan se joka maksaa."

Which translates roughly to: "The one who asks isn't stupid, the one who pays is."

[Warren Hughes]

Or as we say in north east England, shy bairns get nowt.

[thehemogoblin]

Or as we say in north east England, shy bairns get nowt.

Speak English.

[Phoenix]

Or as we say in north east England, shy bairns get nowt.

Speak English.

Correct grammar, syntax and capitalization are your friends.


Remember that...

[mario]

An old finnish saying goes... "Ei se oo tyhmä joka pyytää, vaan se joka maksaa."

Which translates roughly to: "The one who asks isn't stupid, the one who pays is."

True - Ferrari chose to pay Kimi that amount of money, so whilst we may criticise Kimi, you wouldn't blame him for accepting what they offered him. To be honest, given that Kimi was discontented with Mclaren after too many reliability issues, Ferrari could easily have offered half of what they did, and he'd almost certainly have accepted it.

OK, let's focus solely on F1. For me, an overpaid F1 driver is the one that's paid more than $15mil, whether if it's the best or not. If they're paid less, I find it reasonable, because admittedly with all the revenue generated and the fact they need a serious and strict preparation and some ability and (let's face it) balls...well, it's still acceptable. Kimi's case, on the other hand, is a disgrace. An utter disgrace. One has to question if it was there for the bling and glitz and for nothing else.

Kimi, though, seemed to be the exception rather then the norm when it came to salaries. After all, when he first went to Ferrari in 2007, he was being paid as much as the next three highest paid driver combined (I recall that two of them were Hamilton and Alonso, but I can't remember who was next - possibly Button, but I am not sure). If the 2009 salaries listed there are true, then Kimi earned almost as much as Alonso, Hamilton, Rosberg and Massa combined ($49.5 million for those 4, compared to Kimi's $45 million) - which seems bizarre.
After all, if you look at that list for last year, there were only two other drivers who earned above $9 million, which were Alonso and Hamilton (on $15 million and $18 million respectively) - and those two earned a fair amount of their money from personal sponsorship deals, which the teams simply added to their pay packet.

It is true that Ferrari were keen to replace Schumacher with Kimi for 2007, but it shows that Ferrari must have been so keen that Kimi could just name any price, and they would pay it. What Kimi's accountant and agents must be getting is anybody's guess, but they must have been doing something right...

Quite disturbing; this is a harrowing example of Ferrari's uncontroled might: they can settle for abusive requirements like it was nothing. Incredible.

It is the advantage Ferrari has for having the security of backing from the FIAT group, the prestige and heritage of the team name, and a substantial amount of money from FOM due to past and current success - all of that adds up to a lot of advertising revenue.
Bear in mind that Formula Money puts Ferrari's budget this year at £260 million - now, I would take that figure with a pinch of salt, but if it in the right ballpark, then it shows what a huge advantage Ferrari has at the moment (by comparison, Mercedes and Mclaren are operating on around £130-135 million each, with Red Bull a bit behind on £110 million). Interestingly, whilst the budget may be one reason why Williams have struggled in the past, it can't be the only reason - Force India have probably got a smaller budget, yet this year they have managed to get ahead of Williams, and Toro Rosso may soon put Williams under pressure as well, and they are also on a smaller budget (in fact, markedly smaller).
Now, in such an environment, it is not surprising that Ferrari oppose a spending cap - in a development war, whilst Red Bull may have Newey, Mercedes have Brawn, and Paddy Lowe is doing a fairly good job at Mclaren, Ferrari have got a reasonably good design team, and substantially more resources then those teams. Whilst I have had my queries about how a spending cap would work, you can see why there has been pressure from the FIA to control spending.

[Collieafc]

Or as we say in north east England, shy bairns get nowt.

Speak English.

You say to somebody from England

That aside, you raise a valid there Mario about Williams. Whatever they are spending money on, it isnt yielding good results

[Tealy]

Or as we say in north east England, shy bairns get nowt.

Speak English.

I think its all bs because I can't find anything on the web for it but when I first started at Sunderland uni we were told the nearby church (http://www.parishofmonkwearmouth.co.uk/St-Peters/history) was where the written form of old English was born.

[Warren Hughes]

Or as we say in north east England, shy bairns get nowt.

Speak English.

I think its all bs because I can't find anything on the web for it but when I first started at Sunderland uni we were told the nearby church (http://www.parishofmonkwearmouth.co.uk/St-Peters/history) was where the written form of old English was born.

[Jordan192]

I think its all bs because I can't find anything on the web for it but when I first started at Sunderland uni we were told the nearby church (http://www.parishofmonkwearmouth.co.uk/St-Peters/history) was where the written form of old English was born.

If you really want to take things up a notch, if it's true that the current form of the geordie/mackem dialects have been around pretty much as long as Modern English, George Washington himself quite probably had a recognisable north-east accent...

[mario]

I think its all bs because I can't find anything on the web for it but when I first started at Sunderland uni we were told the nearby church (http://www.parishofmonkwearmouth.co.uk/St-Peters/history) was where the written form of old English was born.

If you really want to take things up a notch, if it's true that the current form of the geordie/mackem dialects have been around pretty much as long as Modern English, George Washington himself quite probably had a recognisable north-east accent...

You might be interested in a book that Bill Bryson wrote about the evolution of language in America (called 'Made In America', I believe), which is quite a good read (since he balances being informative with also being entertaining). The irony is that whilst there are those in the UK who decry Americanisms, in a number of cases, it is actually the case that the language has moved on more rapidly in the UK then the US, not that the term was modified in the US.
On that note, he commented that the historical records don't give a definitive idea of what accents were like in the US - some suggest that they were marked, whilst others suggest a relatively uniform accent amongst the early colonies. However, several commented that most people had a Southern UK accent (often described as a Sussex accent) - which makes sense when you consider that quite a few of the early migrants had set forth for the Americas from the South of the UK, where most of the major ports were at the time (and a number still are). So, if Washington did have an accent, he probably would have sounded more like someone from Sussex then a Geordie.

[eagleash]

Or as we say in north east England, shy bairns get nowt.

Speak English.

I think its all bs because I can't find anything on the web for it but when I first started at Sunderland uni we were told the nearby church (http://www.parishofmonkwearmouth.co.uk/St-Peters/history) was where the written form of old English was born.

The Venerable Bede was a North-Easterner.

[Jordan192]

So, if Washington did have an accent, he probably would have sounded more like someone from Sussex then a Geordie.

I guess - after 4 Generations there probably wouldn't be much of it left

[Marcus]

Why are F1 Driver's overpaid?? I don't think so at all. They engage in a death defying sport for our entertainment - not a necessity by any stretch of the imagination. Why anyone feels that other human beings should risk their lives for our pure pleasure and not get paid high dollar by us is beyond me. It doesn't matter if they enjoy it and/or if they get other perks besides. The idea here is that their lives and all that comes with it can disappear in the wink of an eye - and we will all still be here to watch others risk their lives.

And Kimi - you all know that if he'd insisted on taking 20 million instead of 40 million because he didn't want to appear to be too overpaid we would all be pointing and laughing at him, calling him a fool. Of course he should take what ever final amount is offered in a bidding war for his services. Anyone who says Ferrari didn't get their moneys worth is fooling themselves. A WCC and WDC in 07 (a compliant Massa) ; a WCC and 2/3 WDC in 08 (with a compliant Kimi) and 5 podiums (6 with Massa's 1) + a win for the dogcar F60 in 2009 - well Ferrari had no grounds for complaint on their end.

In any case, movie stars, businessmen, rock stars and many others get paid a lot of money for what they do. They produce things we value and are willing to pay for - it is the same with F1 drivers and other sports figures. The risk involved (not just for F1ers, but for all risk takers) should increase the pay they receive by a commiserate amount in comparison to the others - but that is not always the case. Measure for measure, they should all be making around about what Kimi was making. I think last weekend was a stark reminder of this...

[Tealy]

Why are F1 Driver's overpaid?? I don't think so at all. They engage in a death defying sport for our entertainment - not a necessity by any stretch of the imagination. Why anyone feels that other human beings should risk their lives for our pure pleasure and not get paid high dollar by us is beyond me. It doesn't matter if they enjoy it and/or if they get other perks besides. The idea here is that their lives and all that comes with it can disappear in the wink of an eye - and we will all still be here to watch others risk their lives.

And Kimi - you all know that if he'd insisted on taking 20 million instead of 40 million because he didn't want to appear to be too overpaid we would all be pointing and laughing at him, calling him a fool. Of course he should take what ever final amount is offered in a bidding war for his services. Anyone who says Ferrari didn't get their moneys worth is fooling themselves. A WCC and WDC in 07 (a compliant Massa) ; a WCC and 2/3 WDC in 08 (with a compliant Kimi) and 5 podiums (6 with Massa's 1) + a win for the dogcar F60 in 2009 - well Ferrari had no grounds for complaint on their end.

In any case, movie stars, businessmen, rock stars and many others get paid a lot of money for what they do. They produce things we value and are willing to pay for - it is the same with F1 drivers and other sports figures. The risk involved (not just for F1ers, but for all risk takers) should increase the pay they receive by a commiserate amount in comparison to the others - but that is not always the case. Measure for measure, they should all be making around about what Kimi was making. I think last weekend was a stark reminder of this...

My argument would be that paying drivers less would spare enough money to make ticket prices lower for the fans. Sadly my left-wing attitude to this kind of thing is completely ignored in the business world and all that would happen would be more money spent on the car etc.

[Nessafox]

isn't it allways so that left-wing attitudes are ignored by businessmen?

[DemocalypseNow]

isn't it allways so that left-wing attitudes are ignored by businessmen?

Yes, because money stops their brains from functioning correctly

[shinji]

isn't it allways so that left-wing attitudes are ignored by businessmen?

Yes, because money stops their brains from functioning correctly

Genius line from Freaks and Geeks - "Everyone's a Democrat until they come in to some money, then they see some sense!"

[Phoenix]

isn't it allways so that left-wing attitudes are ignored by businessmen?

Yes, because money stops their brains from functioning correctly

Genius line from Freaks and Geeks - "Everyone's a Democrat until they come in to some money, then they see some sense!"

Note: in this line, democrats can be replaced with communists, sindicalists, or insert name of religion/rare tendence here.

[mario]

Genius line from Freaks and Geeks - "Everyone's a Democrat until they come in to some money, then they see some sense!"

Note: in this line, democrats can be replaced with communists, sindicalists, or insert name of religion/rare tendence here.

Or there is the line that Clemenceau (I believe) one used: "If my son hadn't become a communist by the age of 25, I would have renounced him. If he is still a communist at 30, I will do so then."

As for whether Ferrari was getting their money's worth from Kimi, yes, he did win the 2007 WDC, although that did fall into his lap to a certain extent.
At the end of the 2008 season he was caught openly admitting to a newspaper reporter that he had not been that motivated, or interested, in the 2008 season, and was generally outperformed by Massa that year. He might have helped win the WCC, but Hamilton's victory in the WDC did generate a lot of publicity for Mclaren as well. At that point, there would have been those in Ferrari who would have wondered whether it was worth paying Kimi to drive for them when his motivation and commitment was questionable - and the fact that he somehow seemed to have lost his edge that year.
Moving on, in 2009 he was being beaten by Massa up until the Hungaroring (who seemed to be coping with Ferrari's troubles better then Kimi), and it was only after Massa's accident that we saw him pick up his pace (although it did help that Ferrari had thrown one last set of upgrades, which was a special low downforce package, for Spa and Monza - and you do have to wonder whether Kimi could have held Fisichella off if he hadn't had the KERS boost at Spa, given how he was able to press him all the way (and the fact that Fisichella was being linked to Ferrari at the time as a replacement for Badoer might have also prevented him from wanting to aggravate Ferrari by pushing to pass Kimi and risking an accident)).
Moreover, he doesn't seem to have made that much of an effort to integrate himself into the team, or to work with his team mate - we saw Massa's comments about chatting more with Alonso in a few weeks then Kimi in two years.
That is not to say that Kimi isn't talented - he is indeed; at Mclaren they respected him long after he went for his consistency and how hard he could push when committed, and Ferrari paid tribute to his capabilities when he left.