A fairer distribution of money among Formula 1 teams? Yes, but not before 2021..

Bernie Ecclestone has been quite vocal recently about trying to change the way F1 revenues are distributed, to make it fairer for the smaller teams...

Bernie Ecclestone has been quite vocal recently about trying to change the way F1 revenues are distributed, to make it fairer for the smaller teams, who miss out on the massive bonuses enjoyed by Ferrari and the top teams.

The matter has been the subject of an official complaint by Force India and Sauber to the EU Competition Commission; the EU commissioner in question has not decided yet whether to prosecute it.

Perhaps co-incidentally, since the UK voted last Thursday for 'Brexit', or withdrawal from the EU, it is interesting to note that Ecclestone, whose company is based in London, has been speaking very publicly about addressing the F1 payments imbalance, using the Times newspaper as a platform to float the idea a few days ago.

He returned to the theme again so again today (Thursday), finding a way to generate an informal press gathering, following Lewis Hamilton's press briefing in the Mercedes motorhome. This website was present.

Ecclestone was standing with Toto Wolff, the Mercedes F1 team boss and 30% shareholder in the team. The pair were returning from a meeting with other team bosses, where the subject of F1 finances was discussed.

Although Ecclestone said he is keen to address the matter as soon as possible, ideally for 2017, Wolff later made it clear that it's out of the question for the current arrangements to be changed before the end of the current Concorde Agreement, which expires at the end of 2020.

However there is some focus on whether it may be possible to share the rising profits from F1 more fairly among teams in the short term, in other words, cutting them in on the upside, as a way to ensure survival.

This deal sees a special fund of around $300m shared between the top five teams, with Ferrari taking $100m, Mercedes and Red Bull around $70m each, McLaren $45m and Williams $10m. Renault also has a payment, negotiated when it returned to F1 as a manufacture this year.

The teams who do not benefit from this fund argue that it cannot be fair and sportingly equitable for a team like Ferrari to take home three times as much money for finishing fourth as Force India does for finishing fifth.

These special bonus payments were agreed with Ecclestone following the decision by Red Bull and Ferrari to break away from the F1 Teams Association in December 2011. This effectively broke up FOTA as a body representing the interests of all F1 teams and the other teams followed, reluctantly signing up to 'take it or leave it' deals with Ecclestone.

Mercedes was late to the party and had to work hard to earn its bonus payment, via its two most recent world championship titles.

What was discussed today was the way the revenues will be split from 2021 onwards and the key will be in deciding what weighing to give to three main pillars:

* Base payment

* Championship result (Performance based payment)

* Historical performance payment

Currently the bonuses which the smaller teams find unfair and unbalanced is weighted on the historic performance.

The F1 business continues to grow, with more money coming in from sponsor deals, like the substantial recent one with Heineken and from TV deals like the new £1bn exclusive UK deal with SKY from 2019 to 2024.

The teams currently share around 65% of the underlying profits of the F1 business and that has escalated in recent years. Wolff gave the example of Williams which received around $40m for fifth place in 2009, when he became a shareholder. Fifth place in the constructors' championship now pays around 50% more.

Under discussion today was the idea of sharing the upside, or the new levels of profitability, more equitably so that the smaller teams are financially secure and can make long term plans. The base payment will be higher and the historical weighting reduced.

Everyone recognises that the climate needs to be less divisive and more professional and long term in outlook.

That said, Ferrari will be reluctant to give away any of its privileges, but it is part of a circus and ultimately needs F1 to market its road car products. It does not do any other kind of advertising. With its vast sponsor income on top of its vast FOM prize money and bonuses it must have income in excess of $300m a year.

Ferrari and the other manufacturers are certainly making their presence felt behind the scenes in F1 currently, calling for widespread changes to the way the sport is managed. But at the same time they need a stable series with stable competitors and it seems that a new consensus could form around something more akin to a Premier League model, where the payment increments between teams based on their finishing position in the league, is not large.

Ferrari will have no right of veto over the arrangements made post 2020, but must try to negotiate the best deal it can. Repeating the extraordinary $100m up front annual payment will not be possible, but Ecclestone conceded that Ferrari will need to be given some kind of extra payment to reflect the fact that it is the longest standing team.

Wolff was at pains to stress that a repeat of the situation where Ferrari and Red Bull signed up first, hanging the rest of the teams out to dry, would not be repeated the time around. "We will not have a situation where one team goes ahead first and screws the others," he said. "That is not going to happen."