And so, as A1GP begins its fourth season, it is a shame that things are coming apart at the seams. The new, F1-derived Ferrari car was financially delayed to the point that many teams (including A1 Team GBR) are not prepared for the season opener at Zandvort this weekend. Rather than a catastrophic cancellation, the opening round is set to become a non-points scoring round with a less than capacity field.

Suggesting the demise of A1GP, however, is almost certainly premature. CEO Tony Texiera and 52% share-holders RAB Capital plc appear to have deep pockets, after all, A1GP can’t possibly be forecasting a profit anytime soon.

So I wonder: was it sensible for A1GP to introduce its new car? And was there ever a need, anyway? With manufacturer-backed series, continuity between the showroom and the race track is important. But A1GP, surely, is about spectacle? And what difference, really, does the car make to the spectacle, to the show?

What parallels can we draw from history? What other series have risked financial stability for the sake of a new car and ultimately later, paid the price?

Champ Car World Series, immeadiately springs to mind. In 2008, following just one season with their new Panoz chassis, Champ Car filed bankruptcy and prompted the reunification of open-wheel racing in the US.

Closer to home, in 2006, the SEAT Cupra Cup (UK) introduced its “new” shape Leon. Arguably necessary in order to maintain brand continuity, it struggled to attract grids comparable with previous seasons. Inevitably, the series will no longer be run in the UK.

What other examples can you think of?

Related posts:

1. Where does all the money go?
2. How is A1GP really doing?
3. Weekly Training Journal: 06/02/09