To cancel a contract, we pay only 100,000?

I don\'t think it\'s fair that we can fire someone paying only 100,000. In real life, that doesn\'t happen. We have to pay the rest of the contract and some compensation.

I\'m seeing many teams who hire new drivers as soon as they reach a new level. I don\'t think that\'s fair, what do you think?

You do need 8m to sign a new one.

I think it\'s enough...

I did this once now, but the signing fee of 6m for my first driver is enough I think. That\'s probably the reason, why this is implemented anyway, as I cannot imagine a signing fee in real world motorsport, where paydrivers are present, too. I had him 6 races, making it an effective payment of roughly 1.3m per race; more than enough.

If your driver is not performing then it could be argued that he is not fulfilling his contract. I would have thought that the 100k is not necessary.

Furthermore, isn\'t it your job as a team manager to hire the best drivers you can afford? If your man is not performing, looking for someone better is part of the game isn\'t it?

You\'re having a point with the signing fee and I see where you\'re going to but what about the other staff? They don\'t have signing fees, isn\'t that unfair?

I think the signing fee for new drivers makes it more difficult for managers who want to sign a new driver every scouting level.  But what about technical and chief directors (and doctors, commercial managers...)?  Maybe there should be a signing fee for them as well?

Drivers can improve and thereby may be valuable for quite some time. The chiefs are stubborn and refuse to learn, so there\'s no reason to hold them a single day longer than needed. If they would improve too, this\'d be another story, but as it is now, it would be ridiculous to pay loads of money for someone that HAS to be replaced in some time to stay competitive.