Bernie Ecclestone says a revamp of qualifying is drastically needed as Formula One is "the worst it has ever been" and not worth the entrance fee.
Lewis Hamilton's Mercedes has dominated F1 since 2014's rule-changes, while the previous four seasons saw Red Bull and Sebastian Vettel sweep the boards.
The 2016 season shows little sign of the trend reversing. The Silver Arrows are once again set to be the team to beat and Ecclestone believes grids that do not reflect the results of qualifying could be a way forward.
He told the Daily Mail: "I think I can say that I'm a bit of an exception in Formula One today -- I have a vested interest. I want to do what is best for Formula One.
"I don't need the job. I don't need the money. Most of the participants are only thinking about what's good for them in the short term. Long term for most of those people is two or three races.
"The result is that Formula One is the worst it has ever been. I wouldn't spend my money to take my family to watch a race. No way.
"What's the point when you pretty much know that Lewis Hamilton will probably put the car on pole and more likely than not win the race, and the other Mercedes will be on the podium?"
Ecclestone's plan to shake up the sport may be extreme, but he suggested that an attempt will be made to rip up the rule book in time for the opening race of the season in Melbourne on March 20.
"We need more competitive racing," he said. "I would keep qualifying as it is. The guy who is quickest would still have his number of poles recorded for history.
"But then he could start, say, 10th based on his pole and where he stands in the championship. We are looking at exactly how we could do it.
"The guy who is third fastest in qualifying would start, say seventh or eighth. That is better than totally reversed grids because all you get with them is the man at the back getting past the slower guys at the start of the race. This way makes it competitive between guys of similar speed. It won't be easy to get past people.
"The big thing is that it would create debate. That's what we need. I don't know if we can get it through in time. We'll see."