A business case for VW in F1

There has been lot of talk over many years of the Volkswagen Group, Europe’s biggest car company, getting involved in Formula 1. The firm has stayed away on the basis that it is too expensive and does not make any business sense. Porsche, which is now (slowly) becoming part of the VW empire, has dallied with F1 on several occasions, notably in the early 1980s when money from TAG paid for Porsche engineers to produce turbo engines of undoubted class, which set new records of success in the sport – at that time.

In recent days the weekly German business magazine WirtschaftsWoche has quoted the group’s motorsport chief Wolfgang Dürheimer saying that he is going to propose that the Volkswagen group enter Formula 1 in 2018. He did not give any further details, although there was speculation that the plan would probably be to become an engine supplier first and then, perhaps, take over a team. The speculation has yet to hit on the idea that Volkswagen owns the rights to the AutoUnion brand and that Mercedes-Benz and AutoUnion battling for success would be a replay of the famous era in the 1930s with their Silver Arrows. That could happen, but in the modern age of marketing it is more likely that a specific brand would be used, be that Audi, Volkswagen itself, Bugatti, Bentley, Lamborghini or Porsche. The thing that is interesting about Durheimer’s suggestion is that it is the first time that a leading VW figure has come up with a business case for F1. He did not even mention the value of the technology that might be developed creating one of the next generation F1 turbo engines, but rather concentrated his thinking on sales, arguing that based on the group’s sales targets in Americas, Asia and the Middle East, “we are not sufficiently represented in motorsport in these regions.” He went on to explain that F1 is really the only serious option when one is looking for global market penetration.

The Volkswagen group sold 8.2 million vehicles in 2011, it is likely to be named the second biggest car company by sales, after GM but ahead of Toyota later this year. Of these, 3.1 million cars were sold in western Europe, while 2.5 million were in Asia (of which China was responsible for about 2.26 million), but sales in India were only 110,000. Sales in Eastern Europe amounted to only 557,000, while the company sold 950,000 in Latin America, and a further 670,000 in the US and Canada. The remaining 325,000 were sold in other places, including the Middle East and Africa, although the Middle East accounted for only 11,000 Volkswagens.

Given that F1 is strong in Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America and the Middle East, it is fair to say that Dürheimer is bang on in his assessment.

39 thoughts on “A business case for VW in F1

  1. Remember Volkswagen has just jumped on the WRC train. They are there even twice, as the Skoda brand is a regular winner at S2000 level.

    Sure the TAG Porsche V6 turbo engine, was a little gem.

    But I don’t think any at Porsche likes to be reminded of their last GP effort in 1991. In essence two TAG Porsche V6 joined together. A monumental disaster.

    The late 80s Indycar effort was semi-successful, at least after dumping their own car. Which was another monumental disaster.

    1. 2 years probably isn’t enough time for quality R&D, let alone agreeing to a deal with a decent team. Can’t imagine they would rush into F1 for the sake of timing it with new regs; they’d want to make a serious go of it, if at all.

    2. Too late.

      PURE broke cover in mid-2011. Admittedly, at that point they seemed to be aiming for 2013 but they won’t be at all upset about the delay to 2014. But this isn’t some little commercial operation hoping to survive from motorsport (see: PURE, Cosworth) this is VW and you can bet that they’ll definitely be in it to win it.

      The kind of organisational and physical investment will be significant and take time. Building and tooling a new factory from the ground up. Hiring and reshuffling staff. Working out, for the first time really, how to design an F1 engine. And they need that engine to win. They need it in at least one of the podium teams – with Ferrari obviously not an option.

      All of this will require a lot of money to do, money which will be poured down a drain for the first few years with absolutely zero return. They probably won’t see much return until 2020. The board will deliberate on it for ages before they greenlight it, IF they do. It’s a major business undertaking and a very serious engineering challenge.

      Don’t think it will be easy – just because it’s a turbo V6 doesn’t mean that they can just lift one from an Audi A4 – spinning one of those up to F1 speeds would make it explode. Then melt. Then explode again.

      1. The more I think about it though, the more the 2018 date looks too specific. What are the bets on some insider knowledge that an engine spec review is planned to to take effect for 2018?

        Even if the result is “yes we’re maintaining 2014 spec up to 2022” it would reinforce VW’s potential investment, where they wouldn’t want to arrive just in time for a respec.

        It’s either that or 2018 really is the first year Dürheimer reckons they can get a winning engine on the grid.

  2. Durheimer was the Porsche board member responsible for the RS Spyder LMP2 project. He’s keen and knowledgeable about racing, and part of the justification and raison d’etre of that project was that it was one of the few ways for Porsche to demonstrate their technology in a US racing scene laden with spec car series. He’s a very sharp guy indeed, and it’s great news that he believes he can use a similar process again, albeit on a massively larger scale.

  3. Joe

    Why do you say F1 is strong in Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America and the Middle East – what proof is there to back up this statement? For example, I thought attendances at many events were highly subsidised (in past, practically free at certain events) and TV viewing poor?

      1. FOM (almost alone amongst sports), now only use ‘Unique Verifiable Viewers’ data, this is gathered from markets where data is collated electronically by reputable monitors, such as BARB in the UK, ‘Unique Viewers’ typically show 1 third less viewers than for example ‘Diary Data’ which uses subjective extrapolated estimates, typically used by FIFA and the IOC, and widely discredited.

  4. If any works team and its customer base were to (theoretically) benefit from F1 technology trickling down, it would be a Volkswagen team or subsidiary. They have invested tremendously in turbocharging as their model lines prove, so it might make sense that a switch in the regulations to forced-induction might appeal to a company like VW and, of course, it subsidiaries. Surely a VW foray into F1 would open more doors for Audi and Porsche in endurance racing where they are already very successful.

  5. I hope they learn the lessons from the BMW venture and resist the temptation to buy a team. Being an engine supplier is a much cheaper and less fraught route to getting your name noticed. Maybe they could supply a number of teams using different brands depending on the team, Red Bull could have a VW, McLaren a Porsche, Torro Rosso a Lamborghini and HRT a Skoda?

  6. VW’s Hans Joachim Stuck stated in 2009 that VW had no place in NASCAR, because it was not a showcase for VW’s technology. Now that F1 is switching to V6 turbos, the business case is much easier to see. (Disclosure: I drive a smallish VW turbo (and love it)). I doubt Audi would venture into F1, although Peugeot’s withdrawal may impact its future sports car plans. Audi has prepared an R8 to race in the US Grand-Am Series (which is owned by NASCAR), and an R8 competed this past weekend at Daytona (without great successs).

  7. To speculate about a Mercedes/AutoUnion battle seems a bit premature; will Mercedes even be around F1 in 2018? Patrick asks a good question: Why 2018? Aren’t we going to see the same thing happen with the new engine formula that occurred with the 2.4L V8 – an engine freeze? Really, F1, you are getting a bit technically boring. There is such little scope for innovation anymore; the new engine rules are as limiting as the V8 rules, with cylinder spacing, V angle, c.g., weight, materials, rpm, and just about everything else controlled. I wish some sort of formula was proposed that only controlled fuel engery/sec and left everything else open. Allow diesel or alcohol or petrol, allow turbos, allow any displacement, allow any number of cylinders, but control calories/sec available by controlling fuel flow. Now that would be interesting; I can only dream.

    1. Not at all premature to speculate.

      Too soon to bet on it? Sure. But too soon to wonder about it and consider the possibilities? No way.

      Why do you think the guy said anything, if not to encourage speculation (and virtual ink)?

  8. Surely they need a reasonable prospect of race wins in order for this to be a good idea? The trouble is that not everybody can be a top team, and unless they can get a contract to supply Red Bull or McLaren, winning doesn’t seem likely. They will be mindful that other car manufacturers have tried the same thing and ultimately retreated from F1 with their tails between their legs.

    It would be very interesting to know whether VW’s strategising assumes that Mercedes will still be in F1 by 2018. How many years of not winning can Merc stand before they recognise that being in F1 but failing to win is not good for their prestige?

  9. Porsche are in the business of running turbo-charged 6 cylinder engines, and they are quite good at it at that. They will surely feel the need for down-sizing their street cars in the future, and what way better than to experiment in that regard doing high-end motor sports?

  10. Sorry Joe, I’m not picking on typos, but this one was hilarious:

    “The firm has stayed away on the basis that it is too expensive and *doe snot* make any business sense.”

    Nasal mucus from a female deer? 😉 Gave me a good chuckle. Understandable when your words per minute rivals the RPM of an F1 car…

    —–

    Regarding the post itself… good news! Happy to see they’re thinking about it. And as an engine supplier, that means they’ll get paid for what they make – helps cut costs and gives them plenty of exposure. Even though Mercedes went the other way, Renault moved in the same direction and seems to be very happy there.

    Some sports car sources are pretty pessimistic on Audi staying involved beyond 2013, leaving Porsche to do their own thing in 2014 when they return to LMP1; I’m not sure if the upstart Porsche effort will use Joest as their team, or if they’ll take Audi people, or if it will be like Peugeot vs. Citroen (or Seat vs. Skoda) in WRC where it was two distinct teams. If it’s two distinct teams, they’ll have some great VW engine people with lots of turbo experience ready to work on a new project (F1).

    However, it seems that each engine supplier wants to supply more engines. With them lasting longer and fewer engines needed a year, I bet Renault could supply the entire field with the volume of engines they used to produce in a season when each car would use an engine a day! Even though there are only four engine manufacturers right now, it will be hard for PURE to break into the market, even if Cosworth drops out. Then, with VW coming in, every supplier will have to complete for teams, thus driving down the price each team pays for engines. Suddenly, with five or six brands competing, it might not be such a rosy deal for the current few engine manufacturers.

    That said, I’m wondering if engines would get cheap enough in such a scenario that it might make sense for engine manufacturers to approach the ACO and suggest that they homologate a detuned version of their F1 engine for LMP use. The ACO wants greener engines, and something like this might be a good way to go for an LMP team that wants a hybrid engine in their prototype… and I’m sure Renault would would love another Le Mans victory! Unlikely, but possible.

    Anyway, that concludes my thinking aloud for now. 😉

  11. Was that 8.2 million Volkswagen branded cars or Volkswagen Group cars? I’m just wondering whether the eleven thousand in the Middle East are mostly Golfs and Passats or also Lamborghinis, Bugattis, Bentleys and Audi R8s.

  12. @ Joe

    It has been announced that Porsche intends to join Le Mans in the LMP1 category soon. VW currently own 49.9% (of porsche) and as you said, is looking to take a further hold of the manafacturer.

    VW have a policy of not racing their brands against each other. In other words, either Audi has to end on a high and move over for Porsche or Porsche gets the ditch and Audi keeps Le Mans to itself.

    Presumably the other brand needs a racing series for it.

    WHICH do you think wil end up in Le Mans LMP1? and will the other, in your opinion go to F1? Or isn’t it that simple?

    thanks!

      1. Joe, although I am most fascinated by the entire Ferdinand Porsche / Auto Union / Volkswagen era of the 1930’s, I think that one should be careful not to capitalise too much on it, considering the political roots. Personally I would be thrilled, but I see big risks for such a strong group like VW.

    1. “Soon” = 2014, according to the announcement made in June. Shortly after that Audi Sport released a statement saying “This is the decision of Porsche company, a decision in which Audi is not involved”. Not sure how much that statement has value, but there has been some confusing comments from Bentley (actually from Durheimer himself, he is also CEO of Bentley) asking if two (Audi and Porsche) can race against each other, “can three?”.

  13. As far as i know the porsche acquisition by VW is off anyway.This is due to our American friendly bankers legal case concerning the market manipulation over short selling of shares. Although it seems the companies are likely to maintain a cross shareholding and continue to work together a full merger doesnt look on the cards and I can’t see VW spending the kind of investment they would have to on a non-core brand.

    1. I am sure it will go ahead one way or another. If the lawyers mess things up, VW can still buy the car business and leave the Porsche parent company to deal with the legal problems.

  14. Thanks the replies Joe and Karen. Karen, I suppose one has to assume that ‘reputable monitors’ elsewhere means just that – but I won’t be entering that minefield!

    I suppose the cynic in me always pre-supposes a dastardly plot to massage the figures to further B.E/ CVC’s aim to fluff-up the balance sheet. Usually that’s at the expense of the core fans, who I’m convinced are still based in Western Europe where traditional (ie interesting) circuits are under pressure to stump-up or be removed from calendar altogether.

    In the light of what’s been happening in Bahrein, Turkey, Korea etc we’ll see who’s left around in a few year’s time. B.E wasn’t entirely stupid signing Silverstone on such a long contract.

  15. Joe, you mention McLaren may be looking for a Honda deal, and I’ve heard a few rumours about that too – but would there be any option for VW to go there as an engine supplier, and buy into the team as Mercedes did? I doubt they’d ever be able to buy full control though.

    But would McLaren be able to extend the customer deal with Mercedes until 2018 (or use PURE engines – or not) and then switch, in the meantime giving VW time to engineer the engine to a high standard?

    Just a random thought. The only other option I could see is a tie in with Williams, perhaps buying Sir Frank out at a later date…

Leave a comment