The Williams Formula 1 team launched its new FW35 at the start of the second pre-season test at the Circuit de Catalunya in Barcelona this morning. The car is a development of the FW34 that won the Spanish GP last year. The team’s technical director Mike Coughlan said that he is happy with gains that have been made over the winter and says that it is “a better, more refined car than the FW34″. The work includes a new gearbox new rear suspension, new radiators, a new floor, new exhausts, new bodywork, a new nose and a significant amount of weight-saving.
The team has done a great deal of dyno testing work to ensure reliability and there is a plan for continual upgrades all through the season ahead. The cars will be raced this year by Pastor Maldonado and Valtteri Bottas and there are high hopes that Maldonado will mature and that Bottas will show top class talent. The team also has a significant new sponsorship from Experian, a global information services company which is listed on the London Stock Exchange. The firm collects information on people, businesses, motor vehicles and insurance and provides credit information. Its primary area of operation is the United States, but it has 17,000 employees around the world.
Ferrari has announced a new sponsorship deal with the logistics company UPS. The deal also extends to the activities of the racing activities run by Ferrari’s Corse Clienti operation and will provide freight services for the company around the world.
McLaren is also in the news having announced that it has signed up 20-year-old Belgian racing driver Stoffel Vandoorne, the reigning Eurocup Formula Renault 2.0 Champion, as a new member of the McLaren Young Driver Programme.
Elsewhere, there is much propaganda being spouted about an attempt to revive the flotation of the Formula One shares in the autumn.
One might suggest that it is entirely logical that CVC Capital Partners would want to get rid of its Formula One shares as quickly as possible given the bad publicity that it has had since the start of the Gribkowsky Affair, which is exactly what private equity companies do not want. Its wild rush to get to a Singapore flotation last year featured acceleration and and then braking that would have rivalled the average F1 car and left the impression that the company had suddenly realised that its trousers were on fire. Explaining what the Financial Times at the time called “a Byzantine structure which few are likely to fully grasp” took 487 pages in the official prospectus, including a daunting 19 pages of risk factors. There was also a highly complex system of “stapled shares”. The decision to stop the float was blamed on the state of the economy, but there is little doubt that the Gribkowsky Affair and the subsequent legal troubles also played a role. Things have not improved in this respect although the Bavarian state prosecution service is taking such a long time deciding what to do that one gets the impression that the whole business may end up being shovelled under a carpet. Elsewhere however there is plenty of work for Formula One lawyers as there are a number of civil law suits relating to what happened. The Princes Gate-controlled press has been trying to make out that Bernie Ecclestone will have a bit of a laugh in the High Court, but I have a vague suspicion that this is largely bravado, reported on by the simpering hacks who dare not question the story, lest he stops buying them lunch. There is also a rather nasty looking lawsuit in New York where an American private equity firm called Bluewaters has filed a $650 million claim against Ecclestone, CVC, Gerhard Gribkowsky, BayernLB, Alpha Prema UK, Alpha Topco and Delta Topco, Uncle Tom Cobbley and all alleging that there was a criminal conspiracy and demanding material and punitive damages. It says that he was willing to pay $1 billion to purchase a 47.2-percent stake in the business, which was in the end sold to CVC for $839 million. Ecclestone has filed an affidavit claiming that a US court does not jurisdiction in the case but there is clearly some argument that has been put forward to warrant such a response. One might suggest that perhaps the US will get involved because money that was secretly paid to Gribkowsky passed through banks in New York. If the lawsuit is accepted as being under US jurisdiction, one can imagine that that the US government might sniff the opportunity to collect some fines as well as it has a very stringent Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), which prohibits the payment of bribes to foreign officials anywhere in the world. This has been increasingly used in recent years in case that have a US connection of any kind. For the moment, however, the chat is all about jurisdiction but this is not a case that looks like it will be going away quickly.
Welcome back Joe (although the snow outside my window would rather say, I’d like to go to Cuba right now, Spain might not be too bad an alternative).
I had seen some of those spinning Bernies tales lately and they are still as easy to spot as ever!
And thats why I rate your blog so highly Joe, the financial insights are second to none. One question, about the 19 pages of risk factors, what is a normal amount of risk factors for a company the size of F1?
Not that many.
Given that many risk factors Joe are there any stand outs as fans we should know that could jeopardize our sport? IE not the current weakness of the teams, but the management of F1? Be nice to know what keeps Bernie up at nights!
Welcome back Joe. All interesting stuff and I really do value and appreciate you as a journalist e.g. someone with the ability for critical thinking.
However, what’s the particular gripe with Sylt? I know he is a prat, but still, why the gripe? Is it because he is “reporting” in a similar sector and is therefore competition?
Proper journalism is not about parroting what someone says, but rather looking at it from different angles and analysing it accordingly. My gripe is not specific to the person mentioned, but with anyone who simply reports what is said without any attempt to put it into perspective. Sadly, this is what F1 journalism is becoming and I will fight that and encourage young journalists to retain the old techniques as long as I am in the business.
Good for you Joe, I follow quite a few F1 sites on twitter (including you) and many of them just say literally the same thing from wherever they have gathered it in the first place. I don’t mind because it’s free and I don’t have to read them all but it’s puzzling why so many would bother to say the same thing rather than voice their own opinions
I always read you before any other F1 news. You always give your take on a story rather than just re-hashing a press release and I find your take to be very insightful (not surprising given your long experience and presumably contacts in the industry). You are bang on with your dislike of many F1 news sources, they are in it for financial gain rather than journalistic integrity. Sorry if it sounds a bit sycophantic but I’m being honest here!
Thank you Joe. Nice to understand your perspective on Sylt et al. As a hardened fan who operates in the sport, I rarely read Autosport.com anymore – merely look at the headlines and never buy the magazine. The magazine is not worth the money.
On younger journalists, how do you rate Adam Hay-Nicholls and Will Buxton vs the likes of Jon Noble and the ‘employed’ press?
I think it best not to comment on specific individuals, suffice to say I have helped Will a little in his career and have been impressed by Adam’s abilities to sell stories in unusual places.
All this an no heir apparent! Hope you had a nice holiday Joe!
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!
Had to laugh at the bullshit speak that UPS (and other similar companies) are “logistics companies”. They are couriers! On their logic, you could say that restaurants are logistics companies, because they facilitate food getting from suppliers to our mouths. Sorry, just a pet hate!
Actually you’re wrong. Joe Bloggs Ltd, running parcels around London on a fleet of 7 scooters. is a courier company. The giants, like DHL, Parcelforce, FedEx etc, are the very essence of logistics firms.
The payloads are incidental; what differentiates them is that each such firm operates their own airlines, shipping lines, multiple vast warehouses, thousands of vehicles and legions of staff simply to ensure that supply chain logistics operate as close to perfectly as possible.
Check out a book called Aerotropolis if you’re interested in learning why your view is perhaps an underestimation.
Why don’t you proof ead, oh sorry, read, your material? It’s constantly error prone and as a result I doubt the quality of everything you write…
If a few literals upset you it is best not to read it. The information is what is important.
Well that’s the point Joe; it’s good info but sometimes hard reading. Is it really that hard to make the experience better?
That depends on how busy I am.
I agree, but this inane topic seems to arise every three or four weeks or so…
I suspect you’re auto-trolling your own blog under various pseudonyms for a laugh!
Joe is human, just like the rest of us, what few errors come through are not exactly earth-shattering, so why make a big thing about it?
Most of us are here for Joe’s insights on the F1 world, not his spelling.
I guess the point is…. this is a free blog. If you want edited proof read material then buy GP+
So why bother reading if you are not happy?
“The decision to stop the float was blamed on the state of the economy, but there is little doubt that the Gribkowsky Affair and the subsequent legal troubles also played a role.”
Facebook’s pump and dump was fresh in everyone’s mind too. Bad time to try the same scam.
Hey Joe, nice to have you back! Great article! Nevermind those who take issue on minor things! It is the quality of the journalism that matters!!! aND YOURS HAS PROVEN IT!!! Waiting for next Sidepodcast!!! Have a great year!!
There are a few less shares to float now since CVC have sold off several lots over the last year. But I still wonder, shares in what? FOM? Delta Topco? Delta Prefco, SLEC? Or my favourite, a new holding company which may hold only non-voting rights and dubious dividend allowances.
But surely Bernie’s magic paper clears him, of all wrongdoing, CVC was apparently willing to pay up to $1.5Bn for the bank’s holding of 71.65% so it look like Bernie saved CVC quite a bit more than was at first evident. Still there are as many loose ends as there are in a barrel of eels.
How come it’s worth 6 times more in 2012, what changed?
How big a deal is this Gribkowsky thing really? I would sink a couple of hundred in to F1 shares, just so I could brag that I am an “F1 Owner”. hehe
But I’m sure that most F1 fans really don’t give a toss if Bernard paid some German bloke a bribe, (I would have assumed that he’s paid quite a number of bribes in his time) As long as the show goes on! The average punter isn’t going to stop watching because Bernie may be a bit of a crook, I know I wouldn’t.
So how much could all these court cases really affect the value of F1, when it’s value really lies in it’s TV ratings?
Great to have you back!
Could all this attention on Ecclestone’s personal affairs and the Gribkowsky matter, be a catalyst for CVC to replace him? This can’t be helping F1′s image, and CVC’s investment as they try to offload it. Not to mention how this will be seen by blue chip sponsors who fund the teams and negative press this all brings to the sport.
I think you will find CVC are also part of the problem and not the solution to Fi woes…..
I would think that would add several more pages of “risk factors” to the existing 19. Sample: “The firm you will be buying will not be managed by the party largely responsible for its huge run-up in value over the past ten years or so. We do, however, have every faith in the new management and that is emphatically NOT the reason we are selling.”