There has been lots of speculation about who might replace Robert Kubica – and I have been responsible for some of it. But there are limits to what can be taken seriously. One can not discount Nick Heidfeld, Vitantonio Liuzzi and Bruno Senna because Eric Boullier mentioned their names. Kimi Raikkonen is worth a mention, but frankly I see now way that Lotus Renault GP can afford to pay the rallying Finn. It makes very little sense to buy Nico Hulkenberg out of his Force India contract as he has the same level of experience as Bruno Senna and while he is obviously a decent talent, one pole position on changeable day when he was helped out with tyre choices might have given him a rather more high-faluting reputation than he deserves. If he was so damned good, surely Williams would have kept him…
Pedro de la Rosa got a chance last year with Sauber and was replaced mid-season so one cannot really imagine him being a serious candidate for the Renault, particularly now that testing is so limited.
The suggestion that Williams F1 is going to sell Rubens Barrichello to Lotus Renault GP is one that I find simply astonishing. Why would a team that is still hungry for success sell its major asset in order to put itself in the uncomfortable position in which Lotus Renault GP currently finds itself? The suggestion is that Williams needs money because there are not many stickers on the car. Don’t be misled by that. The PDVSA stickers are not that big but from what I hear the deal is a monster, with the firm paying $36 million a year for five years. With TV rights money and the other sponsors, Williams has a full budget for the year ahead. One can always have a bigger budget, of course, but selling your primary assets to add to the kitty would be nothing short of desperation. And ignore all ill-informed reports that money from the flotation is going into the team, this is very clearly not the case at all.
One of the joys of public companies is that all the major details have to be published…
Does Rubens want to leave Williams? I don’t suppose he does. I have not heard that the new car is a complete pig and Rubens is always very positive about a car with potential. Would the Renault be better? Right now, it is hard to say, but one might suppose given recent years that this really ought to be the case. However, Rubens likes Williams and they like him. He is comfortable with the team, he has a team-mate who will not cause him too much trouble. It all sounds like a good idea to stay where he is, unless there is a winning car available – and we have to see whether the Renault is THAT good. Yes, it went well in the first test, but what does that prove?
Could Lotus Renault GP afford him? That is another interesting question. There are lots of rumours kicking around about the team’s budget, since Renault decided to grab a parachute at the end of 2009 and leap.
I don’t know the answer, but I do know that the piecemeal sponsorships at the end of last year looked suspiciously like a team that was scrambling to find the money. In addition the bank sponsorships on the sidepods last year looked more like loan arrangements than sponsorships and the Renault sidepods this year have been handed over to Genii Business Exchange, which is team owner Gérard Lopez’s Big Idea. I absolutely sure that Genii is not paying for the space and the cynics in F1 are saying that the name is there because it is better than having nothing at all. And one must not forget that despite the Lotus branding there is a legal action going on about who has the right to use the Lotus name in F1.
What happens if Group Lotus loses? Will the car company give Genii money without any branding? Given that Lotus has been throwing money around so that the likes of Kevin Kalkhoven in Indycar and Nicolas Todt in GP2 will paint their cars up in Lotus colours, the idea of Lotus handing over a big cheque without getting any branding is not really logical.
Unless, of course, the organisation did the obvious thing and gave the money to Team Lotus…
I am happy to hear differently, but my feeling is that there is no money to be wasted on buying driver contracts.
So, all in all, the idea of Barrichello to Lotus Renault GP does not make an awful lot of sense.
joeblogsf1 
I csnt understand why Dario Franccitti’s name isnt in the frame, he was at Jerez today.
I’m glad someone else shares my view on Hulkenberg. Even as a fan of his, it makes no sense for Renault to pick him up
Hadn’t heard the Rubens story but yeah, barmy. But what’s even more barmy is those suggesting Webber – because of course Mark is going to abandon a car that is likely to be winning races and possibly championships just for the sake of being team leader in a weaker team with a slower car for potentially as little as half a season…
And therefore… it is very plausible…
“…surely Williams would have kept him…”
Wouldn’t be the first time Team Willy let a talented driver go.
I know there’s always a lot of back room discussion going on – but seriously, Renault have come out and said, Nick Heidfeld gets the job as long as he doesn’t totally humiliate himself. Senna is too inexperienced to develop the car and Kimi is off rallying and wouldn’t come back.
I know team principals have to hide their motives and deals and rarely tell the whole truth, but they’ve announced the test role and are doing a seat fitting for the guy. Unless he drives it into a wall, he’s got the job.
AuraF1,
In F1 it is wise never to count chickens before the announcement is made…
Heidfeld makes the most sense to me. Of the drivers available he has the most experience with Pirelli and given that the car was designed around Robert their previous partnership at BMW may be valid as they develop the car.
Hi Joe,
Would I be correct in assuming the 5-year passel of money from PDVSA is attached to Maldonado’s presence in the team for the next *half-decade*?
This would be logical but sometimes F1 deals work in funny ways and it would be understandable for Williams to avoid being tied down to an unknown quantity.
One of the joys of public companies is that all the major details have to be published…
———
I’m so much looking forward to this! Sadly I don’t know what is exactly covered by the German laws, but it should be enough for us mortals to have a look at the real costs of F1.
I’m very much looking forward to spending many hours into this. It will be a fascinating reading and I can’t believe I’m using this word when speaking about accounting!
About Rubens, obviously such rumours aren’t helping Williams right now. His contract is part of their financial valuation. It’s very unlikely that they’re so stupid to sell him, because they need money just when they decided to float!? Absolutely no chance.
Such rumours aren’t good for F1, because if Williams’ attempt at Frankfurt is successful, that would change the image of F1 teams and show that they can be profitable organizations. Obviously this would bring fresh investments into the sport and help it adapt to the new “sustainable” world & convert them into more efficient businesses.
F1 fans are great at considering one part of an argument and drawing a conclusion that fits that while ignoring the parts that are screaming that the whole argument makes no sense whatever.
The situation with Rubens going to Renault is very similar to the argument a few years ago that had Alonso going to Ferrari and Raikkonen going to Renault. Ferrari wanted Alonso and he wanted to go there so it all made sense. The fact that it required Kimi to decide to give up a competitive drive to spend a couple of seasons in a Renault was ignored.
Losing Rubens would not make Williams share issue look too attractive. If it happened they might as well shut up shop in Grove.
Completely agree Joe. Although I will never refer to LRGP, I will, however, happily talk about Proton Renault.
I hadn’t heard that one before. Fully agree, that the notion of Renault putting enough money on the table to buy Rubens sounds really far fetched. That is aside from the curious thought of Williams actually wanting to sell or Rubens to jump ship.
I agree that they have the best hope in a few years of getting back towards a climbing line since getting Rubens, and Frank clearly wants to have sporting succes. Otherwise he would gone for the cheaper route of dropping Rubens (who gets payed) and kept the Hülk and took on Maldonado anyhow.
If he was so damned good, surely Williams would have kept him…?
Let’s be very clear on this, Williams let go of Hulk cause they lost 43% of sponsors, for the same reasons they went public by listing their company at Frankfurt Stock Exchange. They clearly needed Pastor’s blessings (read $$$$) to save themselves from embarrassment. Hulk had a decent year, maybe nothing special minus the pole… but reasonable rookie year in my books. but him losing the seat to Pastor was purely due to Williams need for $$$.
Also in my books only Nick or Tonio can replace Kubica. rest is all wishlist of people, but LRGP needs experienced driver who can help on car’s development & also make very few mistakes on the track… for me Nick is on Pole position for this. the rest will only get if he does very poorly in the test.
Hi Joe.
You write, “What happens if Group Lotus loses? Will the car company give Genii money without any branding?”
Everything I’ve seen so far has been about either:
– Group trying to stop 1Malaysia calling themselves “Lotus”; or
– 1Malaysia demanding compensation for having their licence from Group terminated.
In other words, it’s all been about whether 1Malyasia are allowed to call themselves “Lotus”. I’ve not seen ANYTHING questioning Group Lotus’ right to brand any racecar as “Lotus”.
If 1Malaysia win all the lawsuits on all counts, it is conceivable that the court will require Group to reinstate their licence, although I suspect that compensation would be much more likely. But even then I haven’t seen anything suggesting that the licence was explicitly exclusive (even if both parties assumed it would be), or that 1Malaysia is seeking any legal remedy which would stop Group from doing any or all of sponsoring RF1, buying RF1, or renaming RF1 as “Lotus”. (Of course, 1Malaysia currently have a veto on the last through F1’s own structures, but it’s hard to see a team in which Renault have no shareholding in and no formal relationship with keeping its current name indefinitely, even if it ends up being renamed GeniiF1).
What have I missed?
I heard somewhere that Ralf Schumacher, Eddie Irvine and Allan McNish are also being considered. Whaddya think, Joe?
malcolm
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
The other question might be why a team that is hungry for success consider Rubens to be such its major asset? In F1 terms he’s been around since dinosaurs roamed the earth and is in the twilight of a career in which he’s played second-fiddle for the overwhelming majority of his time.
Williams has waved a cheery farewell to drivers who have converted its engineering brilliance into world championships – without a penny back in return. If Rubens is worth a few quid then it must have a deal to retain The Hulk who, while being no faster, isn’t any slower either and has potential to grow.
On that basis shipping Rubens off to Renault might well make some sense.
Very good point re: what happens if Group Lotus loses, I was wondering why everyone was focused on TF losing the suit but not the other way around. It also seems like one of the bigger stickers last year, HP, is no longer to be found… oh well maybe Japan Rags is a monster deal ..
Everything you said about Rubens i agree, at least about this year. But, what you think about next year, supposing that Lotus Renault be the World Champion (Drivers or Constructors) in 2011 and, with a good money, invite Rubens to be Kubica’s partner to 2012? His contract with Williams overs this year, right?
Heidfeld WDC 2011 – you heard it here first (rofl)!!!
Joe, you need a separate post category for these “no, don’t be stupid” rumors. Call it “whoa, slow down cowboy!” or “rumors caught in the sandtrap” or something like that.
No doubt Bruno has been reading the small print in his contract again and pointing out that it says third driver, and he is there for the exact situation that now exists, but like Liuzzi has found that waving it about and shouting has little effect on people that regard contracts strictly as a one way thing. Incidentally it’s about time Liuzzi took his dispute to the FIA unless of course he is being paid to keep quiet.
It seems like we hear so much about the scourge of paid drivers, and what a shame that the some of the most promising drivers can’t find a place on the grid. Yet when you have a situation such as Renault’s (er, Group Lotus’?) and look at it in the cold light of day as you have done, well, maybe there are aren’t so very many after all. I suppose we need to take Bouillier at face value as we have no other way of evaluating things.
Sorry to mention yet another name: Too bad Sutil is locked down. I have always hoped to see him in top notch equipment.
Surprised they couldn’t get Seb Loeb 🙂
Steady on Joe, have another glass of red! I’m beginning to think that the Lotus position(!) is going to end in tears big time. Renault ie Genii are in trouble, for the siple reason that they are money pewople and there ain’t a lot of proper money about. I’m sure that this means ‘Renault’ is about debt and if Lotus isn’t in the same boat, then I’m going to to be very surprised. Still say that Senna should be given a proper go. H
“Unless, of course, the organisation did the obvious thing and gave the money to Team Lotus…”
I honestly think we’re more likely to find a jolly snowman dancing in the fires of hell than for that to happen.
I think Raikkonen would cost Renault roughly what he cost Ferrari, somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 million dollars.
If the 2011 Renault is a revolutionary technical marvel and a true title contender, then Kimi would be worth every penny. In fact, there’s no available alternative.
If, on the other hand, the car has no realistic chance at the title, then it would seem to be money very poorly spent.
All of which probably doesn’t matter a whit. For as Joe’s analysis makes rather obvious, Renault doesn’t seem to have anywhere near enough cash to make an enticing offer to the former world champion. Unless of course, the secret money men behind the Renault / Louts / Genii decide to open their purses very wide.
Nick Heidfeld seems the obvious choice. For too many years too many people have marked the German down over the past 10 years, but there are many reasons why Lotus Renault should take him.
Firstly, his experience. He may have been in Formula One a long time, but the likes of Damon Hill and Nigel Mansell won their titles at around the same age or slightly older – don’t forget Mark Webber, who is, what 34; He seemed to have a good run at the championship last season..
Secondly, don’t forget how highly rated he WAS. McLaren-Mercedes planned to take him as the natural replacement for Mika Hakkinen before Kimi Raikkonen burst on the scene in 2001. Perhaps now they wish they had taken Heidfeld…who didn’t exactly fare too badly in points and grid positions against the over-hyped Finn. We also need to look back at his showings against Kubica himself. Do we forget that he actually let the Pole through in Canada to score his first Grand Prix. Then there’s the way he beat Mark Webber at Monaco when they were at Williams together…
Thirdly, like Jenson Button he’s someone, perhaps a late starter, who will grab an opportunity. Nick has the experience of managing the Pirelli tyres during his brief stint as the tyre company’s test driver before he was called up for the latter races of 2010 by Sauber-BMW. He also has a tendency of keep out of trouble and score points mercilessly, remember his stunning running that was only ended by Luizzi at Singapore 2009? If the likes of Webber-Vettel/Alonso-Massa/Hamilton-Button are fighting each other/taking each other off/ next season someone like Nick could come through to score.
Finally, there’s something about the black and gold Lotus-Renault that I like. The second race I ever watched live on BBCTV was the Detroit Grand Prix of ’86 won by Senna. It’s lived with me ever since and I think they look stunning. I would love to see them back at the front – they are based in the UK – and who care about the row between them and the ‘other Lotus’ team.
Hi Joe,
Love the blog and this is another fantastic update. I agree that I cannot see Rubens leaving Williams! Keep up the good work.
All the best
Talking about things that have happened which seem shocking do you know anything about Pat Symonds being hired by virgin in a consultancy role!!! What does the paddock think to this and also the FIA?? Would love your opinion Joe
Thanks and love the blog
K x
ill make it simple, great idea to have Rubens at lotus renault, hes pissed off with cosworth / williams, the second driver HAS to be Senna, lets repeat the glory days again, 2011 will be a fantastic year if this comes to fruition.
No comment
I thought the court case was about Team Lotus use of the name Team Lotus, not Group Lotus using the Lotus name on the Geni Renaults (or whatever u want to call them).
Either way I think its a no brainer for Group Lotus…They are getting FREE sponsorship on another teams’ cars! Any man on the street thinks “lotus” is “lotus cars”…………………………………..right?
Jonathan,
I don’t agree.
This may be a totally random comment but thinking about the pool of drivers that are neither too journeyman such as Heidfeld, or too inexperienced, such as Renault (/ Lotus whatever) ‘s reserve drivers – whatever happened to Justin Wilson?
“one pole position on changeable day when he was helped out with tyre choices might have given him a rather more high-faluting reputation than he deserves”
come on joe… nico stunned everyone on that day..
williams got rid of him only because of the money
Joe
Thats exactly what i have been thinking why would any team sell a driver only to end up in the position Renault find themselves in right now.
I also think most of the speculation comes from those who don’t know much but have to fill a newspaper.
James
The full spin doctor mode kicks in making sense of everything, truth is the Kubica accident blind sided everyone & it’s damage control time. Genii (let’s agree on that name for the team) were probably counting on some stellar 2011 results from Kubica in a decent car to “Galvanize” them into a Top Team worthy of a title sponsor. Things are different know & it’s time to cobble together the best last minute plan, hopes of a stellar season have been replaced with maintaining respectability ala Heidfeld.
Joe,
Why is it that the Kubica rallying accident has gotten such a sympathetic response from within the paddock, struck quite a “Human” nerve? Personally, I like Weber’s comment about denying the drivers the racing competition. Let’s send that Boy some cheer, it will be magnificent when not if he gets back in an F1 car and kicks some Arse! The kid woke up in hospital to face a nightmare reality. Time for the Joe Saward “Fan” get well soon card, bring it on whether JA has one or not, different readership & it’s about our man Kubice!
If Group Lotus lose the Court action then perhaps Tony Fernandes might let them use the Team Lotus brand under licence…
(A glib, frivolous thought on my part obviously)
Can Group Lotus not still use their Lotus name in F1 even if they lose the case to stop Fernandez using the Team Lotus name? Am I missing something?
Also, mid-way through last season Renault went to Bernie asking for a cash advance of their TV money when their cash-flow was getting tight. Hardly an encouraging sign.
Boullier himself has said as long as heidfeld shows up and does a decent job the seat is his. (Read possible old fashioned shootout between him and senna)
But as far as I can see there isn’t really any speculation assuming nick does a decent job.
Don’t replacing with Bruno Senna, you can put anyone in this car.
Hello Toleman fan. There are two sets of court cases started, but after the first hearing, the judge decided to bring both together in the next hearing in March.
The one started first is about Team Lotus being after Group Lotus for unproperly quitting the licence agreement with 1Malaysia.
The second is about Fernandez wanting the court to confirm Team Lotus rights to the name bound to that team since its start in the 1960s through its sale by the Chapmans in 94 and the demise as an active F1 team, being governed by D. Hunt ever since.
Whent Team Lotus wins the second one, they have a very good basis to keep Group Lotus from referring to “their” racing legacy, using the lotus Logo in F1 as well etc., effectively meaning the Group would indeed have to get a licence from Fernandez to do the sponsorship as it currently is.
@joesaward:
malcolm
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
LOL!!! Too true Joe, the same thing went through my mind.
I think Heidfeld is the safest option – I know Luizzi seems to have underperformed, but he hasn’t got the proven F1 results record that Nick has.
lynnduffy,
True, but they don’t necessarily want a bloke who always finishes second. Rather than endless speculation, back and forth, let us just wait and see what happens. That is now the logical thing to do.
Nick, is looking good with the car. Joe, if he is competitive (shot at the title) and Robert is available do you think Petrov be sidelined?
Steve Selasky…
Whoah! Slow down. RK is still on and off the operating table. NH did good but if the car is THAT good any experienced driver might do as well. The team will decide what happens based on a number of different criteria. They might listen to what Robert has to say about drivers. Perhaps they will still test someone else. Who knows?
As much as I respect what you write Joe, I’m in for questioning your words on Hulk.you yourself admitted Hulk’s departure from Williams was well cash-related and it’s absolutly impossible to think they didn’t want to keep him cause of his performance.
Anyway, for the seat, I believe Nick has the best chance and is the logical choice too.he’s consistant, he’s experienced, still fast and he’s free.
Regards,
Mehryar
Mehryar,
I am simply relating thoughts that were expressed to me by team insiders who did not wish to be quoted on the record. Now, they obviously would say that if they were giving away an asset because someone else turned up with a pile of cash, but they said it nonetheless… The belief is that NH did OK, but was not THAT special, aside from that one pole position.
Why do so many people, including Eddie Jordan on BBC, call Liuzzi “Luizzi”? You would never call someone named Lee Uzi “Lou Easy”, now would you?
Hey Joe,
You don’t agree with my opinion that Group Lotus are getting free advertising from “Team Lotus”, or that for the man on the street “Lotus” means road cars?..or both?
I’ve been an obsessive F1 fan for 25 years (not typical at all man on the street) and even for me “Lotus” means one thing…road cars. As a racing team, Team Lotus sadly died in 1995.
Not arguing, just debating.
Whats the score with the court case? Is it just about “Team Lotus” use of the name?
Jonathan,
We are all different. For me Lotus means F1 just as much (or in fact more) than it means road cars. As to whether Team Lotus is dead, I suspect that the law disagrees with you. Nonetheless your choice of 1995 was interesting. If you count the Pacific GP deal as being Lotus, then why argue about Tony Fernandes?
Nick did a great job today. Exactly as was expected. He’s no more a “journeyman” than Mark Webber was in 2008.
Jonathan,
The Fat Lady is yet to sing…
Hey Dev,
I think you should do some research before posting, According to statements made about the filing Williams have been profitable for the last few years and have 25 million euros in cash.
Even if the deal with Venezuela isn’t as big as rumoured they can afford to spend some of their cash reserves while they have a year to look for another partner.
Hi Joe,
I entirely agree on 99% of occasions it’d be silly to guess. But in this case Renault genii are panicking and will take heidfeld unless he embarrases himself. They will so desperately want to maximise development time with a stable line up given petrovs inexperience I think heidfeld, once given the shot, would essentially have to crash the car on the opening lap to lose the drive.
I make no assumption on heidfelds capability by the way. Just basing this on how investors will demand action.
After topping the timesheets yesterday Heidfeld couldn’t have done much more. His technical feedback was good also apparently. If he dosen’t get the ride now I’ll be amazed. Must be hard for Kubica sitting in his hospital bed watching possibly the best car he’s had so far in F1 topping the times in someone elses hands. His motivation to get back quickly will be higher than ever.
James Allen appears to have found out that Hulk does have a get-out from his FIndia contract if a race seat opens up, but apparently they want someone with experiance.
I guess it’s Heidfeld’s seat to lose, then.
“True, but they don’t necessarily want a bloke who always finishes second. ”
The team does not exactly have options of any driver with a race win that does not have either a) a contract to drive F1 this season or b) actually wants to drive a Renault F1 car.
Remember 2008 Robert and Nick got the BMW Sauber team to lead (briefly) the constructor’s championship in a less competitive car than McLaren and Ferrari. A string of second place can do your championship a lot of good.
To me it is all early days – last year the Sauber looked really good in testing but at the start of the season it was disasterous. 2011 will most likely be Red Bull leading with McLaren and Ferrari contesting second spot. I expect Mercedes to be in fourth spot. Renault (or Lotus Renault) need to aim to get that fourth spot without the benefit of the key driver.
What they need in testing is driver to help analyse the changes that 2011 – more especially to understand the tyres. With Petrov being slow and crashing (and then blaming the KERS) they need their other driver to rack up test miles without damaging the car too much and incurring downtime.
During 2010 Liuzzi was something of crash-test dummy (admittedly not ALL his fault) but if he brings the same luck to a new team his usefullness is somewhat compromised.
Rich,
Now there is a thought? Is an unlucky driver always unlucky or does his luck change one day and suddenly everything works in his favour?
I can never make up my mind on that. For example, people always say that Jean-Pierre Jarier was unlucky but he walked unhurt from a helicopter crash after dropping 800 ft into the ground… I’d say that was lucky!
Jonathan:
Sorry, what has happened since 2008 to make that not the case?
Finishing 4th in points in by far and away THE BEST CAR?
Admitting in Abu Dhabi he couldn’t get a time as good as Vettel and other drivers?
Grrreat success!
‘Senna’ is not good enough, btw. Very annoying driver who always refuses to get out the way when being lapped.
@BasCB:
You wrote:
“When[t] Team Lotus wins the second one, they have a very good basis to keep Group Lotus from referring to “their” racing legacy, using the lotus Logo in F1 as well etc., effectively meaning the Group would indeed have to get a licence from Fernandez to do the sponsorship as it currently is.”
I agree with you about “racing legacy”, maybe about the logo (IIRC Fernandez didn’t use that last year), but don’t see how that “effectively means” what you say.
Didn’t Fernandez race last year under a licence from Lotus Cars? Isn’t that what the first lawsuit is about, that he wants it reinstated?
So if you’re right, Fernandez has to say to Lotus Cars in court, “last year I colluded with you in breaching a third party’s rights, but now I’ve bought out that third party, so I ‘m suing you to stop you doing the exact same thing with RF1”.
I can’t help thinking that that isn’t a great case to be making, even if it’s legally coherent. And, I haven’t heard anything from Fernandez that says he has that intention. Have you? Or do you think he’s holding that card close to his chest?
Joe –
Several of us have made this same point already, and I’m interested that you’ve not replied directly, even though you’ve obviously thought all this through.
That suggests to me that you’re probably right.
But I would really like to know why you think this / how you know / or at least if you know more than you can let on at the moment. Thanks.
toleman fan,
Fernandes did not use the Team Lotus branding, nor the Team Lotus name. Thus what did he do wrong? Hunt did not challenge him. It is now different as Fernandes is challenging Group Lotus’s right to race in F1 and its right to terminate the licence – as I understand it.
Joe:
Everyone else seems to think Heidfeld has the RF1 seat sown up, you don’t.
Same question as above really, in a different context. Yes, sure, it’s not final, anything can happen, etc., but that’s always true. You don’t insist on applying Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to everything. You’re being very mysterious atm. Have you been talking to Isabel? (I always thought she was Pat S, but that’s another story 😉 ).
I noticed that Brundle says he’d chose the Hulk (and that Kimi wouldn’t be fit enough) , and that Blundell says it should be PDLR, because he knows the Pirellis best. Most everyone else seems to think Heidfeld is the right choice.
What are you hearing that isn’t being picked up elsewhere, who is still a candidate, and what would you do if it was your call?
Thanks. I’m really enjoying the way you’re leading us on on this one (well, that’s what it seems like to me)
toleman fan,
People tend to jump to conclusions. That’s all.
Joe,
No I didn’t consider Pacific as being any kind of Lotus team. I guess I have my years mixed up, was it 1994 when the Lotus team went under?
Amazing how the years pass so quickly.
Still do not have an answer to the Lotus court case question. Is it just a matter of usage of the “Team Lotus” name, or is the ” Lotus ” naming rights under examination too?
F1addicted,
I don’t consider Mark Webber a “journeyman”. OK perhaps he is not totally top draw in the Vettel, Hamilton, Alonso, (old) Schumi sense, but he is better than a Trulli, Button or Kovalainen.
There are so many drivers on the grid who have not had a fair crack in a winning car..
As Joe said “The fat lady is yet to sing”.
It’s going to be fascinating.
Joe,
re: Lotus vs. Lotus, please refer to the hearing transcript. The judge clearly says that it is about Group Lotus not wanting Team Lotus to use it and claiming it’s illegal for Fernandes to use it, not the other way around, the lawyers confirm it.
Joe, something you said actually made me think for a moment
“If you count the Pacific GP deal as being Lotus, then why argue about Tony Fernandes?”
The thing is, I am not actually arguing for or against Tony Fernandes (I don’t really care), but my personal opinion is that it’s absolutely absurd to “buy” an extinct F1 team’s name. There is no relevance whatsoever other than them being based in Norfolk.
They could just as easily be called Brabham, Vanwall, Hesketh, Tyrrell, or a dozen others. It would be just as absurd.
I’m sure Tony Fernandes spent good money to use the Lotus name and that is why he is in the courts fighting this, quite rightly.
Lotus Racing is inexorably linked to Colin Chapman and a rich F1 history, for that I can understand your linking the name with F1 rather than road cars, fully understandable.
When I think Lotus F1, I see Senna in the JPS and Camel liveried cars, not this 2011 absurdity.
Jonathan,
See my post today
Joe,
You have made me feel young LOL. I just turned 40 only a few weeks ago, so to be bundled with the “younger generation” is refreshing.I will dye my hair tonight and get ready for some who’s your father (seeing as it’s VDay LOL).
Seriously though, Thanks for the great editorial. It put all things Lotus into perspective from all angles without any spin, and reminded me of what Colin Chapman created.
I wonder whether he would approve of what is going on with his dear Lotus now?