It is very late in the day for a rescue of the old Marussia team. There are any number of hurdles and little hope that the team could do anything this beyond just being there, but the team has earned the money that it can claim and if there is cash to go ahead then F1 should supportive of the effort. Will it be? In real terms, F1 teams tend to be ultimately selfish and if they stand to gain from sharing Marussia’s money between them there is a chance that some will vote against the idea of letting the team fight on. This would be stupid. F1 needs cars and needs to move forward rather than squabbling all the time. The sport must be deemed more important that the individual parts. I see no reason why the FIA or the Formula One group should vote against a revival, and if they do they should expect condemnation. They all have agendas but it is very clear that the sport is pretty broken and needs fixing and not helping the weak is a bad idea.
- Comment
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
joeblogsf1 
You reap what you sow gentlemen.
You reap what you sow…
Hi Joe, is the deal thats on the table workable, do all the creditors need to agree for this to go ahead?
Well said.
Hi Joe,
I can’t get my head around why Gene Haas has not purchased the entry and assests of Marussia and attempted to enter them as Hass in 2015… surely it’s easier to build a team from some sort of a skeleton rather than trying to go from the ground up? Your thoughts?
Would having another Ferrari engine on the grid not be of benefit to Ferrari and their new political leader. An extra puppet waiting for its strings to be pulled. A puppet paying them £20m a year for the privilege. Seems like a no lose opportunity for Ferrari to support Marussia’s re-entry to me.
Whilst I agree, I keep wondering if the sport needs to die before it can be cured. In the grand scheme of things it really makes little difference whether Marussia survives or not, if the powers-that-be don’t have a genuine interest in the common good. Same goes for Haas. Who cares if there’s one new team getting aboard to fill in for several dead ones.
Also what’s up with FIA? I was under the impression that they’d reobtain the commercial rights, if the grid were to fall below 20 cars. Over the winter we’ve suddenly heard stories about how the agreement is actually more complicated and muddled and 20 cars apparently isn’t the lower limit after all. Why in the glorious name of Satan are the FIA not standing up for themselves for once?
It’s times like this that the seriousness of F1 fades away and it becomes meaningless in the big scope of things. My condolences to you Joe and to your family. Please take some time off to grieve. We all appreciate what you do but there are more important things in life.
I’m not so sure about Marussia. They don’t have a new car. They would have to race their last year’s car or make some desparate changes to comply with new regulations. Either way, in 2014 they didn’t catch up with midfield teams but they were reasonably close. Now, after few months of chaos, if they manage to make it to Melbourne, they’re right back there when they started in 2010.
So their only point in racing would be to get hand on the prize money which in itself is okay, but I’m not sure that they are capable to race with other teams. Maybe just trot along. But do we really want that.
As part of the fix, I’d like to see any team that is willing to spend the millions to enter and run F-1 be allowed to show up and run, even if they are 3-4 seconds a lap slower. That means that cars passing them have to negotiate a slow car. So what if someone is lapped 3-4 times in a race. That was the norm, NOT the exception, throughout the history of F-1. F-1 should require all of the major big teams (Red Bull, Mercedes, Ferrari, McLaren) to run in the actual race their 3rd car and it should be driven by the team’s 3rd driver. If a car has been practiced by either driver, then it is fit to race and should be. F-1 could give a financial incentive to allow a local, that country’s driver, to drive it in his home Grand Prix. For example, there always use to be an F-1 car for John Love in South Africa, or Sam Posey in the USA, or David Piper in the UK. If a country is worthy enough of having a Grand Prix there, then someone who is up and coming from that region of the world should be driving.
I agree with you on this, they should be allowed to race, wasn’t the concession already made to allow both the teams to use the 2014 cars this year.
If it’s withdrawn now becuase some teams think they can get extra cash it would be pretty weak.
I fully agree, Joe, and would love to see Marussia return, however unlikely this may be. I fear though that commercial self-interest rather than the common good may prevail with regard to decisions made by others.
Assuming that all worked as a business model for a new investor and they then did run some cars, would that then mean the Organizers can meet their contract obligations to race promoters? Something lurking in the back of my mind says they must field a minimum of 20 per race?
I must admit – and I’m not trying to be negative – that with the state things are in at the moment I would question whether this is the right time to consider making a multi-million, high risk investment in this particular platform. There are just far too many fundamental problems with the F1 business model and structure as it stands now to justify any investment. I don’t see the business case. I’m not against it ; I just don’t see it.
Be interesting to see what transpires.
Joe
Let us hope you are right and they all do act responsibly; with out a decent field it will become a farce
Paulos.
I fear no one is listening Joe.
I am sorry to hear about your father Joe .. Jeremy
As is often the case, you’re spot on.
It would not surprise me if the midfield teams will feel they simply can’t turn down the extra few crumbs that would be on offer with Marussia’s dissolution.
What are the chances of the short one cutting a deal to keep Marussia and the midfield teams happy? Think I know the answer but I’ll pose it nonetheless.
The owners of Force India can’t see passed their own ego’s so no doubt they’ll vote nay along with Redbull, Hopefully Sauber and the rest will vote yeh. Fingers crossed although there are other hurdles to clear.
I was under the impression that the prize money was only redistributed if a team was unable to enter the subsequent season. If the other teams deliberately block a team which has paid its entry fee, that’s not the same thing, surely? I mean, if that worked, the rest of them could get together and grab Ferrari’s money if they wanted. Reductio ad absurdum, I admit, but in theory…
So if the rumours about Manor being refused entry by the other teams are true, and they can get their hands on its money, there’s even more wrong with F1 than I thought. Why would anyone bother to come into the sport if that’s how it treats a team in difficulty? Who knows what future Manor might have with the right investment? Back markers can come good in F1; it just often takes a change of ownership. Jaguar is now Red Bull. Tyrrell (/BAR/Honda/Brawn) is now Mercedes. Even Minardi is now the respectable Toro Rosso. Even the team in question began to show some promise over the last couple of seasons. Yes, they’ll probably spend this season tooling around at the back, but is that any reason to kick them out? It’s not as if there’s a horde of others queuing up to take their place.
They’re not blocking Manor’s entry – they’re blocking the use of the 2014 car, effectively nailing the team.
If I don’t want to lend you my lawnmower, one excuse is as good as another!
That’s good. I like that! 🙂
Joe, if you know the answer, please explain to us.
If Marussia just changes the front of last year’s car but keeps all the rest, including the monocoque, will the car fit into 2015 rules?
Will that not be an easy task to do?
Or do they also need to change other things to be compliant to the new rules?
And crash test the resulting cobbled chassis.Don’t forget
Once again we expect the teams to act in an anti-competitive spirit, and rightly so too. Many outsiders will be judging on how to sport reacts to this to see whether the sport has in fact made any progress or is still just a little boys club.
The overall lack of governance of the sport and overall policing is abysmal. You cannot blame the teams for turning this into at times an arms race, their job is to win. The only difference between this and every other sport is they are allowed to get away with it.
On the Factory and equipment front Joe,
Do we know how much ‘tech’ is still up in Dinnington for them to actually work on the cars / Run the IT required to compete in a race.
On the ‘future’ front, Did Caterham actually ‘Buy’ the Leafield Technology Centre? Theoretically if they only leased it, there is nothing stopping Manor moving in and acquiring that equipment once it becomes clear Caterham won’t make the 2015 starting grid?
I’m sure the ‘heavyweight business individuals’ involved know what they are doing from a logistics and business perspective, it is just the Politics which might see the attempt to get back on the grid fail.
I suppose Jordan King might be the 3rd driver if this gets pulled off????
We satisfied our curiosity with the excellent article from Max Yamabiko:
” The only real differences between a 2014 chassis and a 2015 chassis are the front impact structure, which was changed largely for aesthetic reasons and a larger anti intrusion panel on the side of the monocoque. ”
http://www.crash.net/f1/feature/214443/1/max-yamabiko-what-next-for-marussia.html
But, reading the article, if Marussia/Manor manages to race at Melbourne, probably it will deserve a trophy by itself!
Joe, what about the speculations about Honda, they have any ground?
I would guess that Ferrari and McLaren would be supportive of Manor getting to the grid in 2015. They are owed monies, and the team’s viability makes getting paid more likely.
OK .. a couple of questions then ;
1) Where is the money going to come from should the teams vote to allow Marrussia to survive ? After all … it was the lack of money , poor use of resources etc that put the team [ as well as Lotus/Caterham/Force India who are currently on the edge of the abyss or about to fall over it ] into the position they are in
2) Are we to suddenly make F1 a Socialist sport ? If so .. why ? To perpetuate the existence of teams that in reality had no business entering F1 to begin with ? Does F1 really need mobile ‘ speed bumps’/’sleeping policemen ‘ to fill the ranks ?
3) You claim that the ‘ sport ‘ must take precedence . And from your’s and especially my point of view I’d agree whole heartedly . Problem is F1 hasn’t placed the ‘ sport ‘ of F1 as the number one priority for at least the last five years or so . Favoring pretense [ of being ‘ green ‘ etc ] spectacle , commerce , profit [ for F1 not the teams or the tracks ] scripting [ both results and controversies ] and blatant Smoke & Mirrors . So the question is ; Wouldn’t it take a complete and utter change of mindset/zeitgeist in order for F1 to suddenly place ‘ sport ‘ over commerce and profit on this or any other issue ?
4) Formula One History has been riddled with teams … both major and minor … that have fallen by the wayside since the sports inception . So why should this suddenly be of any concern now .. especially when there are so many other much more dire problems in F1 that are in desperate need of addressing ? Its not like Marrussia’s [ or any of the other teams currently in peril ] existing or not is going to make one bit of difference to anyone and especially the audience numbers [ both live and TV ]
In closing and in my opinion . What F1 needs to do is to ; Rid themselves of all the excess irrelevant and meaningless technologies that are costing the teams so much – Stabilize the rules so cars and motors can have a longer shelf life .. and be evolved rather than constant ground up creations – While allowing genuine innovation rather than promoting the pretense of innovation – Lower ticket prices .. venue costs … TV license costs etc to once again bring F1 to a wider audience thereby generating greater revenue – Eliminating many of the 3rd World – Despotic Regime races that are losing everyone money and costing the teams a fortune to participate in that are in fact benefitting No One .. with the possible exception of a few despots , politicians and Bernie & Co ( which in reality are one of the same mindset )
And not to start ‘ subsidizing ‘ abjectly futile back markers without a prayer of even so much as coming in the top ten …. never mind winning .
‘Sport ‘ … is all about survival of the fittest . The minute we eliminate that … all remaining [ what few there are ] aspects of ‘ sport ‘ will have been removed from F1
I’ll just point out that FOM is “subsidizing” the big teams already. It further tips the scales in favor of those that already have the most money. The sport would be better off if that money was distributed more fairly. Call it socialism if you wish. So be it. The sport is better off with more balance between the haves and the have-nots.
You are right that sport in and of itself is about survival of the fittest. But, that isn’t workable in a professional sport. If one (or a few) teams continue to accrue all the advantages, it ceases to be worth watching. It loses the most compelling aspect of sport – competition – when a sport is allowed, through lack of regulation or unfair distribution of money, to follow the natural outcome of survival of the fittest.
I imagined you standing in front of a full length mirror as you delivered this tirade and when you had finished you smiled and felt very pleased with yourself as you imagined a rapturous applause from a grateful crowd. Only there was no applause, no crowd. Just you. Standing there. Alone. Feeling pleased with yourself.
I think the point is that *if* Manor can get the cars, people and money together to compete in Melbourne, then the other teams should not artificially exclude them just because they can.
About stabilizing the rules. Engines aren’t the best example but I really enjoy that engines play a crucial part in a car again. It just interesting to watch how much different manufacturers have managed to improve their engines compared to last season. I would really like to see it continue that way (e.g engine manufacturers can change 1/5 of the whole engine or whatever the amount of tokens it is each year). And the regulations stay the same for like 5-7 years, then a newer, more modern formula. It would be then be really nice to see how progress has been made over the past 5-7 years.
The problem with engines is that they are a fixed cost to client teams and they don’t really have an option to change that.
Concerning overall costs… If the regulations remained the same or some more expensive areas available for development are banned, the teams would just spend the money elsewhere, on designes that are maybe not so profitable in terms of lap time but that could still give them the edge. So if Ferrari or Mercedes has a lot of money they would spend it on testng 100s of different variations of front wings or something else like that.
The only thing that tighter and more stable regulations would achieve is cars that are closer and closer to each other but as this is a consturctors series where everyone have to build their own car, I don’t think that would be the best way forward.
Sport is about competition within a set of rules that encourages fair play. Darwinism is about the survival of the fittest.
Dear Joe, all
Guitar Slinger – so, if subsidising ‘futile back markers’ is taboo, where do you stand on Ferrari’s subsidies???
Cheers
MarkR
That’s two couples 🙂
They don’t have a good record for helping (see Strategy Group, 2014). My hopes are not up.
According to the Sky News website, former Sainsbury’s boss Justin King is leading the consortium. I thought he was supposed to take over from Bernie E? Is this JK dipping his toe in the water, do you reckon?
He wants to be careful there, he may very well loose his toe!
Can’t help thinking that they will turn up to the first race…grab the money for 9th place in 2014 and then do a runner.
But I live in hope and wish them luck.
Can they roll out an old car with a new nose, get their cash from last year, and then fold?
I believe you posted an article a week or so ago listing all of Marrusia’s debt. Engines and tires were the largest numbers if I remember correctly and we don’t know if the personnel were fully paid at the end. Wouldn’t it be better for F1’s reputation if their prize money was used to settle the debt and then the team officially euthanized rather than let them limp around for another year and accumulate more debt?
Staff were reported to be paid in full before they were claimed redundant.
And I believe that creditors were offered an enough serious solution to go for it, otherwise administration would not be lifted.
Joe, why do you hate Khapytalyzm? LOL
On a serious note, seriously, WTF are these guys thinking? They’re ruining one of the greatest pastimes of all times. Indeed, stupid.
While I’m not a big fan of the (American) National Football League with all its scandals and nonsense, one ought to admire their socialism to keep their sport alive and well. Word is 114.4 million people tuned in for Super Bowl XLIX last Sunday. Yes, 114.4 million people for a sport that essentially only caters to one country, and lemme tell ya, a country that the majority cannot get enough of capitalism. Insane. Among things to keep the sport are the reverse draft system and the revenue sharing. It means that small teams like community-owned Greenbay, Wisconsin Packers can win now and then. Vibrant, awesome, good for them. F1, are you listening?
Sorry to hear of your loss Joe – I’m sure that everyone who has had to deal with a similar situation will want to extend their deepest sympathy. Not about F1, more important than that.
It was my understanding that it was the 2014 engine that could be used only,if the 2014 chassis is deemed illegal for safety reasons then so be it. As for Force India well ill say no more.
Joe – is there anything stopping the team getting a dispensation to run another team’s 2014 chassis? Ie last year’s Ferrari for example?
Images were circulated on the web a while back purporting to be of Marussia’s near-complete 2015 car. Were they genuine? If so, what happened to it?
Force India’s reported reluctance is, how shall we say, ironic?
Would be a real shame if they didn’t make it in some shape or form. Manor seem like a bunch of proper racing folk, whatever the shady Russian investors behind the marussia branding may be.
Joe, it’s not often I disagree with your blog but on this occasion I will have to beg to differ.
If I remember correctly, a contributory factor in the Bianchi accident at Suzuka was the fact that the (mandatory?) system that avoided application of both throttle and brake at the same time was disconnected on the Marussia, I’m guessing the complexity of this system was too expensive to fix and they were already in excess of their credit line with Ferrari.
Therefore they were running a car that failed to conform to the regulations. This seems to have been conveniently overlooked as it was preferable to have those two cars on the grid.
If Marussia were to rock up in Melbourne with a dispensation to run last years cars – can we seriously expect them to have resolved this issue?
I’m all for the battling underdog… but sometimes nature has to take its course…