Carlos Ghosn, speaking at the Frankfurt Motor Show yesterday, said that no decision has yet been made about Renault pulling out of F1 completely, or whether to continue as a team owner. He said that he will soon make a decision. The Renault boss said that the present model as an engine supplier does not work.
“In 2009 Honda, BMW and Toyota all left F1,” he said. “We ourselves hesitated. We stayed out of loyalty and because the name Renault is associated with the history of F1. We have said clearly to the F1 authorities that we are finished as an engine supplier. One thing is certain, we are no longer able to stay with the current configuration: when we win, it is the team that wins; when we lose, it is the fault of the engine manufacturer. We have started to feel that the return on investment is too weeks an engine supplier. Our name was never mentioned when we were winning. Then, with the new engine, the teams that we supply have been pointing fingers at us. Is that fair or not? That is not the question. It is a sport. It is a question of sporting behaviour. And in this kind of sport where the work is a joint effort, we win together and we lose together.”
The messages are clear as daylight. Red Bull can go and find another supplier. And if F1 wants Renault to stay on running a team, the Formula One group needs to recognise (financially, of course) the contributions made over the years by the French firm.
joeblogsf1 
I know it’s bully v. bully as usual, but it’s frankly difficult to argue with Ghosn’s points, especially when Red Bull have painted such a huge target on their own back. I have a funny feeling Ghosn’s bluff will be called, if only because neither Bernie nor CVC feel they can ever be seen to lose or even compromise. But it would be pyrrhic victory at best…
Very likely, but strategically this would be a good battle for BerniCVC to lose – they would appear to care for the sport by keeping one of the (intermittently) historical, names in F1. Contrary to FOM tactics (guidelines?), good PR can be just as effective as bad PR.
And the cost is peanuts for the people involved given the potential for goodwill as you say and also spicing up the show
Carlos Ghosn is not bluffing; as a Brazilian as well, I know him…..but time will tell.
Time for Red Bull owners (DM and HM) drop their arrogance down
Hardly bully vs bully. I don’t recall Renault slamming RBR. The person who should loose the most from this is Christian Horner for not speaking truth to power and telling marko et al to shut up. Horner will regret not being more of a voice of reason. What team would want to employ someone who cant pull a team together!
About time that Renault spoke openly about what many of us feel about their situation. Sadly the potential is there for the F1 group to dishonour their (Renault’s) sporting contributions completely, satisfying their own greed and the sport lose a wonderful manufacturer.
Time to dust off all those V10s and V12 engines from the 90’s. The great sound may get people interested and stop them falling asleep.
Not sure that many people care about the sound so much as the racinig. That era’s sound was often a high pitched zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz leading to 40 winks when a certain MSC was at his peak.
People keep moaning about the sound but the only droning I hear is those droning on about V8s/V10s/V12s. Times have changed.
I think quite a lot of people never listened to the old turbos, for example, so I agree with you. They were never screamers. I like the new formula – a few fans need to calm down.
I find the most boring sound in F1 is that of those who still complain about the engine noise a year and a half after they were introduced. Get over it, please.
Don´t be ridiculous.
I agree 100% with him, however I do think Renault confused the issue by calling their engines Infinity on the cars and cam covers.
That was not Renault. It was Nissan. There is a difference
If Ghosn is speaking with his Renault cap on, he has no one to blame except the Ghosn who was wearing the Nissan/Infiniti cap. The confusion was their own doing.
There may be a difference, but Carlos Ghosn is still Chairman & CEO of both. Replace “Renault” with his name in Chris R’s comment and I think he has a point.
Nissan and Renault both own each other though. They are basically a group.
C’mon Danilo. Don’t be shy and hide behind the Hippo….
Yes. Especially on a site you’ve never shied from disparaging.
He is the CEO of the alliance that controls both though, and Infinity did get $1 billion of exposure.
Hardly Phil R – you sound like an ad man!
Renault and Nissan have been in the Alliance since 1999, indeed Renault owns/owned 30-odd percent of Nissan.
It was a curious decison, the naming Infiniti thing. You’ve long said that Renault resented it and its good to see that it’s now been made public – but Renault has always been on the engine covers of the Red Bulls. I suppose Infiniti is more prominent on the side pods in recent seasons, and with the branding in the team name, though.
Also, Carlos Ghosn’s Wikipedia page says “In 2008, Ghosn was named Chairman, President, and CEO of Nissan. In 2009 he was named Chairman and CEO of Renault” so is he still both of those? If so, I like how he can change hats at will 🙂
Surely Renault could have had some say or veto on this being on the car as it is them that is linked to Nissan not Red Bull. You can’t blame Red Bull if they accept a few quid extra to get Infiniti on the car.
Having said that I do feel for Renault, they have got virtually nothing from their success with Red Bull, only coverage of their current failure
Why was Nissan allowed to make that decision at all? If Renault agreed in any way they are culpable to some degree.
I thought Renault owned Nissan.
Why did Renault allow it? No other engine manufacturer has ever allowed themselves to be placed in a position like that.
Anyway, I think Carlos is perfectly fair in his assessment. The way bernie negotiated the historical payments don’t make any sense and Renault deserves a big annual payout given their time in the sport relative to teams like Redbull and Mercedes.
No, there is not a difference. Carlos Ghosn is CEO of both Renault and Nissan, and a decision such as that, which impacts both companies, was assuredly made by Carlos Ghosn himself. I’ve worked with both organizations; I know how it works.
Nobody called the engines Infinity.
You’re right, Chris R. Ghosn was and is Chairman and CEO of the Renault-Nissan alliance. Allowing a state of affairs to arise in which the Renault brand was not writ (far) larger on the side of the Red Bull cars than Nissan’s niche luxury brand was an error of judgement however you care to slice and dice it.
Time for Ferrari to play hardball with Horner!
Unless they going to give RBR a lower spec engine it seems a strange decision by Ferrari given that they may well be beaten on a regular basis by the customer team
Right, I don’t understand Ferrari’s motivation either. I can only assume Ferrari will want some RBR IP in return. Other wise, as you say, why do Ferrari want to entertain the high risk of a customer beating them. I also don’t understand any marketing tie up with iconic luxury sports cars and a nasty chav drink.
I cannot imagine any sensible argument against his position.
Grand Prix racing huh, no French race, no French driver and potentially no long time iconic French Engine manufacturer. Not friggin good.
Hopefully Bernard can see through the haze this weekend as the sport cannot afford to lose these guys.
Roman Grosjean is French.
Franco-Swiss actually
Charles Pic was the most recent French driver but would seem a victim of the money game, it seems to produce a revolving door of talent with a very small time window to prove themselves.
Charles Pic could never be described a victim of money. His family has a fleet of 6,000 trucks. Poor, they are not.
This could be just the thing to make CVC realize they need to put some skin back in the game.
That is not going to happen.
I do not understand why Renault are complaining about not being publicly included in Red Bull’s past successes and being blasted in their current failures.
We all know Renault’s power was NOT the principle reason Red Bull dominated in 2010 – 2014.
They spurned the opportunity to share in any of the success that their power units may have been when they sold their factory team in 2010. By 2012 they were an engine supplier only with minimal visual presence on any of the teams they supplied.
That Renault (as a brand) did not capitalise on the good years was their own marketing failure.You yourself have stated in the past that Renault have never been good at leveraging their F1 success – a limited edition Megane or Clio here and there, that’s about it. This has been a problem since the Alonso years.
After RBR’s breakout season (with Renault power) what does Renault-Nissan do? They put their Infiniti brand as Red Bull’s No.1 (or should that be No.2?) sponsor.
RBR have been great for that brand. I daresay that without Sebastian Vettel (and to a lesser extend DC), no-one outside of middle class USA would know of its existence.
You cannot have it both ways. The Scuderia never made Felipe Massa do hot laps in an Alfa Mito and in the same breath rave about Ferrari’s supreme power…
That is Renault-Nissan’s management failure, while Mr Ghosn was CEO.
As for 2014-15’s performance, Renault (in their capacity as an engine supplier) have been an abject failure.
Their power units are significantly more expensive, significantly less powerful, and significantly less reliable than any of its competitors.
Any improvement has been over-promised and under-delivered on, as what Daniel Ricciardo alluded to this week (I follow his public comments closely and he rarely says anything negative).
Further, they’ve not used any of their engine tokens this season in an attempt to reduce the gulf in performance.
Now Renault want to become a constructor again!
Yes Red Bull’s petulance with respect to Renault’s power units reflect very poorly on them, but fundamentally their criticism is accurate. I understand a lot of people at Renault are working hard but so is everyone else. F1 is probably the ultimate results business.
Therefore I think it is appropriate for FOM/CVC to treat their demand for Historical payments with care.
I disagree
Look..nobody is happy about the power unit supply situation in F1. why have it? its expensive, its draining manufacturers, Honda has had it. We have to make it so difficult ? Its a race..the cars line up and go..fastest wins
Not quite. It’s also about refinement, pushing limits. Merc had problems, now they don’t. Ferrari aren’t far off now, Renault obviously not as bad as Red Bull would have everyone to believe. Honda (they say) will get better. Your last sentence though is correct.
Nobody has come out of this mess looking anything close to good, but Horner and his two bosses have soon a shocking lack of class in particular.
shown rather.
/We all know Renault’s power was NOT the principle reason Red Bull dominated in 2010 – 2014/
We all know Red Bull would NOT dominate without engine maps perfectly tuned by Renault.
I agree with this you can argue that RBR should have handled their responses more maturely, however Renault’s abject failure to deliver a competive power supply for two years in a row is pretty poor.
Business is business the amount of money being paid to Renault to supply a competitive product, they need to deliver. I bet if you were paying the money out of your pocket peoples attitude would be different
By way of perspective, everybody in the U.S. knows what Infiniti is (if that’s your point). Renaults are not sold here.
My point is you cannot complain that one manufacturer you head up didn’t get due credit for building a successful power unit (I will concede that Renault obviously had a huge impact on the EBD era) when:
A) Your customer is paying for your engine and development; and
B) Your customer is a constructor fundamentally competing to market their own product
Knowing this, you elect to:
C) Not sponsor the car as an engine manufacturer
D) But sign off on a huge sponsorship deal with the constructor for another manufacturer under your control – creating a plethora of new PR opportunities.
Renault let go of its works team to limit its costs to equal its PU supply revenues with minimal sponsorship costs. This was all well and good when Red Bull were winning and Lotus were a feel good story as it didn’t cost them in PR.
Now they’ve been failing as an engine supplier for some time and they have failed to convince its biggest customer that they are remotely close to improving the performance differential. They lost two customers in one season. Red Bull have gone public about their dissatisfaction and it is costing Renault more than ever in PR.
Ghosn knows full well that their current situation is of their own doing. Buying back its old team is the perfect PR remedy…
“We all know Renault’s power was NOT the principle reason Red Bull dominated in 2010 – 2014.” (sic!)
Two things: we DO know that that domination could not have happened without a very strong Renault engine. Aero cannot win championships alone. And second, since when were RBR dominant in 2014?
I disagree. The introduction of their blown diffuser was huge and, it later year (and probably more importantly) Renault were recognised as having the best engine mapping.
Their ability to use engine mapping to control torque was repeatedly stated as an innovation, and once banned, they were still recognised as having the most driveable engine due to the mappings.
You can have the best aero in the world but if the car is releasing the power in a less than optimal way (see Honda) it doesn’t make an ounce of difference.
Adrian Newey would disagree about the Renault engines. They designed the mapping and integrated it all for the hot and cold blown diffuser ideas during those winning years. Clearly there were many factors in the Red Bull dominance – but Renault’s design work was at the heart of it.
In my hometown cafetaria, they had a sign: if you’re satisfied, tell others. if not, tell us.
I fully agree poor branding by Renault..this whole lets blame RBR gets a bit long in the tooth
Joe, isn’t the fact that the engines were homologated responsible for Renault not receiving due credit for its achievements with Red Bull Racing? Because back in the Mansell-Prost-Schumacher-Hill-Villeneuve era I believe Renault was getting due credit for its championship winning efforts with Williams and Benetton.
I understand that it was Singapore-gate and economy woes that led Renault to quit running the Enstone team and become an engine manufacturer, but now they want to go back to such as arrangement. Let’s hope that if they succeed with their plan they manage to stay in the sport for some time as a team so that they’ll truly be considered a historic team. Throughout its history Renault, as a constructor, has been a coming-and-going company.
Why would homologation prevent Renault from receiving credit for their achievement?
Homologation would not prevent Red Bull from mentioning the “fantastic Renault engine in the back” on the podium/in the press conferences.
I agree with the principle of Ghosn’s comments, especially in respect of Red Bull’s behaviour, but equally don’t have a lot of sympathy for Renault. They chose not to be a full manufacturer team, they chose to not fully promote their successes with Red Bull (or indeed with their own team) and they allowed a partner brand to muddy the waters in respect of their identity with Red Bull. For all their history and success in F1, Renault is not a brand synonymous with the sport, nor is it a brand with a prestigious or exciting image that makes it especially attractive to F1 (such as Mercedes or Red Bull). As much as historically it has been successful in F1, it has also been historically mediocre in the real world of making and selling cars. There’s simply nothing about sweetening Renault’s deal that makes sense for CVC – other than keeping a ‘big team’ running, but if rumours are to be believed then Mr. Ruhan has a ‘plan b’ up his sleeve anyway, plus if Manor are here to stay then A.N.other team is ‘expendable’ in Bernie’s eyes. I doubt many fans want it to happen, but the reality is that Lotus and Renault won’t get the sort of favours they seem to need.
Joe – in a scenario where Renault walks and Lotus as a team survive, would Ferrari and/or Honda step in to supply engines?
Maybe Carlos should read the past press releases and look at some interviews. When they were winning they have been mentioned many times. When they recovered after failures they were mentioned as the expert helpful factory partner. Even when their alternators and pistons failed in 2012.
The talk about 2009 is unverifiable padding on his own back.
And lets be honest. Up until today, their handling of the issues with this PU has been lame. It’s like they went into the new engine era like they did not really want to. Lack of funding, lack of expertise, lack of planning. They would not even have been able to run at Melbourne in 2014 if RBR hadn’t modified their software.
And now they want to run a factory team on the cheap. What’s the goal of that? It is not like they will magically make a Mercedes beating engine next year. When Honda uses its tokens right, even Honda might pass them performance wise.
If you are the partner of a team, which is owned by a huge brand itself, you should not be surprised that the team is eager to highlight its own brand.
Red Bull is in F1 to promote Red Bull, not Renault. If you partner with a private team like Williams, things would be different. They did not hesitate to put BMW in the foreground. Also McLaren gave Mercedes-Benz its fare share of the glory, and would be willing to do that with Honda, if only there were any glory.
I hope Renault stays, though. It would be a real loss for F1.
Go Renault – he’s absolutely right
Perhaps this will teach Messrs Horner and Marko about partnership and not shooting one of your own feet when the going gets tough……
I cannot see how anyone can disagree with what Carlos Ghosn has said. The brand image that RBR have shown has always been confusing, with Red Bull on the Torro Rosso in Red Bull colours and Infiniti on the parent car in purple. (those two team names could more suitably, logically, be reversed in application to the teams.
I cannot see how Renault can possibly justify being in F1 unless it costs them nothing. The company is not splashing about knee deep in spare cash.
So if Bernie and co remain intransigent it looks like the end of Renault in F1.
Oh and Lotus of course!
Carlos Ghosn is a man who brought huge cost savings to the industry through “global purchasing”, he and a few others, 20 odd years ago, were founders of what at the time was a supplier’s nightmare.
Does anyone buy any other Renault than chic shopping cars or 7-seat family wagons (and then regret it from the moment that the warranty runs out)?
Yes, Renault won the first Grand Prix and pioneered like billy-ho, its turbos in the Seventies were pretty special and, thanks to Williams, Enstone and latterly Red Bull, its racing engines have been graced by some of the most competitive cars of the last few eras.
But it doesn’t bear much relation to the brand. For all Renault’s achievements, if people want a prestige or performance they shop elsewhere.
If I were a Renault man I’d cut my losses and start work on a 2017-spec Clio WRC for a fraction of the cost, offset further by the existing programme for customer cars in regional and national series.
The TV audience may be smaller but the live attendance and online presence across the rally world makes a gigantic sum and is much more relevant to Renault’s bread-and-butter products than F1.
Considering that Ghosn has never come across as big fan of F1, this really sounds like a good-bye from Renault.
I’m sure Renault is not blameless for their unsuccessful marketing exploits during their winning days, but it is difficult not to agree with Ghosn on the win-together-lose-together attitude.
RBR doesn’t come out of the imminent divorce smelling of roses. And since they have only 1 option left for engine supply (technically is it still called an “option”?), they are not in a great negotiating position when they sit together with Ferrari to agree a new engine deal.
I see on the BBC that Eddie Jordan is stating with utmost confidence (as EJ does) that VW-Audi will buy RBR and be in F1 by 2018, after 2-3 years of Ferrari power.
Hmm, not yet convinced about that.
VAG did not hire Stefano Domenicali just to write a feasibility report and then disappear…
Maybe yes,maybe no. They wouldn’t be the first to pay a huge sum on an F1 study that went nowhere.
As a daft decision by a big car company, it’s not quite up there with BMW/Talbot, I grant you.
I must say I actually do not care as much for Renault as I care for Lotus and its great team.
Mr. Ghosn is no saint, but of course he is right to try getting some dough from CVC. The really nice (but unrealistic) move from CVC would be to make sure small teams survive, and still have a chance to win.
I can understand Ghosn feeling a little miffed that Renault seemingly got little recognition when Red Bull were winning, and the finger pointed at them when things went wrong. However I am struggling to recall any ad campaign or publicity of any kind tying their F1 success to their core business. I would imagine questions need to asked internally about why Renault have been so anonymous in this regard.
If Renault leave the sport, Red Bull, and I suppose F1 itself, will have a lot of thinking to do.
Hopefully they end up buying the Lotus team and stay as a manufacturer/constructor.
But, it does raise a question, when you have a big and long-standing entrant as both a constructor and engine supplier in it’s time, raising such concerns…where is the attraction for other big manufacturers to enter the sport?!
I agree with Ghosn about winning and losing TOGETHER but at the same time it was, surely, incumbant upon Renault and their PR department to cock-a-doodle-do about their world championships with Red Bull.
I remember back in the day, it was felt that a company entering racing as a sponsor should expect to spend at least the same amount on PR as they had on the sponsorship itself. I don’t think there is anything different today even though Renault are not a sponsor per se.
The blown diffuser of the RB was 100% the result of a good aero design with the crazy engine modes the Renault had for off-throttle ignition/gas generation. Renault should get credit where credit is due- they were a major part of the RB domination years.
As for now- I cannot for the life of me understand why Renault would want to be involved in F1. No French GP, tenuous German GP, Monza potentially on the outs, ticket prices that are beyond the means of most fans. Maybe they have a major dealership in Baku?
They have no hope of catching Merc. They are doing the right thing to try to get money and pick up Lotus on the cheap, but CVC/BE like their money too much. As much as they do deserve I would be very surprised if they get it. CVC/BE don’t recognize ANYTHING that went in to creating what F1 is- they only recognize how to liquidate the asset.
Red Bull are a nightmare, when Williams had much success in the 90’s it was always Williams-Renault and it was very much win together lose together, all Red Bull have done since 2014 is whine and even when they won the titles 4 seasons on the trot who got the glory ? Vettel and Newey never Renault.
Love the black cars but bring Renault F1 back to Oxfordshire where it belongs! All that’s left is Alonso/Grosjean and happy days 😀
Renault was a huge artisan of their domination with the blown exhaust technology and all the credit has gone to Mr Newey. RedBull has lost their only well educated figure in Sebastian Vettel. I honestly understand why Renault didn’t invested enough in that technology, just for them. True Renault didn’t do a good enough job, especially this year, but they’ll probably end-up even more frustrated with an old spec Ferrari PU with no hope of better days.
Can’t help thinking it would be quite amusing if Ferrari decided not to supply RBR as well …
+1
Joe , Romain Grosjean said in the Driver’s Press Conference that he has made his decision about where he will be driving next season . I think this means he’s off to Haas for 2016 then with a view to possibly replacing Kimi at Ferrari 2017. Do you agree with me Joe?
Yes
Great to have consensus. Especially for Romain.
Joe, when was the last time an F1 team got sold for a decent sum of money? Renault sold “Enstone” for free did they not, just a promise to keep the team running, same with Jaguar to Red Bull?
Brawn to Mercedes comes to mind, and before that EJ selling to Midland? Must make you wonder if you’re wanting to buy a team that the exit strategies are pretty limited.
Force India I would guess
I wonder if Bernie is going to work some of his Machiavellian magic to get Renault to stay. It would be healthy to have more than 2 engine suppliers in F1 and with the supposed new regs for nxt season- more aggressive looks. flatter tires, they could field a very good mid-level car. The kids at Torro Rosso are getting some note worthy results.
Joe, what does your behind the scenes contacts say about FOM, $ and whether there is the want to have Renault stay in the game?
Is Formula E becoming more and more important to Renault? Too important to remain in Formula 1?
Yes and yes.
Dear Joe, all
As much as I consider RBR’s attacks on Renault abhorrent, Ghosn’s quoted statements here do have the smell of burning flesh and martyrdom by self immolation.
‘We stayed out of loyalty for F1’… Wellll, after the Singapore travesty, and, the reputational damage, they couldn’t get rid of their race team fast enough. Now he complains that the engine supplier model doesn’t work.
As to not getting due credit- ‘our name was never mentioned when we were winning’… Well, if you really there out of loyalty, if that was truly your motivation, then why complain about lack of publicity?? Red Bull paid for the service, didn’t they?
Conversely, if you are in it for publicity, then get off your butt and do something to capitalise on it (I am referring to 2010-13 here). Why should RBR go out of their way to give Renault a publicity leg up??
‘We have started to feel that the return on investment is too weak as an engine supplier’ . Really? I would imagine that there are numerous teams which have found that return on investment is too weak as a Renault customer. Or, they would still have a Renault PU behind their driver.
I haven’t seen a script of the actual speech, does Carlos bother to take responsibility for the bloody obvious- that they have made a gross stuff up of producing a competitive PU.
Playing the victim does their image no favours.
Cheers
MarkR
So what they should do is buy Lotus and keep the Mercedes engines, that way when they win it’s Renault and if they don’t it’s Mercedes’ fault! Plus they don’t need to spend on engines development!
Seriously though how does buying a team solve their problems? Without customers to spread the engine development costs, plus less mileage because of less cars, surely this would put them in a much tougher situation?
“We win together and we lose together” How long does Renault and Carlos Ghosn think that Red Bull must accept their rubbish without consequences. Renault have brought this mess on themselves. They playing games with Lotus and F1 in general. As you have said Joe, buying Lotus with state money is not going to go down well in France. Sadly I think Lotus has also been sucking the Renault dummy.
im not sure why the french govt would worry about a few million investment, its never stopped them before, why should it now? could there be another reason renault hasnt bought lotus yet? keeping their powder dry to buy out red bull…
reports are suggesting red bull has already signed with ferrari, well torro rosso may have, but ferrari doesnt provide current spec engines to customers, never have never will, this is why red bull are gonna quit a the end of the year.
according to mark webber, mateschitz hasnt decided yet, aparently its stil 50/50, but he possibly still thinks ferrari will give him parity if he pays enough. when he wises up he will pull the plug. meanwhile renault can stall lotus incase they can buy red bull and get aidrian newey et al into the bargain. and in
the meantime they have all the leverage to squeeze a bit more cash out of mr e.
or maybe not, maybe ferrari will let red bull beat them when mercedes wont
Joe, so here it is:
COURT 15
Before MR JUSTICE BIRSS
Friday, 18 September 2015
Not before 12 o’clock
GENERAL LIST
Part Heard
5528/2015 In the matter of Lotus F1 Team Ltd
Between: The Commissioners for HMRC v Lotus F1 Team Ltd
Do you have any news on what might happen?
They could buy another team, work to develop their engines, build up a winning team, hire a top line driver or two, spend a billion or so to get there, then sit back and watch the Renault name bask in the glorious headlines, like…”Lewis defeats Nico to win World Championship” 😉
Sportsmanship is when one has their unquestionable best; not the current Renault RBR situation.
The strange thing is, Renault didn’t even do that much when they won the world championship with Alonso. What Ghosn says is true, but I think allowing Red Bull to put Infinity sponsorship on the cars, generally poor PR, these are things he should have done better. I think Red Bull’s success had A LOT to do with Renault engine mappings and such stuff. It’s sad they could get so much right, and mess up the easier stuff.
How will all this affect Torro Rosso given that they to have a Renault deal but are (too?) closely linked with Red Bull..?
I know Renault have said they will honor the contract but just imagine the what will happen if next year a Renault TR out races a RB Ferrari……..
Also re recognition of their achievements..were teams not originally entered as Williams Renault, Mclaren Mercedes etc.. the engine part seems to have been dropped now..
Eddie Jordan is saying on the BBC that Volkswagen buyout of Redbull is happening with Ferrari engines being used until 2018…
Why would Ferrari wanted to do that?
‘Cos Bernie will make it happen.
Money talks, and Ferrari likes money and can probably influence their PU’s output in the RB.
My thought exactly
For the good of F1? F1 cannot afford to lose 2 more teams next year.
I see a lot of criticism for the infifniti branding , but as any marketing man will tell you the USA market is huge and , as already stated by somebody here , Infifniti means something there whereas renault is not even sold !
renault tried hard even when only an engine supplier by advertising their products as…world champions …. crass , but not as bad as citroen advertising their C5 as …a german car made in france !
but , as a fellow french resident , I am sure joe would agree that France is a world of it’s own
Absolutely
Totally off topic.. but interesting none the less and means that VW isn’t going to have so much money to spend on F1 engines one would think.. [Link removed]
Yes, it is big mess for VW, with a price tag of potentially $18 billion