There is sad news from Banbury today with word that the staff at Manor has been told at lunchtime today that they are being made redundant – and that the team will be liquidated because a buyer cannot be found for the team in its current state. It remains to be seen if the assets can be sold quickly, without the old owners being involved.
The key is for the company that holds the F1 entry to avoid becoming legally insolvent. If someone buys this and picks up the assets as well, then the team could revive, but there are a lot of ifs in this scenario.
Whatever happens, the last owners of Manor will not come out of this story well, as there have been several possibilities to sell the team, but they chose not to sell, despite being in no position to run the team properly.
Please think about donating to the Jill Saward Fund, which aims to continue the work of my sister Jill Saward (1965-2017), who campaigned to help rape victims and to reduce the number of rapes in the world.
joeblogsf1 
So Fitzpatrick’s “investment” was a bit fragile then? Sounds like a bit of a chancer to me. Hopefully the staff involved can find other employment.
Very sad. Not how I was hoping this would end. Such a shame for all the guys and girls involved.
A shame – they really looked like they were close to moving up a step or two.
I’d like to know why these people buy such teams in the first place. It’s a hopeless cause without a ridiculous investment. What was the end game? Is it simply to say hay look I have a last place F1 team costing me millions of pounds a month to keep afloat.
That’s not the sort of logic which leads to a person having enough money to buy a team in the first place. It looks like Fitzpatrick has lost at least £30 million from this. That’s an expensive and pretty dull ego trip.
It sucks for the employees but its a pointless entity off the grid.
Sauber will be pleased they can show up with an box car now and get 10th place.
Yeah sucks…but how is it possibile 200 people lost their job without anything (they zigned a 6 montonths notice period contract), no compensation…nothing and Fitzpatrick can do that without any issue and any problems with the law. Where is the uk government? Where is the fia?
Depending how Fitzpatrick and anyone else with him, set up the team investment, it maybe that he hasn’t lost £30 million but has arranged his other businesses a nice tax loss! Businesses do this all the time. The chances that he lost all that money, are in my view, minimal. Still awful for the people working there, and another example if needed, of how unsustainable F1 is as a business model……although it is supposed to be a sport.
Very sad. A good team in many respects.
A good opportunity perhaps, for the new owners to show that they meant what they said about access to the sport.
Agreed, but don’t hold your breath.
You don’t spend $8billion to become a charity. Liberty want an even bigger slice of the action for their shareholders than Bernie could deliver to CVC.
Life is not complicated. Business is business. Corporate BS is just there for window-dressing
I don’t disagree with you, but F1 has recently found it very hard to attract investors because the rewards offered by those who own and control the sport make it a very big risk. Liberty has to be careful that in its pursuit of profit it doesn’t cut off its nose to spite its face – having nearly half the teams struggling to survive cannot be good for the sport and I seem to remember Bernie once saying that nine teams was an absolute minimum.
This looks like the last twist of the knife caused by Bernie’s ridiculous distribution of funds. The remaining 10 teams in F1 will all receive money from FOM and shouldn’t be struggling for cash until whatever plan Ross Brawn has come up with arrives.
I can’t see much chance of another owner turning up when F1 is going though it’s current upheaval, unless he’s got £50 million or more to lose.
Is there any realistic hope of someone buy the team then scrambling a team together for this season?
We will have to see. There are procedural things to be done first. If holding company Just Racing Ltd goes into administration, the administrators can get control and then sell things…
SuperAguri did something like that (from the ruins left behind by Arrows) in record time, but they had significant Honda support…and were seven seconds off the pace initially. It would be a miracle if some sort of Manor resurrection achieved to race in 2017.
Heartbreaking, the loyalty and dedication of the front line staff dumped on yet again. I just can’t put myself in the mindset of someone who turns down an offer for some cash simply to watch it die.
Why is it the folk who want to own race teams seem to be those least qualified.
Yes I know they were tailenders but someone has to be last, that’s in the fundamental DNA of a race.
There is a distressingly large percentage of the population that would prefer control to success.
As always in these situations it is the loyal and hard working staff who suffer. It must be so galling to be so near the season and yet fall almost at the final hurdle.
However, as the current owner appears to have been playing hardball with potential purchasers, now the relevant company that owns the F1 entry has been declared insolvent, what is to prevent any potential buyer coming forward and making a “cheap” offer to the insolvency company ?
From what has been reported the 2017 cars must be close to completion, although whether mandatory safety tests have been completed is doubtful, but if they can start with a modified 2016, if that is even technically achievable, at least they would be on the grid.
Conversely, maybe its better to let this operation fold and as with so many before, be yet another hard taught lesson that minnows rarely survive long in a shark pool.
The company that holds the F1 entry is not insolvent. The subsidiary that ran the team is.
This is what I wrote
Thoughts go out to all those with bills to pay, and no wages to pay them. Yet more bloody minded owners causing crap for innocent people.
Presumably Liberty are not that bothered about Manor failing as it can be blamed on things previous to them.
In a couple of years time when teams are solidly profitable they can then sell an extra franchise and add to their balance sheet.
I would argue that nobody, not even the owners would have tried to save this. The ‘asset’ lies in the entry and what’s happened is all the liabilities have been liquidated away. Cynical but practical. I very much hope the car will be on the grid this year with most staff re-hired. What do you think Joe and who is involved? Mr D for one?
Not quite the case regarding liabilities. The administrators task is to obtain as much cash as possible in order to pay back secured creditors, even though it may only be pennies on the dollar.
Assets will be sold off in order to settle debts, including the most valuable, the F1 entry.
In all likelihood the sale failed because any buyer would expect the seller to settle the old debts, and Fitzpatrick was expecting the buyer to assume payment on the bills.
A lose-lose situation resulting in the inevitable, bankruptcy.
/Assets will be sold off in order to settle debts, including the most valuable, the F1 entry/
F1 entry does not belong to the company under administration and I strongly doubt whether this entry is sellable (transferable) at all.
Seems madness just as Liberty are about to come in and are making all the right noises about making all teams a “Good Business” to be in…
Hi Joe,
Will there be an article in GP+ looking back at the life and times of Manor? Be good to read your overview and insight into the highs and lows.
Rich
It is way too early to know what will be in GP+ in six weeks from now!
If the team had made it to the top 10 this year the entry would be worth something, or even if there was any possibility that it would be in the top 10 in 2017 there could be some value to it – but I would say that is off the cards. So as it is now, it isn’t worth all that much, if anything at all after debts are considered.
Well better to clear out the deadwood now.
It would’ve been idiotic to have last year’s cars with abit of bodge & freckling to be on the grid for this year. They would’ve been lapped by everyone. Comical. Sad that a huge number of staff have lost their jobs. But more than likely they’ll be scooped up by other racing teams.
Feckling
No, I don’t agree. Building an entirely new F1 team these days is crazily expensive, so wiping out old ones and selling them off piecemeal is just dumb
Precisely. That entry licence is potentially worth an absolute fortune for the right people. It’s akin to the golden ticket in Charlie and the chocolate factory; it could destroy you or ruin your life, but you just might get the keys to the kingdom.
One sort of wonder’s, given that Joe has said in the past, there might be a few interested parties for this team. But the current owner wanted more than what these parties are or were prepared to pay.
So like a game of poker, he has lost – so far, but I think he gave the race team “Loans” – so in theory a nice tax break for his other business interest and if someone does come in and want to pick up the pieces then, they might have to clear up the loans to get at the assets.
This could be the game he is playing
I see the entry licence is gold.
In that case perhaps their is a chance for someone will the right wealth and will to control alt delete Manor and bring in a new team. Though one assumes they’ll have to keep the Manor name for a season as that Licence bears the Manor.
Understood Joe 👍and CBR👍
Before the spelling police hit me a mandatory “Their or There” fine.
I mean ✏ “There”✏
Surely selling it for “something” is better than getting “nothing”…
Obviously not because of some clever tax dodge or something similar. Shame on the current owners letting their employees down like this.
Sad day, I like to see a good group of back markers, when they score a point it’s like a win for them, the battle at the back is usually more interesting than the battle at the front.
Call me a commie, but F1 money must be spread towards the bottom, otherwise the show will continue to suck. As is, we know the driver’s champion is one of the first three GP winners of the season. (Check the stats.) And now even easier, since he (and regrettably not “she/he”) will have two fewer obstacles on track. Here’s my unsolicited suggestion to TPTB overlords: give, free of charge, unlimited option tyres to the three teams at the bottom of the championship ranking. And waive the two-compound usage rule for them. And let them use the DRS anywhere they want. They’ll go faster, albeit artificially, and soon they’ll be scoring points, and soon they won’t be at the bottom any longer, and other teams will benefit of the same leg up. A cheap method to help the bottom team stay competitive. And make the show interesting.
It’s not communist, it is logical
Logical, perhaps, but not racing. It would be an artificially manipulated ‘show’.
It already is artificially manipulated.
I would not like to see any superficial benefits given to slower cars (unlimited tyres or unlimited use of DRS) but they are part of the whole thing as much as anybody, and deserve (if not equal then at least) fair slice of the money generated by the sport. Surely, nobody would be interested to see races where only the best and richest compete (e.g. six cars on the grid).
I have been watching F1 since the early 70’s. Attended my first Grand Prix at Brands Hatch in 1982 and have been to almost every British race and some in Europe over the intervening years.
In that time i have witnessed Team Lotus – a multi race and title winning team fall by the wayside as has Brabham.
Another successful team, Tyrrell, changed into BAR/Honda/Brawn and Mercedes. Although, of course, the premises are no longer in a Surrey woodyard…
Other race winners that exist only in our memories are Jordan, Shadow, Wolf amongst others.
Even today, the once mighty Didcot powerhouse – Williams – seems to emulate the historic patterns of behaviour of the withering rather than the forceful team they once were.
So Manor – a perennial back marker outfit since their inception 5 years ago – are on the way out because of some foolish man’s pride. To my mind, the teams not even part of Manor.
In my eyes, Manor is a British motorsport team with successful histories in national motorsport. The F1 team is Virgin? Marussia?Marussia-Manor?
When John Booth and Graeme London walked away, any ties with the teams true heart were lost.
35 years ago, Ferrari, Mclaren, Williams and Renault shared track space with Lotus, Brabham, Tyrrell, Toleman, Arrows, March, Ligier, Osella and Alfa Romeo.
C’est la vie!
Don’t forget that Jordan is now Force India, Minardi is now Toro Rosso, Toleman/Benetton is now Renault (again), and Stewart/Jaguar is Red Bull – and that all except Minardi were former winners. The only teams on the grid which still have the same name as their first entry are Ferrari, Williams, McLaren, Sauber and Haas.
+1.
Off topic but also potentially sad is a Wall Street Journal report that the new Sao Paulo mayor wants to sell off city assets including Interlagos to get rid of corruption in government management and raise funds for the city account. Have any additional insight Joe?
Yes, he wants to sell the circuit
Really sad news. There should be change of rules or plans to curb this every year story and stress of employees. Why is it that fia have 13 vacancies but only give prize money 10 teams.
Manor jus travelled all around the world to end up with nothing. Just the fact of finishing the season should be reason enough to qualify for a share.
If renault did not step in last seaon . There would be no enstone team. If sauber couldnt find an investor, the team wouldve maybe been preparing an LMP1 for the 2017 season. That would leave us with 8 teams for 2017 to watch.
@Saffa – I can’t think of any reason why Mosley didn’t write rules regarding the distribution of money into the FIA contract with Bernie. He also allowed Bernie to delay payments by over a year and refuse payments to teams that changed their names. you can be sure Bernie didn’t allow track owners or television companies to delay their payments to FOM.
Mosley deserves to be blamed for much of the mess that F1 has become. Perhaps looking after his friend was more important than ensuring the teams and their employees were given every opportunity to keep their jobs.
The delayed payment thing is a fallacy
Jonno, FOM does not “delay” payments. They have a payment schedule where money is sent to the teams DURING the following season, to make sure that those team actually compete in the season (this is a requirement to be allegeable to recieve further money).
If it would pay the whole sum up front, that would cause all sorts of issues. Including an oppertunist getting a team through the winter, cash in and disappear into the dawn with all the money.
Teams have been know to ask for, and receive, money in advance o that. But that is (or should be) the exception. FI, Sauber and indeed Lotus/Renault and others have all used this route to get cashflow available earlier.
Other teams do have to approve, and i’d guess FOM would hardly be willing to send Manor money BEFORE any new investors get in and show (i.e. put in money and some guarantees) that they are willing and capable to make sure that the team will be on the grid.
Absolutely gutted. Job number 1 for Liberty is surely to arrange for a more equal revenue distribution model. I hope Ferrari spend their extra $100m wisely as that could have saved 200 jobs by keeping Manor on the road. Thoughts with everyone at the team.
Amen to that. ++
It is the usual prejudice against FERRARI. facts show that 4 teams get historical special payments, FERRARI payment is $70M and not 80/90/100M, FERRARI gets $105M in total, Mercedes and Red BULL GESTS $75m extra, McLaren gets $32M, AND Williams $10m. in realty FERRARI GETS $30M more than Mercedes and Red Bull.
Re the new owners LM, Does anybody think all 5 teams are going to give-up that extra money?.
This is incorrect information
Joe, will gladly stand to be corrected, just saying it is incorrect information does not help.
But, I stand with what I said, namely That the $80M/90M/100M (numbers) being constantly pushed out by some as being given to FERRARI more than is given to the next big earning team, even if said team wins championship is pure prejudice against FERRARI.
AS is the fact that “but never mentioned”, that it is not only FERRARI alone that is paid special historical payment, but also Mercedes, RBR, McLaren and Williams.
I have given all the correct figures in JSBM. The confusing thing is that some of the teams were given signing bonuses.
I am not very familiar with the ins and outs of a business in administration – why did the current owners choose not to sell?
Probably because there was no one to buy. Why that would be the case is the real story here and I am looking into that now.
Ricardo Gelael was in the factory with Lowden and four other ‘investors’ last week. His son Sean was in Banbury this week. They were clearly very serious. Maybe they will pick up the pieces over the weekend and my job will still be there on Tuesday when I go in to pick up my redundancy papers?!!
Dave,
I sure hope so for the sake of you and your colleagues. It’s terrible to see an F1 team forced out for lack of finance. All the best.
Fingers crossed that something can happen to save the team, and you guys don’t lose your jobs after all. We need you on the grid.
Why no buyer? Any serious operator can pickup the valued pieces for less through administration and hopefully still field a team this year, or at worse acquire the license and race next year.
Time is a problem
So what happens to the 27.5 million in prize money from 2016? Do they have to be on the grid in 2017 to claim it, or does it become part of the companies net worth? Or does F1 just get to keep it?
An offer to buy was there, a due diligence uncovered a “big red” for the sale, it was all about the involvement of Manor in the fatal accident of Bianchi (possible liability).
Evidence please…
Haha that’s a red herring! It’s more likely to do with Fitzpatrick still being sued by mr Marussia for using his name in 2015.
Not good to see yet another team disappear. Time was there were so many would-be entrants we had to have a qualifying session to determine who would get into qualifying proper. I suspect running an F1 team was considerably cheaper back then, and sponsorship deals a bit less thin on the ground.
However, Haas has shown that it’s perfectly possible for a new team to enter F1 and not be perpetually last. I’m all in favour of more teams – viable, credible teams; not a B Class, either formally or de facto. The clutch of new teams in who joined in 2010 added little or nothing to F1 and were frankly a bit of an embarrassment. If the demise of the last of them lights a fire under the new ownership and brings about some changes, resulting in its replacement by one or more teams who are actually capable of scoring some points on merit then maybe it’s not such a bad thing.
Haas were able to come in as a pseudo-team under the rules that allow one to farm out a lot of the car. The teams they beat are established ones that would find it hard to follow that model. I think what Force India, a proper constructor, achieve is far more impressive and I hope the Haas way of going racing is eventually banned.
Sad.. Still any chance after this though for 2017?
Although the operating company closed it’s doors the F1 license holder company still stands. it is still not the end of the road, a buyer could still come and buy.
“The failsafe algorithm is designed to override the throttle and cut the engine, but was inhibited by the torque coordinator, which controls the rear brake-by-wire system, Bianchi’s Marussia has a unique design of BBW , which proved to be incompatible with the failsafe settings.
@salvuborg – If that gets to court and wins it’ll be the end of motorsport. F1 cars along with many other classes are prototypes designed to be ‘cutting edge’ racing vehicles. As such they can fail and every driver is well aware of the dangers. We see incidents every year in car races caused by a design or manufacturing failure. Sadly, some drivers are injured in those incidents.
The last thing we need are bloody ambulance chasers in motorsport.
“If that got to court and wins it’ll be the end of motorsport” End of motorsport?, me thinks that’s a shade too bombastic, many a racing driver lost his life at the wheel of a racing car, and the sports is still going on.
A failsafe system is a design so as it is “A FAILSAFE SYSTEM” and it would have been proven as such.
Technical reports involving this same car in two separate accidents pointed to it’s BBW failsafe system being to be incompatible with failsafe settings.
“two separate accidents” and the other?
/“two separate accidents” and the other?/
de Villotta’s, I suppose
@salvuborg – I’m certain I’ve seen you post nonsense elsewhere, attempting to give the impression you have access to the inner workings of more than one F1 team. Perhaps you should be writing for pit poo.
I have not and claim no access to any team. like most on here including you my “sifted” information is from reports I read, but I not only have learned to sift carefully, but also avoid falling into the trap of believing only that of what I would like to hear.
@salvuborg – “sifted” ? You just done a C&P from a click bait, Google rank chasing, vanity site, that publishes makey uppey crap by people who never leave their bedrooms.
I suggest you read their “project” page and watch how frequently their ‘contributers’ have petty rows and disappear.
You says a lot, think a lot of others opinion is crap, don’t answer to what others say, and neither contribute to the discussion.
Were you looking in a mirror when you posted that?
That is enough, you two. This is a blog where we try to be grown-ups.
And what’s that got to do with a potential sale?
POSSIBLE LIABILITY.
The safety report issued by the FIA noted that when he lost control, Bianchi was travelling substantially faster than any other competitor at that point on the circuit. At the time, nobody said much out of respect for Bianchi’s awful situation, but the possibility of lawyers arguing for contributory negligence cannot be dismissed.
Bianchi’s family behaved with great courage and dignity while he was in hospital. I am very surprised that they are now apparently considering court action, it would probably multiply their distress many time over.
Yes the 396 page report also noted that.
The deal offer was put on the table by CGF, CGF has adviced the client to do an extensive due diligence, lawyers involved are same names as Fitzpatrick used when acquiring the team.
These are information known only by owner, cgf and the administrator. Evidence, please…
“extensive due diligence, lawyers involved are same names as Fitzpatrick used when acquiring the team”
And these lawyers did not point out this widely-known fact when doing dilligence for Fitzpatrick?
Do you work at Manor? Where is your evidence in documentation about this or are you just spouting some rubbish you found on the internet and taking it as fact ? The fact is the owner chose not to sell . End of.
I neither heard anybody nor know of anybody that disputes the fact that the owner pulled the plug.
Maybe you should ask the owner
As I can hardly understand the logic of the team owners, I just started wondering: is it possible that Carey might be less restrictive than BE and would allow the team to re-enter at some time in the season and not to lose the whole prize money that team was entitled to?
This assuming that the deal fell because of seller, not because of buyer.
A team can miss 3 races and still keep FIA license. Manor does not need to have 2017 car ready until Russia which is the end of April.
I think you’ve written about two different things at once.
Every team is obliged to be present at each race, otherwise it’s in the breach of FIA regulations and may fined thereon (with exclusion from Championship possible).
‘Missing 3 races’ is a matter of agreement between the team and the commercial rights holder, important in regard of prize monies.
It’s a commercial issue primarily. They commit to being at all the races.