I was seeking a word to use to describe the arguments being put forward by F1 teams about why there shouldn’t be an 11th or 12th entry and “poppycock” leapt to mind.
The word means nonsense, or at least that is the polite version. I was amused to discover that the word first appeared in the United States where, so the story goes, Dutch immigrants used the term “pappekak”, which was said to mean “soft dung”. Dutch is not a language that is easy to master. I can say “Godverdomme” with a vaguely convincing accent and I am one of the few Englishmen able to pronounce Ijmuiden correctly, but Google Translate’s “Detect Language” function explained that “pappekak” is actually Norwegian for “cardboard cake”. I know northern folk can eat some funny things, but that takes the biscuit, as the saying goes…
Anyway, “poppycock” is a good word for what is being whispered into the ears of news-starved F1 journalists, in the hope they will write stories suggesting that the sport does not need any more teams – and that most of the current entrants are opposed to the idea of allowing General Motors to join the party.
I will admit that I didn’t have much confidence in the whole Andretti concept, but when Michael turned up with General Motors some doffing of hats is required. GM is America. It’s huge and powerful and a brilliant catch for F1. OK, Ford would have been just as good, but clearly Michael has better connections with GM.
During the announcement GM president Mark Reuss made it very clear that the firm intends to build its own Cadillac engines as soon as it can do (this may not be a good idea, by the way, but that is what he said). He did not say that the most likely way to achieve this quickly is to use intellectual property acquired from another manufacturer… but that is logical.
The accusation that F1 teams are whispering is that GM will only be branding engines built by someone else… and this would be poor show. No real F1 team would ever do that…
Um… Let’s take a waltz through the history books to see if any F1 team ever competed pretending to be something it was not. This sort of thing has been going on since the beginning of motor racing and there are a lot of examples of things being rebranded to help manufacturers who need a shortcut. If you want a good example where better to start than Ferrari which used the Lancia F1 car when their own was not very good, back in the mid-1950s. In the early 1990s Ferrari was so desperate to be successful that it bought Honda V12 IP after the Japanese firm departed F1.
Mercedes? Always a shining example of integrity. Well, yes, but they did enter F1 hiding behind a Sauber-branded V10 built by Ilmor, which Mercedes did not control for another 10 years. And when Merc entered as a factory team, they bought the old Honda team.
More recently Red Bull Racing bought Honda engine IP in order to start its own power unit programme…
Haas and AlphaTauri buy pretty much everything they are allowed to buy, while Aston Martin has a track record of cleverly producing cars that look just like those of its rivals – without it being illegal.
Car companies which race in Formula 1 but do not use their own engines are three-a-penny at the moment: Sauber, McLaren and Aston Martin would be best to keep shtum because they are all trying to play in the big game, but cannot afford to pay for their own F1 engines. OK, Sauber is being swallowed up by Audi now, but it has been pretending to be Alfa Romeo in recent years…
So arguments that GM should not be allowed to play are nothing short of poppycock. And one might even reach for the word “hypocritical”, although it isn’t that because the truth is that the teams are simply scratching around for arguments to try to justify keeping new rivals out and must all be well aware that the arguments are hopeless.
The main reason the teams are whining is because they fear they might lose out financially. Some of them obviously worry that they might drop further down F1’s greasy pole if big new players appear… so they are trying to protect themselves. That’s all. If they argued that extra teams make logistics more difficult, one might accept that but any new manufacturer is good for the sport, if only because they spend a pile of money promoting racing, which benefits everyone.
Manufacturers quite often screw up on track (ask Toyota). The problem is usually the same. Bosses who do not know the sport arrive, thinking it will be easy and that F1 teams don’t know what they are doing… and quite often the car industry execs leave without their trousers around their ankles having been spanked by the experts.
Making a fuss and trying to stop a major automobile manufacturer from entering the sport is pretty pathetic, particularly when the manufacturer is American and F1’s future growth relies heavily on the US market. Smart thinking would be to say: “Bring it on! Let’s all generate more cash”. That’s what they will be thinking in Denver (home of Liberty Media). If I was an F1 team boss who needs an engine, I’d be off to Detroit to talk to Ford or Chrysler because now GM is in, the others might be convinced…
In any case, competitors being allowed to stop a new player entering a game is a subject that has the potential to make lawyers a lot of money. One can imagine attorneys from Sioux, Grabbett and Runn LLC throwing around words like “cartel” and “collusion” and in the end GM has nothing to lose if they take down F1, because that would benefit other forms of racing, in which they are also involved.
122 thoughts on “Poppycock!”
How many pit lane garages are at most F1 tracks? Are there any tracks with only 20 garages and if there are, is there room to extend these? IMHO that would be the only valid reason to limit the entry to 10 teams of 2 cars each. Otherwise totally agree with you Joe, GM/Andretti should have been welcomed by the other teams, if they had the interests of F1 as a whole, at heart, rather than their own narrow financial interests.
Bu why can’t they buy existing team?Does one expand Premiership in order to accommodate another wealthy Saudi prince or Russian oligarch? I would guess that Hass or Williams could be for sale if the price is good. Even Alpine doesn’t look to enthusiastic about F1 at the moment. Why not going the Audi way?
There aren’t any other teams for sale. Andretti tried to buy Sauber, but failed. Alpine is not for sale. Hass is not for sale. Williams is not for sale.
Mr Andretti several times tried and failed to buy an existing entry and has apparently now concluded that it’s cheaper to try and force a new entry while the anti-dilution fee is still only $200 million.
He has the money. The problem at Sauber was that they demanded lots of stupid clauses in the contract, so Michael walked.
When you’re trying to acquire a good with a very limited supply (in this case 10 in the known universe) having the money is necessary but not sufficient.
Hi Joe, can you share your view about whether other teams would be for sale, such as those suggested in a previous comment (Haas, Williams, Alpine…) My understanding has always been that it can only be a question of price, even taking into account the expectation for substantial increase in value going forward meaning that it is likely to be expensive.
Not at the moment
There’s a well-known proverb in business: Everything has a price, even the things that are not for sale.
And yet Audi succeeded.
They gave the Swede a chance to get out one day looking clever…
There is promotion and relegation on a multi league system. I could buy Barnet in the UK and get them to the Premier League without upsetting the settled size of each league, motor sport used to have a similar possibility but not it’s nigh on impossible financially. Jordan came up the ranks, as did Stewart.
The limit in F1 is how many cars a track can safely hold for a race. Your argument would mean 2 additional games or two weeks extension to an already too long season with the FA Cup, Europe and League Cup.
Joe – the rules for a new team joining are contractually set out in the Concorde Agreement, which runs until 2025. If Andretti plan to join in 2026, that will fall under the next Concorde Agreement. The next iteration CA is likely to have a far higher Anti-Dilution Fund than the current $200m.
Let’s see if Andretti can perform this time, having failed to perform with Sauber. So far GM is just the paint job – not an investor, engineer or engine supplier.
You obviously were not involved in the announcement call…
You obviously believed all the PR guff then. Best not to take things at face value.
Really? You should be a journalist, or just sit around all day stating the obvious.
If you have ever helped set up a garage in Monaco you will scratch your head as to how another team would fit in as it’s full to bursting now !!
True, but rejecting GM because of garage space is plain silly. Better to drop a team of no value!
Or drop Monaco? Let’s not pretend that conversation is originating because of some terrible Americans…
Now that is an interesting concept. Dropping a team. Has that happened before?
In the USA, the NFL has had expansion where new teams are added. While F1 and the NFL are not apples-to-apples, the NFL is probably the most profitable sporting enterprise in the world. So, if the NFL can expand and make the finances/logistics work, it would seem that F1 could do it.
We used to have qualifying heats on Friday (I think) to limit the number actually able to enter the race. So the slower teams often got DNQ after their name in the results. They had to be within a certain time of the fastest car. (Joe will know)
However most teams that leave drop themselves through financial woes.
There was a time when there were circa 39 cars and 13 of them went against each other with the top 4 going through from pre-qualifying. The 9 unsuccessful cars would leave before the weekend even really started and I think do not even reflect as having been there at all. The 30 cars would then qualify for 26 places and the slowest 4 would DNQ, at the half way point of the season those who had to pre-qualify based on how they were doing in the championship. In 1991 Jordan had to pre-qualify for their first 8 or so races and at half season were in the fastest 26 with Brabham dropping down and just over a year later, out of the sport all together
There were some, the Life W12 of Gary Brabham, who has had an odd post career was one that springs to mind of never even being close to getting out of pre-qualifying. AGS when it morphed into Andrea Moda was another. I think Perry McCarthy had about 3 laps, or 1 flyer, if any at all when he tried his luck with Andrea Moda
Yet there were more teams just a few years ago. Also, Monaco is always a terrible race, would be better to drop it from the calendar anyway.
There are 12 garages at monaco currently.
” but when Michael turned up with General Motors some doffing of hats is required.”
Michael didn’t bring GM, though. He brought a Cadillac sticker.
It’s a big sticker
There are big stickers on the Sauber, too. Doesn’t mean the stickering party is in Formula 1, though.
Aston Martin, McLaren…
Do you know if Mr Stroll pitched the Aston Martin name as part of getting his magical new F1 entry in 2018?
And the will obviously be contributing a large number of greenbacks for that sticker, as they will be doing the engine and drive train, unless we going fully green and going to have cogs and peddles
Green? Cogs? Pedals? Don’t or you’ll get Joe going about the Tour de France again! 😉
GM are not “doing the engine and drive train.” They are well and truly merely a sticker on the car.
And if Mr Andretti understood that what he needed to succeed in his quest for an F1 entry was an OEM being associated with the bid, who knows what kind of deal he was willing to cut GM to get their sticker.
So I should believe you rather than Mark Reuss. You must therefore be Mary Barra…
The quote I’ve seen from Mr Reuss is the following:
“We have a signed agreement with a power unit supplier to begin with. And then, as we move forward, we bring a lot of our expertise to create things for the future as well.”
Would you mind sharing any more substantive quotes provided by GM / Mr Reuss?
The GM board has experience approving funding for Corvettes and LMP cars, not Formula One, and certainly not Formula One engine programs.
I know the inner (upper) workings of GM extremely well. This commitment to an F1 project will last until the company is under any significant financial stress for whatever reason, e.g., severe economic downturn, regulatory forced sales of unprofitable EVs, whatever. At that point GM will pull the plug, just like when Bill Ford fired Jacques Nasser and got rid of Stewart F1 d.b.a. “Jaguar”
Meanwhile, I agree that F1 needs additional (credible) teams. The franchise system is not structured correctly if existing franchisees can prevent new franchises.
That is true of every manufacturer
Indeed, which is why F1’s focus on automobile OEMs as team owners is not a good long term strategy, in my view, particularly as OEMs move to a drivetrain technology that is not attractive to most F1 fans.
Yet they have been involved in IndyCar since 2012, I believe. Every manufacturer could leave in a heartbeat as well. If that is what helps Andretti get going then more power to him and if GM/Cadillac pull the plug, will there not be other PU sources available? If the Andretti team is viable and has the money you damn well know there will be a PU supplier ready to take said money.
I fail to understand the hostility people have towards adding another team. No one wants to see the mishaps from 2010 but that was a completely different scenario and was poorly botched by BE, MM, et. al.
Andretti’s plan seems completely different and much better organized. Only time will tell if it is successful or not but why the fan hostility towards his effort?
This is about the F1 entry, which is any team’s most valuable asset.
Few doubt Mr Andretti’s ability to put together a minimum viable product with his customer Renault PU, it’s just that what that would add to the sport pales compared to the value Mr Andretti and his investors would unlock the moment they were granted an F1 entry.
I was incredulous that the teams still had a veto after the introduction of the dilution payment.Obviously that’s what it took for Liberty to make the deal but it’s pathetic.
Is there any way the FIA can accept entries for 2026 on and then present that list to Liberty and the teams as a done deal?
The current 10 will never accept any extra teams because their short term thinking will only be concerned with their current value and revenue reducing.
They will if they think will look badly on them
lol the team don’t care what people think
Do you think you can just assemble an ace new football team – then rock up and join the Premier League?
Perhaps you did not notice but this isn’t soccer…
You can buy Manchester City in the third tier, make huge investment and get them promoted to the Premier League and continue buying their way to success.
With the cost cap, the initial issue for Andretti would be building a car from scratch where the existing teams have huge databases of empirical design to avoid blind alleys and then to race on an even footing while only being allowed to develop with a finite cost cap. It’s not impossible, but it’s tough.
Exactly. Perhaps we should let Andretti in to give Williams someone to joust with at the back.
Sioux, Grabbett and Runn LLC will enjoy that. The sport allows 12 teams, the question to be addressed is do they tick the boxes on what a new team must look like.
….hello Joe !
As usual, a brilliant description of the situation.
It’s always a pleasure to read you.
Best regards from Uruguay!
Yes, it’s very obvious that the other teams just do not want another team to join and are scratching around for any excuse.
However, it’s also obvious that it would take years of very expensive investment and experience for a brand new team and engine to become competitive. GM is a huge bureaucracy and I doubt that they understand the difficulty of the challenge. I genuinely hope Andretti make it to the grid and do well, but the idea of GM running an F1 engine program just sounds like a recipe for setting fire to a billion dollars.
“Yes, it’s very obvious that the other teams just do not want another team to join and are scratching around for any excuse.”
Who knows which other interested parties Formula 1 is in negotiations with.
I’d say reactions would differ significantly if they got an agreement with an actual OEM rather than the guy who couldn’t come to terms with several existing teams and is now insisting on getting a new entry for his customer team.
Politics in F1 can be fascinating but also frustrating. As in the “real” world there is lots of background briefing by the various interested parties.
My uninformed opinion would be that adding new manufacturers who are genuinely able to contribute would be good for the spectacle and good for business. Growing the size of the audience, bringing in new sponsors, etc will only increase the overall value of F1 so surely everyone will benefit? The dilution fee should cover any initial loss to the other teams until the growth is sufficient.
I’m not 100% sure that concentrating solely on the American market is the wisest choice but perhaps there is more going on behind the scenes. Joe, what do you think on Panthera’s operation?
No one is focussing solely on the US. It’s the priority.
Oké Joe, you can pronounce Ijmuiden, but being Dutch, I know that the correct way of writing is: IJmuiden. Long story short. Long time ago it was Ymuiden, as it was Johan Cruyff and not Cruijff.
Didn’t know that!
The Regs define how many competitors are allowed. (As also do they races)
However the integrity of the Regs nowadays, is besmirched by constant alteration to suit the commercial rights leaseholder’s latest whim. The regs are not the cornerstones they once were; nowadays being made from tissue paper and bendy plastic!
Well said Sir.
Thanks again for your wonderfull blog!
Impressive as your command of the Dutch language already is, might I suggest: sleephut (slayp – hut). It is a derogatory term for a caravan. I might come in handy next time you have to navigate the orange army’ s caravans.
Richard de Ruiter
As a lawyer, your last paragraph is exactly what I have been thinking about…
Simply pathetic the attitude of some F1 teams. They must be trying to force new entrants to buy an existing team and the entry at 10. F1 teams should never be allowed to be part of this process.
With acceptance by the American market is so obviously what can add more value to the sport than anything else out there, why so adamantly opposed? Not such a surprise when you consider these are the people who sold TV rights to Bernie for peanuts. Nobody can see beyond their own nose.
“what can add more value to the sport than anything else out there”
To make up for the losses to existing teams, adding Mr Andretti’s team would need to bring in at least two new races with dictatorship-level hosting fees or quintuple the NA TV rights fees for the next licensing period, above and beyond what the current set of 10 teams would be able to achieve through normal growth.
That, quite frankly, seems unlikely.
Joe, what are the biggest technical limitations to allowing the current cars to be smaller? I have heard mention it is the turbo hybrid power unit spec. Surely safety features require a minimum of bulk? Is a too crowded track, particularly at locations like Hungary, Monaco, Zanvoort, Portugal, Singapore… just about all if them, will start to get crowded?
That said, let’s go Mario!
As always people read the things they want to and not all the points that matter. GM / Cadillac clearly state they are expanding the Caddy brand from US to global, hence funding for F1 and WEC. Also as Joe has rightly identified GM and Honda are in bed on EV programs because as one of the correspondents here has mentioned, EV’s are a long way off being profitable so economies of scale work for both companies . Honda signed up for the 2026 rules but obviously they are not staying at red bull as RB have their own engine program and Honda HAVE to do their own R&D and build because its the Honda way, but producing for a partner is also ok for them, remember they branded the old V10’s as Mugens …. Have great respect for Michael and Mario, inspite of everything they are putting their reputations and business in the firing line. Many moons ago I was involved in F1 at the time we had prequalifying and at Monaco it was difficult but thats one event. So lets stop moaning and quite rightly get behind this application… Imagine if the biggest car company and race team in the US are black balled… I doubt Liberty will enjoy the fall out in their new found market success. Its a World Championship so let the world enter..
Whatever happens, it is unlikely to be anything that we have not seen before in the history (Which by itself is pretty unbelievable!) of F1.
Badge engineering has always been prevalent in F1 just as it has in the motor industry.
One wonders how much the addition of further teams helps the FIA, apart from the entry fees.
Always preferred idea of three-car teams. I know it won’t happen but I like dreams.
I tried to give the benefit of the doubt and hold out as long as possible, but I’m ready to reach for the word “hypocritical.” It really bothers me as a fan when the teams put themselves above the sport as a whole. I wish this type of thing could be eliminated through the CA for the long-term benefit of the sport, but maybe that’s wishful thinking. I guess it’s time for the lawyers unfortunately. Good Lord…
And, I don’t get how pit stalls would even be an issue. If the rules dictate a max number of 13 teams, the infrastructure should support that by default.
Speaking as a born and raised American, the thought of GM having a team is very exciting. I obviously can’t speak for all of us in the US, but it has been difficult for me to wholeheartedly embrace Haas as my “home team.” A machining company with an Italian TP (who is very German – I had to do some research to figure that whole thing out), with no American drivers. The Cadillac choice is interesting. I guess because it is the premium badge of GM that would most closely align with Mercedes, Aston Martin, McLaren, etc. Looking forward to that Escalade safety car!
Joe, do you think an entry is possible for 2025 as just today Michael Andretti made a comment about? Or only 2026?
Also, if I may, being portuguese may I ask you how likely do you think our Grand Prix (in Algarve) is returning to the calendar?
Thank you, greetings from Porto.
I think it is the aim to be in 2025 with a badged Renault engine, with a bespoke unit after that.
Remember, these are a lot of the same teams who turned Bernie down for an opportunity to reap hundreds of millions of dollars in future revenues for a mere $1M investment. They can’t see past the end of their noses. And Wooff is only concerned with his personal investment portfolio.
Again a great read Joe. My concern for teams 11-13 would be during qualifying. The traffic jams in the 1st qualifying session are already ridiculous. What happens when you add 2-6 more cars?
Qualifying will have to be restructured.
Toto and the newly hugely popular sport should be aware of the fickle nature of US fans, a large portion coming from urban audiences who don’t look down their noses at the Cadillac brand like the scarf wearers from Monaco. There is more than a whiff of classism in the response by a bunch of teams who when you look under the hood, were begging for capital a short couple years before Netflix bailed them out, and have car company stickers on their cars that are frankly laughable.
Having worked for GM this is doomed for failure. They get half-pregnant with ideas and their long-term objective is to make money in the short-term. There is no racing pedigree in the organisation so don’t expect engineers to be redeployed.
Andrew Benson has written a very good article on the BBC highlighting these issues as well.
As a f1 fan of 40 years I’d like to see more teams, but I think I would prefer to a have closer spread and greater opportunity for success for the current team 10 teams.
Joe, any news on Williams & Sauber team principals? Seems to have gone suspiciously quiet on that….
It would seem many of the naysayers here are conveniently forgetting companies like BMW, Toyota, and Honda pulling the plug on F1 efforts whenever it suited them. No reason to believe GM is any different. Gary mentions how Ford pulled the plug on the Jaguar (formerly Stewart) team when leadership changed. Gee, whatever became of that organization?
But Cadillac. I can see the pushrods from here.
To poppycock we can add another excellent word gerrymandering!
This whole play by the current teams just comes across as protectionist and very short sighted.
If Tyrell had not on the grid back in the day Toto wolff may not have had a team to play with.
If Jackie Stewart had not of got on the grid Red Bull may not have had Wings.
It does make me a little sad that they all want to spread the competition amongst themselves.
Joe, great piece on the current tit for tat.
This all roughly fits my belief (shared in a previous blog reoly) about the situation. In that certain teams or manufacturers treat F1 as theirs. They are seemingly relying purely on the current Concorde Agreement and linked 200m dilution fee in their poxy objections.
It would be interesting to see what the existing teams do if FIA simply say
‘the entry process for 2026 opens next week but closes in March , sign here or go away!’
Bet nearly all of them would commit and any that didn’t would easily be replaced.
Not sure if you’re a betting man, but if you were, would you put money on Andretti-Cadillac and/or any other new teams joining the grid in the next four years?
I think it will happen if they get the entry. If not, I see a very large lawsuit for the next 10 years…
I see a restraint of trade issue in the US if a ‘cartel’ (remember Bernie calling the teams that once?) of 10 vote against any more teams entering F1 if they have followed the FIA entry rules. This could get nasty considering the commercial rights holder is a publicly traded US company and many sponsors in F1 are US based.
F1 is driven by lawyers with compliance manuals… if there is a compliance risk, they will not challenge a new team. They all agreed the terms for new entries… now they must live with them.
Another way of looking at it is that the existing 10x teams have done very well without the additional dilution over the years so “suck it up” because the rules say there’s room for more teams on the Grid.
BTW is it 24x cars or 26x cars…. Manor Lotus and HRT recently left F1 which would make 13 teams & 26 cars…..
You think a Team 11 can just arrive, expect to draw $60-75m annually from the common pot, without compensating the 10 teams who lose that $60-75m ??
Of course not, but they are willing to do that.
As Churchill once said:
“Madam, now we’ve established the principle, let’s discuss the price”.
It will be more like $600m than the previous $200m, which expires in 2025.
Do you ever get depressed being so negative about everything?
It is a positive Joe! We’re looking forward to receiving our share of the $600m.
Why not? There used to be 15-16 teams and Pre-Qualifying and the 107% rule (which still exists). The money used to be split 13 ways (or was it more than that?). Any new team won’t “just arrive”. They’ll be spending a huge amount of money to be there so why can’t they have access to prize money? Why get upset because existing 10x teams had it good for last few years only having to split 10 ways…..
IIRC, in the (recent-ish) olden days, only the top 10 teams got performance-based revenue shares, all others just got a base package and some travel discounts.
How does the cost cap work regarding new teams? Are they allowed some leniency to build up their resources in the early days of competing or do they have to arrive fully formed and abide by the cost cap from day one?
They need to do a lot before coming in and then they must adhere to capex restrictions.
Thanks. That must be an enormous amount of money upfront with no income. The £200m dilution fee must be the least of their problems.
Not if you consider the value of an F1 entry.
The worst case of ‘pretending’ I can think of is Lotus cars sponsoring the Enstone team and and branding it Lotus. Lotus! Colin Chapman would be spinning in his grave.
Completely agree with your view, trying to keep out a legitimate competitor makes the F1 teams look like a protectionist cartel, afraid of healthy competition.
The teams are acting in self-interest, of course they are. But I’m not sure I blame them. It’s only very recently that any of the teams have come on to anything resembling a financial even keel, so of course they don’t want to share.
Other sports with a finite number of franchises charge huge fees to join the party- the NHL charged US$650M to their most recent addition. I don’t see an issue with this either.
I suppose the question is whether one thinks Andretti and GM will give all the teams a bigger pie to share out. I’m honestly sceptical, a Cadillac-badged Renault doesn’t seem that exciting. Is there something that makes you think that Andretti/GM will genuinely create a bigger pie?
who runs the show at this point? The FIA? The F1 Group? Liberty? A lot of stakeholders here.
I’m old enough to remember the days when most of the entries ran engines labeled as Ford, but actually built by Cosworth, and when privateers could come and go almost as if by whim.
Had it not been for privateers might we not have seen the likes of drivers such as Janes Hunt?
I wonder what revenue share those coming and going privateers were getting …
It is amazing how quickly the fortunes of teams have turned around thanks to Liberty’s common sense. I even recall Joe saying that the £160million paid for Williams was “way over the top”, despite it being quite close to $200million at the time.
I agree that it is right for Ben Sulayem to seek expression of interest and subject them to close scrutiny, I feel sure that there must be some interest by Far Eastern manufacturers with very deep pockets.
I suspect that the key stumbling block for the current teams is that the buy-in price now needs to be much, much higher. They are now profitable business centres.
Its a crazy world out there!
Yes, no question, Andretti and GM will greatly enlarge the stage and the audience and the pot. If you don’t agree with that, you will hear from my lawyers, Engulf, Bludgeon & DeVour.
Joe. Perhaps if GM had said we are entering F1 and will be building an F1 engine (sorry Power unit) which we will be racing in 2026/27/28 I would take them more seriously. I happen to know of one very senior Italian engineer whom I believe is not currently doing anything at the moment who could put together a competitive engine (PU) in that time period.
So reverse physiology… Andretti got told no, unless you bring a manufacturer with you. Andretti pays GM / Cadillac for one year to front the team, then disappears, leaving Andretti with what they wanted all along, an autonomous F1 team. Can’t beat a good conspiracy theory !
Conspiracy … or just plain good business if you end up with an F1 entry (soon?) worth a billion dollars.
On the road car side, to wit, I seem to remember the venerable LJK Setright jotting in Car magazine some decades ago that the original Lamborghini V12 was designed with Honda help. They have always had a considerable depth of engineering talent and it would seem they have plenty of IP to spread around. I can’t see them ever walking completely away from the top tiers of motorsport.
New teams coming in and being immediately successful?………Mmmmm can’t think of one, oh yes, Brawn GP (and yes, I do know the teams history).
That was hardly a new team
Mr Brawn managed to do what Mr Andretti has failed at, multiple times – buy an existing F1 entry.
Sure but he needed £1 not several hundred million of them.
Timing and opportunity are indeed (almost) everything.
It isn’t very long ago we had 22 and 24 teams on the grid and even a lot more in a more distant history (with the famous 107% quali rule). Bring ’em on, nothing as great to see somebody succeed from scratch, or equally great when they fail…. What I just can’t understand is the great resentment towards GM (providing stickers blabla). You are the same people that welcomed lotus (x2), were jubilant over the Alfa Romeo branding, sad when the Porsche/RB deal fell true….? O, bring Ford to the game, yah! I feel a bit of traffic light post traumatic stress
” You are the same people that welcomed lotus (x2), were jubilant over the Alfa Romeo branding, sad when the Porsche/RB deal fell true….? ”
I’m sure you can provide citations for this particularly wild claim.
Joe – I’m amazed by the hostility and skepticism expressed here. As a long time follower of you, I trust your perspective. It is important to point out that Andretti is a real multi-disciplined team – not a whim like USF1 and other upstarts (Pacific? Oynx?) We have a real professional marketing driven organization running the show in Liberty. Seems like we still have too many people suffering from BDS (Bernie Derangement Syndrome). Thank you so much for your balance and looking forward to the next Audience with Joe!
We just had this brief period of pandemic and lockdown and suddenly being sat at home watching streaming was the future. F1 being one of the sports willing to cobble together races at empty tracks gained a new following.
Streaming services are now a disaster as it was a stupid idea to think people would sit at home forever.
Americans will gradually bleed away from a sport that is different to what they think is racing.
The outrage from seeing nobody responds to their entitled attitude will probably help.
No mention of Andretti Global in any official F1 website or social media. Not even a hint!
Joe, Totally agree with your points on the teams (and F1 itself) approach to new F1 teams, good to see the FiA being more supportive.
What are your thoughts on the Panthera potential, and also the Hitech F1 project?