Prodrive out for 2008

[Buzz Lightyear]

just waiting for the press to catch up :)

[Dave B]

http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=382689&highlight=prodrive#post382689

Just waiting for Buzz to catch up :p

[GP-M3]

I think they should lose their entry and it should go out to offer again. These guys had their chance and didn't take advantage of it.

[CNR]

think about this



2008 negotiations On 7 December (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_7) 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004), at a meeting attended by the bosses of all the teams but Ferrari (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scuderia_Ferrari), Ecclestone offered a payout of £260,000,000 over three years in return for unanimous renewal of the Concorde Agreement, which would guarantee the continuation of Formula One in its present form at least until the expiration of that contract.
On 19 January (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_19), Ferrari (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scuderia_Ferrari) announced it has signed an extension to the 1997 Agreement to expire on 31 December (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_31) 2012 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012). Later in 2005, Red Bull (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull_Racing) and Jordan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Grand_Prix)/Midland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midland_F1) also signed an extension.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde_Agreement#_note-2) On the 7 December (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_7) 2005 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005), Williams F1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Williams_F1) became the fourth team to sign an extension to the agreement.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde_Agreement#_note-3)
On 27 March (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_27) 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006) the five Grand Prix Manufacturers Association (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Prix_Manufacturers_Association)-backed teams submitted their applications for the 2008 season.[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde_Agreement#_note-4) On 14 May (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_14) 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006) the five GPMA-backed teams signed a Memorandum of Understanding (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorandum_of_Understanding) with the commercial rights holders (CVC/Ecclestone) which will form the basis of the next Concorde Agreement.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde_Agreement#_note-5)



http://flagworld.auto123.com/en/racing/news/index,view.spy?artid=91879
David Richards has confirmed for the first time that Prodrive will definitely not debut in Formula 1 as planned in 2008.

"There was a dispute about our eligibility," the Briton said in an interview with the German specialist magazine Auto Motor und Sport.

"In addition, the new Concorde agreement has been repeatedly delayed. We asked the FIA to be able to start mid-way through the season: our request was rejected.

"So for 2008 there is not a realistic chance of there being a Prodrive Formula 1 team," Richards stated.

In April of last year, F1's governing body announced that Banbury-based Prodrive, an outfit famous for its involvement in world rallying with Subaru, had been selected to become the twelfth and final team in 2008.

But the touted 'customer car' rules have since been the subject of intense controversy in the paddock, moving Richards last month to reveal that a planned link-up with McLaren-Mercedes had been called off.

Richards explained that Prodrive's target now is to debut in 2009, pending the consent of the FIA World Motor Sport Council.

"Secondly, we must wait for the new Concorde. Only then can we fully assess our options," he added.

Richards, former Benetton and BAR boss, said: "Our ambition is still to be in Formula 1. But there was the risk of legal procedures because we wanted to use a customer car. As a result, our entire business plan was put into doubt.

"So we have chosen to re-group instead of simply race ahead blindly," he explained.

[passmeatissue]

Grandprix.com says this...

"At the moment there is much discussion over an "Amnesty Agreement" to solve the current arguments about teams running customer cars. The compromise is simple (and rather generous). Toro Rosso and Super Aguri will be allowed to run customer cars for two more seasons but they must then become constructors in 2010. In addition all the teams will be paid prize money during this two-year period rather than the money going only to top 10 constructors. While becoming a constructor is an expensive investment, there is the added benefit that the manufacturers have agreed to supply customer engines for around $10m a year to help the smaller teams survive. This deal has yet to be completed and as long as it drags on so does the arbitration.
As talks about a new Concorde Agreement have faltered there has been a growing belief that the best way forward is to use the old agreement and roll it onwards, updating only the financial schedules."

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns19878.html

This is saying that customer chassis will disappear. If that's true, then Prodrive will never get off the ground, and SA could fold. TR would suddenly become much much more expensive for Dietrich and might not make sense any more.

On top of that, there is this killer fact that Renault's two championships did not increase sales of Renaut cars.

F1 owes billions to its venture capital owners, and it all depends to an absurd extent on one man who is 77 years old.

If you had shares in it, would you buy more, or sell?? :confused:

[Malbec]

I think they should lose their entry and it should go out to offer again. These guys had their chance and didn't take advantage of it.

Actually it was Prodrive who were wronged. The 12th entry was put up for bids on the understanding that customer cars would definitely be allowed from 2008 onwards. The only bidder who had the ability to design their own cars was Paul Stoddart who kept some equipment from Minardi. Mosley was never going to give him the entry.

Its great to see F1 lure entries in and get them to spend quite a bit of money in preparation then change the entry requirements at the last minute to keep them out. Gives the sport a real professional sheen....

[Valve Bounce]

It is probable that Customer Cars will never come to fruition. At present, any Constructor willing to get out of F1 can sell their team for Squillions, but if Customer cars were to be allowed, their team would hardly be worth 2 Brasillions. I cannot see the likes of Williams being to happy about losing gazillions in the value of their team just to let customer cars into F1.

Then there is Renault, and if the FIA fines them a billion for spying on McLaren and having their plans in their pockets, they could possibly pull out and they certainly want more than two brasillions for their team. Half a squillion might be more like it.

Of course, Super Aguri, if permitted to run customer cars for another two years, will have sufficient time to arrange for their cars to be designed by Toshigi, and the cars don't have to look exactly like Hondas by then. After all, the Japanese are hunting whales in the guise of research, so Toshigi might have a research branch to carry out research work and test this research using Super Aguris. It will all sound like Japanese to Max and Bernie who, in the interest of making more money, might just decide to play dumb.

[SGWilko]

Does anyone else begin to wonder if FIA does not in fact actually stand for........

F*****g
Incompetent
A******s

This whole 12 entry thing, and the handling of the 2007 season controversies has done so much damage to the sport.

Its a real pity.

[/RANT OVER]

[RS]

Well it's not good if the FIA move the goalposts but I am very happy not to see Prodrive enter as they intended in 2008.

There is one slot available on the grid and plenty of organisations out there perfectly capable of developing their own F1 car (including Prodrive!!)

Re: Prodrive's "team" I heard at one point they were intending just to turn up at the grand prix and run cars completely prepared by McLaren, which is much worse than what SA and STR do.

Go and sort out your Subaru World Rally Team first Mr Richards!

[SGWilko]

Well it's not good if the FIA move the goalposts but I am very happy not to see Prodrive enter as they intended in 2008.

Its a shame you see it that way. Of course it is your opinion and I respect that. But, given the success DR brought to BAR during his tenure, I think he has a lot to offer F1.


There is one slot available on the grid and plenty of organisations out there perfectly capable of developing their own F1 car (including Prodrive!!)

Well, I am not sure about the 'perfectly capable' aspect. Remember the late eighties/early nineties - so many teams that pre qualifying was necessary. Now, I am the first to admit that a lot of entries is a good thing, but not when a good proportion of them are 5h!tboxes entered by hooray henries!


Re: Prodrive's "team" I heard at one point they were intending just to turn up at the grand prix and run cars completely prepared by McLaren, which is much worse than what SA and STR do.

Go and sort out your Subaru World Rally Team first Mr Richards!

Well, at the time Max was singing and dancing that this approach was allowed and welcomed. Nothing wrong with another guaranteed competetive entry. But of course, true to form the FIA screwed that up as well. So, all that money and effort, getting the PP for the new factory specifically for the F1 team, and Max (the advocate of cost cutting, remember) has been the cause of DR financial sacrifice.

Nice guy this Max, eh?

[RS]

Its a shame you see it that way. Of course it is your opinion and I respect that. But, given the success DR brought to BAR during his tenure, I think he has a lot to offer F1.

I don't disagree with that at all, and would be happy to see him in F1 if his team were to design, build and run their own car.


Well, I am not sure about the 'perfectly capable' aspect. Remember the late eighties/early nineties - so many teams that pre qualifying was necessary. Now, I am the first to admit that a lot of entries is a good thing, but not when a good proportion of them are 5h!tboxes entered by hooray henries!

True, but given that there is only one entry available you think they'd be able to find one team to fill the gap!

[SGWilko]

I don't disagree with that at all, and would be happy to see him in F1 if his team were to design, build and run their own car.



True, but given that there is only one entry available you think they'd be able to find one team to fill the gap!

Absolutely spot on. Just another reason I think the FIA have got it all wrong. The teams that do spend gazillions on their own chassis (and these are some long standing proper racers - the likes of Frank and Patrick, Ron, Ferrari, Renault and Honda - are effectively having their noses rubbed in the poo by the FIA by letting customer cars in.

Although, I think the FIA are in the process of seeing the light and effecting a U turn, but hey, thats showbusiness!!

[Valve Bounce]

The only reason that Torro Rosso and Super Aguri are still in F1 with their "customer" cars is because they are not threatening anyone. If Honda were qualifying on the front row, and Super Aguri were occupying the second row with their "customer" cars, and/or ditto for Red Bull and Torro Rosso, there would be one helluva row about teams running 4 cars in F1. Right now, the only ones to suffer were Team Honda as Super Aguri were beating them; and they soon fixed that didn't they!!

[passmeatissue]

I see there is now a spat about Super Aguri testing Honda drivers for them, to save Honda using up their test mileage allocation.

There are so many problems with customer/junior teams, we'll be better off without them. But I wonder if the regen systems will also have to be bought and sold.

[AndyRAC]

Whatever the reasons, Prodrive can concentrated on sorting the Subaru out, at the moment it's a shambles.
As for the F1A, they're an utter disgrace, apparently changing the rules. Whats wrong with customer chassis? Why limit the entry to 12 teams? Why the huuge entry fee?

[SGWilko]

Whatever the reasons, Prodrive can concentrated on sorting the Subaru out, at the moment it's a shambles.
As for the F1A, they're an utter disgrace, apparently changing the rules. Whats wrong with customer chassis? Why limit the entry to 12 teams? Why the huuge entry fee?

The entry fee was a measure brought in to try and ensure that a new team entering F1 would have a guaranteed income stream (the FIA would give back the fee over the course of the season).

The max 12 places was also a vain guise to keep at bay the one season wonders (Andrea Moda, Pacific, Onyx etc) that really had no hope of qualifying, let alone 'making it' in F1.

So now, the only ones that can really afford to race are the manufacturers, and we all know what a fickle bunch they are......

[ArrowsFA1]

Hardly a PR triumph for F1 or the FIA :dozey: Invite new teams to "bid" for a place on the grid without having sorted out the customer car issue. Give that place to Prodrive who made it clear all along their plan was to run customer cars. Continue to allow Prodrive to make plans, sign contracts and invest considerable sums of money. Then at the last minute say "no, sorry, you can't now race next year".

Meanwhile both Toro Rosso and Super Aguri have been allowed to run customer cars.

Blummin' daft :rolleyes:

[truefan72]

the whole thiong is a mess
first prodrive:
I was never happy with their bid and felt thast there were stronger teams out there thast would have served the public interest considerably more. But of course, FIA wanted their entry fee and outbid the others for it, then they were ill prepared, with no contigency plan whatsoevere. simply relying on another team to give you the car and then rebadge it to your colors is not , in my estimation a real team.
As to torro rosso and SA, I think they have developed enough differences and continue to do so, that would merit them being grandfathered in.

Now to the FIA, what a bunch of disorganized and amateurish management of a multibillion dollar sereis. Just a mess. For all of what happeded in 2007 and now this, heads need to roll.

[VkmSpouge]

A shame the rules couldn't be sorted out in time for Prodrive to enter, they would have been a good addition to the grid. I just hope something can be pulled together for 2009 so we can have 24 cars racing.

[passmeatissue]

A shame the rules couldn't be sorted out in time for Prodrive to enter, they would have been a good addition to the grid. I just hope something can be pulled together for 2009 so we can have 24 cars racing.

It looks like the mood has gone against customer teams altogether. IMO they could still have 12 full own-chassis teams on the grid if more of the money stayed in the sport, and was distibuted more equally.

Bernie has always had this devil-take-the-hindmost attitude that means the weaker teams always get weaker, before failing and being replaced by some other optimistic hopeful.

[ioan]

Let's leave the FIA out of this. For the FIA it was OK to have customer cars next season, but for that to be possible the new "Concorde Agreement" (including the customer car possibility) had to be agreed by all the teams. Some teams didn't agree however.

So, who are those that don't agree with customer cars?

Williams, Force India???

Please do think before attacking the FIA just because its raining outside. :rolleyes:

[ArrowsFA1]

Please do think before attacking the FIA just because its raining outside. :rolleyes:
Fair point :up: I still think they should have sorted the customer car issue out well in advance of accepting Prodrive's bid though ;)

[ShiftingGears]

What a pity.

[CNR]

i do not see why prodrive can not get cars in 4 months
even if they did what Super Aguri did and start the year with old arrows f1 cars for about the first 2 or so months :eek:

[wmcot]

Let's leave the FIA out of this. For the FIA it was OK to have customer cars next season, but for that to be possible the new "Concorde Agreement" (including the customer car possibility) had to be agreed by all the teams. Some teams didn't agree however.

So, who are those that don't agree with customer cars?

Williams, Force India???

Please do think before attacking the FIA just because its raining outside. :rolleyes:

Very true! While I would like to see more cars on the grid, I feel sorry for Frank Williams who will be hurt most by customer cars. Perhaps each team should be required to field a junior, customer team and we could bring back pre-qualifying for those teams?

[Valve Bounce]

Let's leave the FIA out of this. For the FIA it was OK to have customer cars next season, but for that to be possible the new "Concorde Agreement" (including the customer car possibility) had to be agreed by all the teams. Some teams didn't agree however.

So, who are those that don't agree with customer cars?

Williams, Force India???

Please do think before attacking the FIA just because its raining outside. :rolleyes:


I think that the FIA should have sorted out the "Concorde Agreement" with all teams before moving on the customer cars issue. It is possible that they didn't realise the "Concorde Agreement" is a secret agreement between the teams, but is legally binding, which can only end if they all agree to it ending, and a new "Agreement" agreed to. Teams like Williams, Spyker (now Force India), Renault (if they run aground on Dec 6) and Ferrari (if they get pissed off with the whole thing and decide to pull out of F1), Toyota who are getting nowhere; - any one of these teams if they decide to pull out would find their position/spot in F1 suddenly devalued extensively.

[ioan]

I think that the FIA should have sorted out the "Concorde Agreement" with all teams before moving on the customer cars issue. It is possible that they didn't realise the "Concorde Agreement" is a secret agreement between the teams, but is legally binding, which can only end if they all agree to it ending, and a new "Agreement" agreed to. Teams like Williams, Spyker (now Force India), Renault (if they run aground on Dec 6) and Ferrari (if they get pissed off with the whole thing and decide to pull out of F1), Toyota who are getting nowhere; - any one of these teams if they decide to pull out would find their position/spot in F1 suddenly devalued extensively.

The Concorde Agreement expires at the end of 2007. So in fact there is no agreement from next season on, at least not yet.
Why is that? Because it's a stupid thing if you ask me.
Is there such an agreement in any other motorsport series?

The FIA should have imposed customer cars, now that would be an efficient cost cutting measure, and it would lead to a highly competitive grid over night.

And BTW Ferrari never expressed that they were against customer cars.

[Oli_M]

Weren't 'most' of the new entries that applied for next years slot also planning on running customer cars (in one form or another) - wasn't that a huge part of the cost-cutting idea that attracted so many people to consider F1 2008 as a viable option?

Or have I mis-interpreted something I've read?

But just so I've got this bit right..... Prodrive won't be able to run McLaren customer cars in 2008 because some teams will object/file court action against them...... but Aguri can run Hondas and Toro Rosso can run the Red Bull cars?

[ioan]

But just so I've got this bit right..... Prodrive won't be able to run McLaren customer cars in 2008 because some teams will object/file court action against them...... but Aguri can run Hondas and Toro Rosso can run the Red Bull cars?

STR and SuperAguri were also threatened with court action this season.

[Garry Walker]

I fully support the ban of customer cars, it would be a complete joke. In addition to that, Prodrive should be stripped of their right to field an F1 car now, and it given to some other team.

[Valve Bounce]

And BTW Ferrari never expressed that they were against customer cars.

You are right on this point. But I just wonder what their reaction would be if Prodrive ran two McLarens which were able to qualify on the second row behind two McLarens on the front row. I know that most of us would not like team orders taken to the nth degree like this.

I think much more thought has to go into this customer cars thing so that teams cannot simply run four car teams. Maybe customer chassis might be more in order with the team getting their engines and transmissions from somebody else. Hard to say what the solution would be really.

[LeonBrooke]

But just so I've got this bit right..... Prodrive won't be able to run McLaren customer cars in 2008 because some teams will object/file court action against them...... but Aguri can run Hondas and Toro Rosso can run the Red Bull cars?

Technically they're not - the rules allow teams to outsource the design or build of the cars. Red Bull owns three racing companies - Red Bull Racing, Scuderia Toro Rosso and Red Bull Technologies. RBR and STR simply outsource the design of their cars to Red Bull Technologies, who happen to give them very similar designs.

It's a similar arrangement with Honda and Super Aguri, except that, of course, SA isn't owned by Honda.

[ioan]

You are right on this point. But I just wonder what their reaction would be if Prodrive ran two McLarens which were able to qualify on the second row behind two McLarens on the front row. I know that most of us would not like team orders taken to the nth degree like this.

As long as they don't run using stolen Ferrari data ... ;)

[BDunnell]

STR and SuperAguri were also threatened with court action this season.

Is that threat (from Williams) not still hanging over them?

[BDunnell]

But just so I've got this bit right..... Prodrive won't be able to run McLaren customer cars in 2008 because some teams will object/file court action against them...... but Aguri can run Hondas and Toro Rosso can run the Red Bull cars?

I think (leaving aside the point made a few posts earlier by LeonBrooke) that a main concern is that one customer team might turn out to be too good and challenge the works teams regularly. They, and the manufacturers, wouldn't want that.

I agree that there's no need to pointlessly bash the FIA all the time — it is necessary some of the time, but not as an automatic reaction — but it should have thought ahead in this case and reached a firm decision earlier. Obviously, that's easier said than done, but I'm sure it would have been possible somehow, and a bit of forceful, definite leadership wouldn't have gone amiss. Also, it needs to be careful now, because of the threat of legal action.

[BDunnell]

Technically they're not - the rules allow teams to outsource the design or build of the cars. Red Bull owns three racing companies - Red Bull Racing, Scuderia Toro Rosso and Red Bull Technologies. RBR and STR simply outsource the design of their cars to Red Bull Technologies, who happen to give them very similar designs.

It's a similar arrangement with Honda and Super Aguri, except that, of course, SA isn't owned by Honda.

And therein lies the point that makes the restriction so hard to justify. Everyone knows the parentage of Super Aguri.

[CNR]

i think with customer cars a team should be allowed to buy the tub (The Monocoque) of cars

http://www.f1technical.net/articles/mech/images/chass.gif
http://www.f1technical.net/articles/63

design or outsource the rest from a different team

(the tub of bmw the ferrari engine and runing gear of Renault at front and say Williams at the back)

[Valve Bounce]

And therein lies the point that makes the restriction so hard to justify. Everyone knows the parentage of Super Aguri.


Maybe they are claiming they get their designs from Toshigi. Or maybe from some company doing research on whales which the japanese kill and then eat.

[ClarkFan]

Well, I am not sure about the 'perfectly capable' aspect. Remember the late eighties/early nineties - so many teams that pre qualifying was necessary. Now, I am the first to admit that a lot of entries is a good thing, but not when a good proportion of them are 5h!tboxes entered by hooray henries!


Opinions differ here. I would be happy to see something closer to those freewheeling days replace the closed shop that currently prevails, where no team, no matter how dismal, gets sent home. Prequalifying served to keep the really dodgy cars out of the way and even the top teams had make sure they were on their games for fear of not making the final field.

And "****boxes by hooray henries" could be used to describe the starting days of many distinguished teams in F1. In his early days, Frank Williams was dismissed as a dreamer without 5p in his pocket. And Cooper, Lotus, BRM, and other distinguished teams started in F1 by sparing others the pain of finishing last. The last decade has been impoverished by the lack of new teams emerging to become important competitors.

ClarkFan

[Valve Bounce]

Opinions differ here. I would be happy to see something closer to those freewheeling days replace the closed shop that currently prevails, where no team, no matter how dismal, gets sent home. Prequalifying served to keep the really dodgy cars out of the way and even the top teams had make sure they were on their games for fear of not making the final field.

And "****boxes by hooray henries" could be used to describe the starting days of many distinguished teams in F1. In his early days, Frank Williams was dismissed as a dreamer without 5p in his pocket. And Cooper, Lotus, BRM, and other distinguished teams started in F1 by sparing others the pain of finishing last. The last decade has been impoverished by the lack of new teams emerging to become important competitors.

ClarkFan

I think those days are long gone. Nowadays, to have a car that could make the grid would require a helluva lot more money and team resources. I think the current competitiveness of teams qould require a helluva lot of R&D nto to mention safety requirements to make the grid. F1 cars have evolved into such sophisticated machinery that one could say that we could compare the current Formula Ford cars with the F1 cars of that era. It's called progress I suppose. The pinacle of engineering excellence and all that guff. Makes me wonder what it's all about: racing cars or throwing money at cars.

[markabilly]

Opinions differ here. I would be happy to see something closer to those freewheeling days replace the closed shop that currently prevails, where no team, no matter how dismal, gets sent home. Prequalifying served to keep the really dodgy cars out of the way and even the top teams had make sure they were on their games for fear of not making the final field.

And "****boxes by hooray henries" could be used to describe the starting days of many distinguished teams in F1. In his early days, Frank Williams was dismissed as a dreamer without 5p in his pocket. And Cooper, Lotus, BRM, and other distinguished teams started in F1 by sparing others the pain of finishing last. The last decade has been impoverished by the lack of new teams emerging to become important competitors.

ClarkFan
I agree but unfortunately Valve Bounce has a point---that is probably a huge barrier to a return to good ole days...........

[markabilly]

I think those days are long gone. Nowadays, to have a car that could make the grid would require a helluva lot more money and team resources. I think the current competitiveness of teams qould require a helluva lot of R&D nto to mention safety requirements to make the grid. F1 cars have evolved into such sophisticated machinery that one could say that we could compare the current Formula Ford cars with the F1 cars of that era. It's called progress I suppose. The pinacle of engineering excellence and all that guff. Makes me wonder what it's all about: racing cars or throwing money at cars.


but you forget the most important aspect of all, the "good of the sport", in this case--money for Bernie as the entry fee to get in the club, as well as the interests of the current group in remaning a closed club to outsiders who might get too big and take a big cut of those revenue dollars under the Concorde, that counter-balances the interest in customer cars.......add that to the costs mentioned above...... :D

[BDunnell]

I think those days are long gone. Nowadays, to have a car that could make the grid would require a helluva lot more money and team resources. I think the current competitiveness of teams qould require a helluva lot of R&D nto to mention safety requirements to make the grid. F1 cars have evolved into such sophisticated machinery that one could say that we could compare the current Formula Ford cars with the F1 cars of that era. It's called progress I suppose. The pinacle of engineering excellence and all that guff. Makes me wonder what it's all about: racing cars or throwing money at cars.

Which is why Prodrive, as a professional outfit, would potentially have been a valuable addition to the grid.

I would tend to feel that all the manufacturers, with the exception of Ferrari which remains the only 'constant', ought to be made to realise that they are potentially dispensable as far as the future of the sport is concerned by having their comfort zone threatened a little. Comfort zones are never good in life — they breed complacency and a 'closed shop' approach which is rarely constructive.

[passmeatissue]

Which is why Prodrive, as a professional outfit, would potentially have been a valuable addition to the grid.

I would tend to feel that all the manufacturers, with the exception of Ferrari which remains the only 'constant', ought to be made to realise that they are potentially dispensable as far as the future of the sport is concerned by having their comfort zone threatened a little. Comfort zones are never good in life — they breed complacency and a 'closed shop' approach which is rarely constructive.

I think Prodrive would be a valuable addition, but not reproducing the 2008 McLaren for a fraction of what Williams and the others have to find. IIRC it's Spyker/ FI who have objected legally to TR and SA, and you can see their argument, being beaten by teams doing a lot less work. I think for the short term all FI are asking for is that the customer teams don't get points and benefits in the constructors' championship.

Longer term, I think it should be a competition on equal terms, whatever that is. And I would include Ferrari in that equality, so whoever wins has done it on merit.

[ioan]

Longer term, I think it should be a competition on equal terms, whatever that is. And I would include Ferrari in that equality, so whoever wins has done it on merit.

Competition on equal terms means not using designs that you didn't produce, and that would also include McLaren as running Ferrari customer cars the past and the next season! :D :p :

[BDunnell]

I think Prodrive would be a valuable addition, but not reproducing the 2008 McLaren for a fraction of what Williams and the others have to find.

Yes, I do also agree with this.

[BDunnell]

Competition on equal terms means not using designs that you didn't produce, and that would also include McLaren as running Ferrari customer cars the past and the next season! :D :p :

Give it a rest, please. Not every thread has to come to this at some point.

[ioan]

Give it a rest, please. Not every thread has to come to this at some point.

All of his posts question Ferrari in a way or another, so I have a bit of fun returning him the favors.

[Malbec]

I would tend to feel that all the manufacturers, with the exception of Ferrari which remains the only 'constant', ought to be made to realise that they are potentially dispensable as far as the future of the sport is concerned by having their comfort zone threatened a little. Comfort zones are never good in life — they breed complacency and a 'closed shop' approach which is rarely constructive.

While I agree with that the FIA is forcing all small operators slowly and surely out of F1 leaving only the manufacturers.

Take engines for example. Over the past two decades we had a very stable formula and changes in the rules were posted well in advance. Now we have reg changes every couple of years which may not affect the racing that much but affect business models a lot. Just over the past couple of years we've had engines go from 3 to 2.4 V10 to V8 lasting from one whole race weekend to two with incredibly tight new regulations on what parts may or may not be modified. Over the next few years we had serious proposals that energy recovery devices be mandatory and now we've got the news that no changes whatsoever may be allowed to engines from 2008 for a decade.

It may not seem like much but anyone taking each change in regulation seriously would have spent millions researching energy recovery devices only to see the investment being wiped out at the stroke of a pen. Should the engine makers now be sacking all their designers from 2008 knowing they won't be needed for a decade or should they keep them in case the FIA changes its mind again?

Big companies like Merc or Honda may take such instability without difficulty, engineers can be shunted to and fro within the company but how would an independent company like Cosworth cope (if they were still involved in F1)?

One day this instability will hit the chassis makers, ie the teams themselves. We've already seen the proposed changes limiting or banning aerodynamic development and identical aero parts have already been proposed by Max. Should teams look at winding down their aero departments in preparation? Should they be investing in expensive CFD systems or windtunnels if they are going to be utterly useless in a season or two?

F1 has been turned into a business where you have to be a multinational or be linked to one in order merely to keep up with the reg changes. Its ridiculous.

[ClarkFan]

I think those days are long gone. Nowadays, to have a car that could make the grid would require a helluva lot more money and team resources. I think the current competitiveness of teams qould require a helluva lot of R&D nto to mention safety requirements to make the grid. F1 cars have evolved into such sophisticated machinery that one could say that we could compare the current Formula Ford cars with the F1 cars of that era. It's called progress I suppose. The pinacle of engineering excellence and all that guff. Makes me wonder what it's all about: racing cars or throwing money at cars.

Valve, I have no illusions about a possible return to a bygone era. You can no longer weld some steel tubing together, pound some sheet aluminum around it, slap a Climax 4-banger in it and go grand prix racing. (But, come to think of it, that formula may have produced a faster car than some of Paul Stoddart's Minardis). Fielding a modern F1 team calls for big euros (with the present state of the currency markets, big dollars won't do).

What I object to is the perpetuation of teams, no matter how dubious their propects. And that is what the current system gives us. No matter how bog-slow Stoddart's Minardis were, they had a guaranteed grid slot. There really should have been a way for a new competitor to put that team out of its misery by just bringing faster cars and sending them home. Even now, no matter how badly a driver/car screws up in qualifying they are still in the race. Allow more competitors than grid slots, and then let's see how serious games faces get for qualifying. You wouldn't even need the hokey knockout qualifying to make things interesting.

Right now, a new Frank Williams couldn't get into F1 in any way, shape or form. Yes, I know the current system is all about the money. But that sucks. :mad:

ClarkFan

[Valve Bounce]

Valve,
Yes, I know the current system is all about the money. But that sucks. :mad:

ClarkFan

Yeah!! I guess the whole F1 circus has painted themselves into a corner, and there's no way out without getting their feet covered in wet paint.

There are many things we'd like to see, many ways to improve the racing, but you just cannot fit everyone into that scheme.

I see Williams would be the biggest issue here, because if, for any reason, Frank wants to sell out, a Customer Car situation in F1 would seriously devalue his team.

I cannot think of an answer right now. :(

[passmeatissue]

Yeah!! I guess the whole F1 circus has painted themselves into a corner, and there's no way out without getting their feet covered in wet paint.

There are many things we'd like to see, many ways to improve the racing, but you just cannot fit everyone into that scheme.

I see Williams would be the biggest issue here, because if, for any reason, Frank wants to sell out, a Customer Car situation in F1 would seriously devalue his team.

I cannot think of an answer right now. :(

Nor me, but how about some of these pieces of the puzzle...

1. Stop giving 50% of the money away to the do-nothing private equity owners. Make it 20%.

2. In the "constructors' championship", only constructors are eligible.

3. Spread the larger FoM income exactly equally down the grid, so that all 12 teams can afford to be constructors and design their own cars (remembering that the successful teams will get a lot more sponsorship income, so there will still be a heirarchy up and down the grid).

4. A team that is too slow has to sell up (by some numeric criterion e.g. fails 107% rule on 50% of races 2 seasons running).

5. No-one can own shares in more than one team.

6. Rules governing the design of the cars are discussed with teams and announced by the governing body on the same date each year.

7. The teams can vote out the leadership of the governing body by simple majority on an annual secret vote :s mokin:.

With no Concorde Agreement and time running out the teams actually have FoM and FIA over a barrel, if only they could unite. Not much chance of that, though!

[ArrowsFA1]

What I don't understand is that Super Aguri are cutting staff because they are "poised to run customer Honda chassis next year, which will require less staff than if they developed their own car." (report (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64111))

If they can run a customer Honda, why can't Prodrive run a customer McLaren :confused:

[SGWilko]

I think Prodrive would be a valuable addition, but not reproducing the 2008 McLaren for a fraction of what Williams and the others have to find. IIRC it's Spyker/ FI who have objected legally to TR and SA, and you can see their argument, being beaten by teams doing a lot less work. I think for the short term all FI are asking for is that the customer teams don't get points and benefits in the constructors' championship.

Longer term, I think it should be a competition on equal terms, whatever that is. And I would include Ferrari in that equality, so whoever wins has done it on merit.

Ioan, is this post questioning Ferrari, or was just unfornate that the team Ferrari was referred to?

You need to rise above the schoolboy mentality my friend, it gets tiring after a while (in my opinion).

[markabilly]

7. The teams can vote out the leadership of the governing body by simple majority on an annual secret vote :s mokin:.

With no Concorde Agreement and time running out the teams actually have FoM and FIA over a barrel, if only they could unite. Not much chance of that, though!
Some great ideas until you got down to this one, and showed you were seriously dreaming stuff that will never ever happen...indeed more like hallucinating from too many of the wrong type of mushrooms....... :s mokin:

[Bagwan]

Wilco , "I would include Ferrari in that equality" , states clearly "a schoolboy mentality" .
Don't be going all "holier than thou" on Ioan .

He responded , complete with smillies , to a nasty , un-warranted dig at the reds . No more . No less .


You know , it's a good thing that Ioan and Tamburello are here to add some balance to a forum that isn't very red friendly .


Though the series will not move up to 12 teams here , I am happy that Prodrive isn't in it .
I think the paddock is much better off without a snake like Richards .

[SGWilko]

Wilco , "I would include Ferrari in that equality" , states clearly "a schoolboy mentality" .
Don't be going all "holier than thou" on Ioan . Ferrari are the first to admit thet they see themselves as 'more equal' than others. That is fact.


He responded , complete with smillies , to a nasty , un-warranted dig at the reds . No more . No less . Ah, the smilies, you gotta love em..... Why was the comment unwarranted, nasty and a 'dig'?



You know , it's a good thing that Ioan and Tamburello are here to add some balance to a forum that isn't very red friendly . That's just plain funny. How unfriendly are the two you mention to other teams I wonder? Strewth, I bet your kettle needs some elbow grease........



Though the series will not move up to 12 teams here , I am happy that Prodrive isn't in it .
I think the paddock is much better off without a snake like Richards . Hold it right there buster, you preach how it is wrong to be Red unfriendly, but you place a slur on DR in the same breath. Tsk, tsk, naughty naughty. :down:

[passmeatissue]

Wilco , "I would include Ferrari in that equality" , states clearly "a schoolboy mentality" .
Don't be going all "holier than thou" on Ioan .

He responded , complete with smillies , to a nasty , un-warranted dig at the reds . No more . No less .


You know , it's a good thing that Ioan and Tamburello are here to add some balance to a forum that isn't very red friendly .
.

It wasn't meant as a dig at Ferrari. Under the current Concorde Agreement Ferrari get a larger share of the FoM income than the other teams, in recognition of their importance and the power of the Ferrari brand.

I'm not blaming Ferrari for that, just saying that it's an advantage. Since I am a sports fan, rather than an unconditional Ferrari or McLaren fan, I would prefer a level paying field, so that the best driver/team wins. Conversely, if I were a Ferrari fan I would like to know that when they win, they have won on equal terms.

I didn't mean any nastiess and I still don't see any in " I would include Ferrari in that equality, so whoever wins has done it on merit". I think you have read something that is not there.

[passmeatissue]

What I don't understand is that Super Aguri are cutting staff because they are "poised to run customer Honda chassis next year, which will require less staff than if they developed their own car." (report (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64111))

If they can run a customer Honda, why can't Prodrive run a customer McLaren :confused:

I got the impression that SA are simply running out of money.

Good question! I feel the answer is that Prodrive was the unacceptable extreme of the customer car concept - four 2008 McLarens. Only two teams want that...

[SGWilko]

I got the impression that SA are simply running out of money.

Good question! I feel the answer is that Prodrive was the unacceptable extreme of the customer car concept - four 2008 McLarens. Only two teams want that...

Well, F1 either does, or does not allow customer chassis. Say what you like about Honda/SA & RB/STR, but they ARE customer chassis, and Prodrive should have been allowed to enter in '08.

If you are not going to allow costomer teams, ban SA and STR. It IS that simple.

[passmeatissue]

Well, F1 either does, or does not allow customer chassis. Say what you like about Honda/SA & RB/STR, but they ARE customer chassis, and Prodrive should have been allowed to enter in '08.

If you are not going to allow costomer teams, ban SA and STR. It IS that simple.

Yes, it would have been, wouldn't it? I thought Spyker and Williams' proposal that they just don't score in the Constructors' Championship was the way to go. That could have applied to Prodrive too, and if agreed last year it would have saved them wasting all that effort.

[ioan]

Wilco , "I would include Ferrari in that equality" , states clearly "a schoolboy mentality" .
Don't be going all "holier than thou" on Ioan .

He responded , complete with smillies , to a nasty , un-warranted dig at the reds . No more . No less .

You know , it's a good thing that Ioan and Tamburello are here to add some balance to a forum that isn't very red friendly .


Thanks Bagwan, I couldn't have explained as well as you did. :up: :)

[truefan72]

every thread is hijacked by certain people bent on turning a decent conversation into some sort of stupid argument, usualy defending phantom slights against Ferrari mostly with no instigation.

I suggest to the mods that they create a seprate forum called "Ferrari" where those so inclined to consitently talk about the Reds, create conflict, rehash tired issues, and attack other for merely mentioning Ferrari, can convalesce amongst themselves, wax poetics about their team, and generally leave the rest of the threads and forum to those (including constructive Ferrari fans)who want to engage in a decent discussion, and can resist the urge to inject tension and acrimony for no good reason.

NOW BACK TO THE TOPIC ON HAND

It's hard to say what the solution is, or where one should draw the line,
but like others have discussed, a good start would be a transparent concord agreement and revenue sharing.

Second, I am not a fan of the extreme version of customer cars that prodrive would have ran. I am neither enthralled by the other version which is set up so the customer can't challenge the manufacturer.

Third, I don't think component customer cars are the way to go either, which was suggested earlier, front wing from BMW, rear wings by Renault, wengine by Ferrari, etc


My suggestion would be to limit the customer relationship to engines. Chasis must be developed by the teams individually and cannot be bought/sold from another team. Teams grandfathered in would be Super Aguri and Torro Rosso, who will be given a mandate to build their own chasis ready for the 2009 season. If using the same engineerieng company, then the RBR and STR chasis must display a significant amount of difference( TBD).

If a team cannot develop their own chasis then they shouldn't be in F1 IMO

[V12]

Well no sympathy from me - they've had 18 or so months to prepare, and as pointed out, they are a huge well established organisation who would have had the capability to do it properly if they'd committed to it from the start. Yes the whole Concorde Agreement stuff is unfortunate but I can't believe they didn't have a contingency plan, like Super Aguri did with the Arrows after their plan to use 2005 Hondas was originally KO'd.

But I agree - throw the whole thing open again, Prodrive had their chance. Of course in a sane world, this ridiculous 12 team rule would be consigned to the rubbish bin where it belongs, I'd much rather talk about qualifying, pre-qualifying and new entries, than how much a team's "value" or "franchise" is being diminished!

[ioan]

Well no sympathy from me - they've had 18 or so months to prepare, and as pointed out, they are a huge well established organisation who would have had the capability to do it properly if they'd committed to it from the start. Yes the whole Concorde Agreement stuff is unfortunate but I can't believe they didn't have a contingency plan, like Super Aguri did with the Arrows after their plan to use 2005 Hondas was originally KO'd.

But I agree - throw the whole thing open again, Prodrive had their chance. Of course in a sane world, this ridiculous 12 team rule would be consigned to the rubbish bin where it belongs, I'd much rather talk about qualifying, pre-qualifying and new entries, than how much a team's "value" or "franchise" is being diminished!

:up:

[BDunnell]

...and generally leave the rest of the threads and forum to those (including constructive Ferrari fans)who want to engage in a decent discussion, and can resist the urge to inject tension and acrimony for no good reason.

:up:

I'll second that. As a fan of no particular team or driver over another, I continue to find some of the 'debate' bizarre to say the least, and unconstructive and annoying to take it a bit further.



It's hard to say what the solution is, or where one should draw the line,
but like others have discussed, a good start would be a transparent concord agreement and revenue sharing.

Second, I am not a fan of the extreme version of customer cars that prodrive would have ran. I am neither enthralled by the other version which is set up so the customer can't challenge the manufacturer.

Third, I don't think component customer cars are the way to go either, which was suggested earlier, front wing from BMW, rear wings by Renault, wengine by Ferrari, etc


My suggestion would be to limit the customer relationship to engines. Chasis must be developed by the teams individually and cannot be bought/sold from another team. Teams grandfathered in would be Super Aguri and Torro Rosso, who will be given a mandate to build their own chasis ready for the 2009 season. If using the same engineerieng company, then the RBR and STR chasis must display a significant amount of difference( TBD).

If a team cannot develop their own chasis then they shouldn't be in F1 IMO

I think you sum it up neatly, but we may need the customer/'independent' teams in F1 in a few years' time, because manufacturer involvement in F1 will not remain at its current level for ever, even if all the signs at present are that certain manufacturers are willing to throw seemingly endless amounts of money into the sport without much to show for it. Aside from the current incumbents, are any other car makers seriously rumoured to be considering F1 (with the ever-present exception of the VW group, though this never shows any signs of coming to anything)?

If, thanks to the current arrangements, we end up with a situation with a diminished grid at some point to come, it will be a sorry sight indeed and a bad indictment on those responsible.

[BDunnell]

Well no sympathy from me - they've had 18 or so months to prepare, and as pointed out, they are a huge well established organisation who would have had the capability to do it properly if they'd committed to it from the start. Yes the whole Concorde Agreement stuff is unfortunate but I can't believe they didn't have a contingency plan, like Super Aguri did with the Arrows after their plan to use 2005 Hondas was originally KO'd.

What we don't know is how far Prodrive's plans got before external factors more or less forced the team to pull the plug. Nor do we know exactly why this happened. What is certain is that Prodrive did want to enter in 2008, and then something (or a combination of factors) caused this not to happen. Did McLaren pull the rug from under their feet? Was the FIA's uncertainty over the customer teams the deciding factor?

In addition, I can't see Prodrive having wanted to enter F1 without a hope of being competitive. We are, after all, talking about a serious motorsport outfit here. Maybe now they will set about designing their own car.



But I agree - throw the whole thing open again, Prodrive had their chance. Of course in a sane world, this ridiculous 12 team rule would be consigned to the rubbish bin where it belongs, I'd much rather talk about qualifying, pre-qualifying and new entries, than how much a team's "value" or "franchise" is being diminished!

:up:

Me too.

[Malbec]

Well no sympathy from me - they've had 18 or so months to prepare, and as pointed out, they are a huge well established organisation who would have had the capability to do it properly if they'd committed to it from the start. Yes the whole Concorde Agreement stuff is unfortunate but I can't believe they didn't have a contingency plan, like Super Aguri did with the Arrows after their plan to use 2005 Hondas was originally KO'd.

Yes they had 18 months to prepare for becoming a customer outfit. When the tender was put out for the 12th entry it was made explicitly clear that customer cars would be allowed for 2008. Why should they have expected that this would suddenly be changed so customer cars would not be accepted?

You speak as if its so easy to change from becoming a customer outfit to a full works one designing its own chassis, however established Prodrive may be we're talking about increasing the budget from $40-50 million a year to $400-500 million a year for the first couple of seasons to build up team infrastructure. Given how established F1 teams like Jordan/Spyker/FI or Minardi/STR have failed to get anything like that kind of budget how would you expect a newcomer to do the same?

SAF1's plan with Arrows cannot be repeated as there are no cars for sale with IP licence that have a hope in hell of being either competitive or able to pass current FIA safety regs. SAF1 still hasn't come close to designing its own chassis either.

The fault doesn't lie with Prodrive, they signed a contract with the FIA only to find the terms of that contract changed at the last moment. The fault lies with the joke that is F1 and here I blame both the FIA and the teams. The FIA shouldn't have issued the tender without being able to guarantee the terms of the contract and the teams should have agreed on a Concorde agreement earlier.

As it stands the sport looks like a total farce from the outside. This season its been shown to be corrupt through Stepneygate, now its also shown that it can't even observe the terms of contracts the sport itself issues. When we're talking about budgets in the hundreds of millions it simply isn't acceptable.

[Malbec]

What we don't know is how far Prodrive's plans got before external factors more or less forced the team to pull the plug. Nor do we know exactly why this happened. What is certain is that Prodrive did want to enter in 2008, and then something (or a combination of factors) caused this not to happen. Did McLaren pull the rug from under their feet? Was the FIA's uncertainty over the customer teams the deciding factor?

As far as I understand it the main problem was that customer cars were not going to be allowed for 2008 and would be subject to legal action from certain teams. A moratorium was arranged for STR and SAF1 since they have strong backing from Red Bull and Honda till 2009 when they will have to build their own cars. Prodrive or the 12th entry was excluded from this.

Without a guarantee that customer cars would be allowed, McLaren set a deadline for Prodrive to sign a contract for customer cars for 2008 in order to allow them enough time to expand their workforce enough to build/prepare 4 cars per race. Obviously Prodrive couldn't sign anything with customer cars being disallowed, hence the current situation.

[SGWilko]

The fault doesn't lie with Prodrive, they signed a contract with the FIA only to find the terms of that contract changed at the last moment. The fault lies with the joke that is F1 and here I blame both the FIA and the teams. The FIA shouldn't have issued the tender without being able to guarantee the terms of the contract and the teams should have agreed on a Concorde agreement earlier.

As it stands the sport looks like a total farce from the outside. This season its been shown to be corrupt through Stepneygate, now its also shown that it can't even observe the terms of contracts the sport itself issues. When we're talking about budgets in the hundreds of millions it simply isn't acceptable.

:up: Spot on. It really has become a very bad joke hasn't it. Someone has to take responsibility for this mess........

[ClarkFan]

I'd much rather talk about qualifying, pre-qualifying and new entries, than how much a team's "value" or "franchise" is being diminished!

:up:

Isn't a "franchise" a place where you eat indifferent hamburgers or pizza with crust like cardboard?

:p

ClarkFan

[ClarkFan]

My suggestion would be to limit the customer relationship to engines. Chasis must be developed by the teams individually and cannot be bought/sold from another team. Teams grandfathered in would be Super Aguri and Torro Rosso, who will be given a mandate to build their own chasis ready for the 2009 season. If using the same engineerieng company, then the RBR and STR chasis must display a significant amount of difference( TBD).

If a team cannot develop their own chasis then they shouldn't be in F1 IMO

To me, it makes sense to draw the line a little differently. Allow private entrants to buy chassis, but not the current year model of another team. Super Aguri was running a 2006 Honda this year - it was Honda's fault that the 2007 Honda was a backward step. But STR and Prodrive would be in trouble under this rule. The 2007 STR was pretty clearly the Red Bull, with a legal fiction of independent ownership of the design. And ProDrive wanted to be a parallel McLaren team.

So let them run, but with last year's models. (SA may even want to keep the 2006!) ProDrive and STR can run their parents' 2007 cars. But these teams should not be eligible for constructor's points, and there should be a significant money pool available for those points. And the new owners of these bits of used carbon fiber should have to do their own development if they want to get faster.

ClarkFan

[Valve Bounce]

To me, it makes sense to draw the line a little differently. Allow private entrants to buy chassis, but not the current year model of another team. Super Aguri was running a 2006 Honda this year - it was Honda's fault that the 2007 Honda was a backward step. But STR and Prodrive would be in trouble under this rule. The 2007 STR was pretty clearly the Red Bull, with a legal fiction of independent ownership of the design. And ProDrive wanted to be a parallel McLaren team.

So let them run, but with last year's models. (SA may even want to keep the 2006!) ProDrive and STR can run their parents' 2007 cars. But these teams should not be eligible for constructor's points, and there should be a significant money pool available for those points. And the new owners of these bits of used carbon fiber should have to do their own development if they want to get faster.

ClarkFan

It all depends on how you look at it, I guess. Personally, if the customer cars are from the previous year's racers, then I would let these teams pick up Constructor's points because these points would only come in either wet conditions or under extreme mechanical fragmentation of the regular cars. A team like Super Aguri will find it difficult to keep their cars on the track next year because of financial constraints, and if they cannot score points, this would make their position without hope.

We either encourage customer cars to enlarge the grid or we may as well just let them fade away. I feel they are a great way to get some guys into F1 who would miss out simply because there are not enough teams.

[truefan72]

Well no sympathy from me - they've had 18 or so months to prepare, and as pointed out, they are a huge well established organisation who would have had the capability to do it properly if they'd committed to it from the start. Yes the whole Concorde Agreement stuff is unfortunate but I can't believe they didn't have a contingency plan, like Super Aguri did with the Arrows after their plan to use 2005 Hondas was originally KO'd.

But I agree - throw the whole thing open again, Prodrive had their chance. Of course in a sane world, this ridiculous 12 team rule would be consigned to the rubbish bin where it belongs, I'd much rather talk about qualifying, pre-qualifying and new entries, than how much a team's "value" or "franchise" is being diminished!

well said,

let's get a proper team in this time

[truefan72]

To me, it makes sense to draw the line a little differently. Allow private entrants to buy chassis, but not the current year model of another team. Super Aguri was running a 2006 Honda this year - it was Honda's fault that the 2007 Honda was a backward step. But STR and Prodrive would be in trouble under this rule. The 2007 STR was pretty clearly the Red Bull, with a legal fiction of independent ownership of the design. And ProDrive wanted to be a parallel McLaren team.

So let them run, but with last year's models. (SA may even want to keep the 2006!) ProDrive and STR can run their parents' 2007 cars. But these teams should not be eligible for constructor's points, and there should be a significant money pool available for those points. And the new owners of these bits of used carbon fiber should have to do their own development if they want to get faster.

ClarkFan

To me, I would find it much more of interest to watch a car that's been somwhat developed and go through its evolution, to competitiveness, rather than watch a team clearly drving a previous year's model and already handicapped as a minow from the start. Or conversely use last years winnig Ferrari chasis, or McClaren chasis which were both exceptional and have some new team gain such an artificial advantage. Then run into the ethics of phantom manufacturer/customer orders or the situation that developed between Honda and Super Aguri where Honda started playing foul with SA becuase they started doing well.

I know certain teams might be on a shoestring budget, but are these teams what we want in F1?

I really liked the spyker car, but being sold 3 times in 3 years isnt' the way to go for me. Let's hope that Force India will be around for a while.

F1 needs to provide a more compelling sytem to attract more manufactures, and a small subsidized package for privateer teams. If they could achieve that outcome, we could see 12-14 teams on the grid, which would be a win-win for the fIA and fans alike.

[Valve Bounce]

I have very strong reservations about Force India. The way I see it, there was and still is more intention at Super Aguri to come out and kick the arse of the better financed manufacturers with their huge resources than Spyker or whatever their derivatives ever had. Some would say that Force India was one way Spyker ent forward; others like me simply see it as an idle fancy by a billionaire to flash his F1 cars around for a year before seeing what profit he can make by selling it then.

Il rest a voir.

[Nikki Katz]

According to Autosport Max has said that Prodrive probably aren't going to see their deposit again, though they're welcome to reapply for 2009.

While I'm not a fan of the customer car idea, Prodrive and a number of other teams attempted to enter under the understanding that in 2008 they would be allowed. The fact that they're not is hardly Prodrive's fault.

It's not really Williams Or Spyker's fault either, they're just protecting their teams, it's more down to FIA mis-management.

So, where exactly is Prodrive's deposit going?

[SGWilko]

So, where exactly is Prodrive's deposit going?

Speculation alert.....

Perhaps up Max's nose, to steady the old nerves........

Alegedly, of course! ;)

[ioan]

It's not really Williams Or Spyker's fault either,

No it can't be! :rolleyes:


it's more down to FIA mis-management.

Ofcourse. And what would you suggest the FIA to do to make Wiliams and Force India accept the customer car idea if they don't want too?

[Valve Bounce]

According to Autosport Max has said that Prodrive probably aren't going to see their deposit again, though they're welcome to reapply for 2009.

While I'm not a fan of the customer car idea, Prodrive and a number of other teams attempted to enter under the understanding that in 2008 they would be allowed. The fact that they're not is hardly Prodrive's fault.

It's not really Williams Or Spyker's fault either, they're just protecting their teams, it's more down to FIA mis-management.

So, where exactly is Prodrive's deposit going?

Agreed. Maybe they can use the deposit for Christmas presents.

[SGWilko]

No it can't be! :rolleyes: it is called protecting their interests and not inconsiderate investment. Any self respecting privateer that abides by the rules would do the same.....




Ofcourse. And what would you suggest the FIA to do to make Wiliams and Force India accept the customer car idea if they don't want too? the FIA could start by growing some brains, following that up by growing some balls. They should not allow customer teams to earn constructors points or money. If the FIA can steamroller rules in willy nilly because it suits them, they can do that with the customer teams issue.

[ArrowsFA1]

...what would you suggest the FIA to do to make Wiliams and Force India accept the customer car idea if they don't want too?
The FIA should have resolved the issue of customer cars before inviting bids for a place on the grid, and accepting Prodrive's deposit. I think it's laughable that the FIA are now going to keep Prodrive's money.

[SGWilko]

The FIA should have resolved the issue of customer cars before inviting bids for a place on the grid, and accepting Prodrive's deposit. I think it's laughable that the FIA are now going to keep Prodrive's money.

Laughable yes, surprising no.

[seppefan]

The FIA should have resolved the issue of customer cars before inviting bids for a place on the grid, and accepting Prodrive's deposit. I think it's laughable that the FIA are now going to keep Prodrive's money.


Was it Prodrives fault ? No. I reckon the FIA owe Prodrive their deposit back and maybe quite a few more dollars. It sure will make others a little wary before applying but maybe the fact they were going to run Mclarens had something to do with it. However DR can sleep at night as MM said " I don't think anybody is going to go after them " for not being on the 08 grid. What a joke the FIA are especially with Max at its head and stuffed with all his mates.

[SGWilko]

Was it Prodrives fault ? No. I reckon the FIA owe Prodrive their deposit back and maybe quite a few more dollars. It sure will make others a little wary before applying but maybe the fact they were going to run Mclarens had something to do with it. However DR can sleep at night as MM said " I don't think anybody is going to go after them " for not being on the 08 grid. What a joke the FIA are especially with Max at its head and stuffed with all his mates.


David Richards is big enough and ugly enough to look after himself against the Maxes of this world. He still got screwed by the FIA mind, but we have certainly not heard the last of Prodrive.......

[ClarkFan]

David Richards is big enough and ugly enough to look after himself against the Maxes of this world. He still got screwed by the FIA mind, but we have certainly not heard the last of Prodrive.......

If Max buys a new car, he had better not make it an Aston Martin. The factory will put in one of those James Bond ejector seats for the driver's seat.

:p

ClarkFan