Marussia confirm Glock’s departure

2013 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Timo Glock, Marussia, Valencia, 2012Marussia have confirmed Timo Glock will not drive for them this year.

The team issued a statement saying the decision was reached “by mutual consent”.

Glock was originally contracted to drive for them during the 2013 season. Team principal John Booth indicated the team had to let him go to take on a paying driver:

“Our team was founded on the principle of benefiting from proven experience whilst also providing opportunities for young emerging talent to progress to the pinnacle of motorsport. Thus far, this philosophy has also been reflected in our commercial model.

“The ongoing challenges facing the industry mean that we have had to take steps to secure our long-term future. Tough economic conditions prevail and the commercial landscape is difficult for everyone, Formula 1 teams included.

“We would like to thank Timo for working with us to reach this decision, especially as he had a valid contract, and also for the contribution he has made to our Team. We wish him all the best for his future and I would like to congratulate the next team acquiring the services of such a competitive, professional and experienced racer.”

Glock said: “I have had three excellent years with the Marussia F1 Team, during which I had the chance to actively participate in building and developing the team in its endeavours to succeed within the Formula One world championship.

“I would like to wish the team good luck in navigating this next period and thank everyone for the great times we shared and the support I have received.

“Although it is not the path I expected to be taking, I am in fact very excited about what the future holds in terms of my own career and I hope to comment on that very soon.”

Booth praised Glock’s efforts since joining the team in 2010, when they were Virgin: “Timo has made a very significant contribution to our team over the past three seasons, helping us to develop our package to the point where, for a large proportion of the 2012 season, we were holding 10th place in the constructors? championship.”

“Timo is a fantastic driver and he has been a very popular member of the team,” he added.

The news means the team only have F1 rookie Max Chilton confirmed in their driver line-up for 2013.

See the updated list of 2013 F1 drivers and teams

2013 F1 season

Browse all 2013 F1 season articles

Image ?? Marussia

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

77 comments on “Marussia confirm Glock’s departure”

  1. Never thought they’d actually let go of Glock. Not after bringing the team so close to tenth place last year.

    1. @scuderiavincero I think it’s pretty clear they wouldn’t have if there was an alternative.

      1. Pretty sad that there wasn’t. Last remaining driver in F1 whose name my Dad remembers

    2. As Keith writes, its pretty clear that in case they had landed that 10th place, their budget might allow for keeping him.

      I just hope that they sign someone like Petrov who has money, but is not a sub par driver, and has enough experience to be of some help in getting the car somewhere with his 3 years in F1.

  2. thatscienceguy
    21st January 2013, 9:37

    I wonder if Vijay’s ears just perked up.

    I know everyone’s 99% sure he’s going to DTM (as am I), but FI would be silly not to at least ask.

    1. Yes but I imagine Force India want a pay driver, considering the current money issues, Glock’s not a pay driver, hence Marussia would have kept him, there is no harm in Force India inquiring but I doubt he will get the drive.

      1. thatscienceguy
        21st January 2013, 9:50

        Of the names being floated for the FI seat I didn’t think many of them came with real money cash. Bianchi – subsidised engines (maybe) in 2014 but no cash flow for 2013, Sutil – some sponsorship but I thought he drew a salary in years gone by, aaaaaaaand now I’ve had a brain fart and completely forgotten the other contenders.

        1. Luiz Razia, Bruno Senna and Kamui Koabayshi have all been linked to the seat over the past few months, but it’s widely believed that they’ve fallen by the wayside and the team will take either Sutil or Bianchi.

          1. Or both…

            Neither seat is officially occupied and the longer the last-minute signings get dragged out for, the more convinced I am that both Force India drivers could change.

            I hope not. But it’s worth bearing in mind.

    2. I wonder if Vijay’s ears just perked up.

      I doubt it. Force India is believed to be on the verge of making a decision about their driver line-up; meanwhile, Glock has only just become available. It’s probably too late for him to start negotiations with Mallya.

      1. And as @formula-1 mentions, Force India will be looking for a driver who also brings some sponsors (or other advantages attached) with him instead of costing them a salary, like Glock would do.
        I guess that if they had say a driver like Maldonado who came suddenly knocking on the door, it would have Mallya think about changing plans, but that is not the case.

    3. Regarding DTM: I heard rumours about him joining the BMW

    4. Webber seems to doubt Glock’s going to end up in an F1 car this year:

      1. And Glock’s responses are even more telling

        realTimoGlock Timo Glock
        @AussieGrit Hi mate thanks a lot for that message that means a lot to me!thats the way of F1 at the moment hope it will change again soon…

        realTimoGlock Timo Glock
        @AussieGrit because like this it has nothing to do with sport!now it’s up to you guys to make things clear in drivers meetings :-))) see you

      2. did you see Glock’s reply? most interesting…

    5. I know everyone’s 99% sure he’s going to DTM (as am I)

      Sure enough he’s testing for BMW this week:

  3. Mikkel Sørensen (@)
    21st January 2013, 9:38

    My bet is on Vitaly Petrov to get the seat. Glock to Caterham maybe?

    1. Caterham let Kovalainen go as they wanted a pay driver, so Glock to Caterham is very unlikely

    2. I don’t quite understand where ‘Glock to Caterham’ comes from… All it’d mean is that Caterham pick up the 2 drivers from their nearest rivals last year.. Has that ever happened before, where 2 drivers have changed from the same team to the same team as each other (I’m not counting Barrichello/Button from Honda to Brawn)..

      1. @keeleyobsessed

        I don’t quite understand where ‘Glock to Caterham’ comes from.

        I do: people assume that because Glock has become available and that because there is a vacant seat at Caterham, Glock is interested in racing for them and the team is interested in taking on Glock.

      2. @keeleyobsessed

        Has that ever happened before, where 2 drivers have changed from the same team to the same team as each other

        Yes: In 1996 Benetton fielded Gerhard Berger and Jean Alesi, which had been Ferrari’s driver line-up the year before.

        But it is pretty unusual. Off the top of my head I can’t remember it happening in the 16 seasons since then…

  4. This is quite blow for Marussia. They need to find another f1 veteran for team building. Anyway, I’d like to see Glock in Force India.

    1. They need to find another f1 veteran for team building.

      Do they?

      I mean, Marussia had Glock. Lotus/Caterham had Trulli and Kovalainen. HRT had de la Rosa. Four drivers over the past three years, and not a point to show for themselves. Having experienced drivers is always better than having inexperienced rookies, sure, but I think the concept of getting a veteran driver in to build the team up and develop the car is a little archaic in this day and age of limited testing.

      1. Surely experience is even more important with limited testing?

  5. Sad to see Glock go. I’m happy though that John Booth is honest about it: Marussia made an official statement, in which Booth explains that although they would love to continue with Timo, that is financially not possible for them. In the past, we’ve seen many experienced drivers leave a team without any official statement from the team about their department – usually it is one small paragraph, Marussia made it an entire article. Hope other teams can learn from this.

    1. @andae23

      I’m happy though that John Booth is honest about it: Marussia made an official statement, in which Booth explains that although they would love to continue with Timo, that is financially not possible for them.

      Agreed I think it’s to their credit.

      1. As both of you write, its certainly a positive to have them be clear about it. I hope Glock does go for a good ride in DTM and the guy they sign on (Petrov? Razia, Valsecchi, Kobayashi all available) will prove to be a positive surprise.

  6. This proves that a contract is worth little more than the paper it’s written on. At this rate, Marussia will need a heck of a lot more paper to get them through the 2013 season.

    1. Any contract can be bought. I would assume that Marussia has a pay driver lined up which brings in enough money to pay off the contract. Also possible is that Glock really does want a new challenge. Because in all honesty, his Formula 1 career is going nowhere. As soon as a driver of his caliber ends up at a team like that, all he does is stretching his career a bit. Practically it’s pretty much over. If he’s good enough for a midfield (or top) team, one of them would’ve picked him up. They didn’t.

      1. To me their press statements read as if it was a little of both. Glock seems on good terms with team management ans seems to understand they are in trouble without more money: he could either help them by trying for sponsors and hope for some future performance, or change plans and maybe find a competitive car somewhere else. Seems they agree under circumstances this is best for all. As others say, good for them to be open about it, increases respect for both parties from me.

    2. Both parties agreed to end the contract because a) Marussia couldn’t afford Glock and b) he seems to have assumed they aren’t going anywhere anyway, so started looking elsewhere.

      A contract can be annulled without a fuss if both parties agree to it. It only gets messy if one party disputes the cancellation.

  7. I can’t say this is overly surprising.

    It is a shame to see Timo (most likely) leave F1 as he could definately have been a race winner had Toyota stayed in F1 or if he had got a better seat instead of signing for Virgin.

    However, when the team/car is as bad as Marussia’s I really don’t think it matters who they have driving the car. Any 3rd rate pay driver can drive around at the back and finish 2 or 3 laps down.

    Marussia’s decision smells of a team making decisions just to survive and not to make progress. I can’t see Chilton and whoever will take the seat doing any better or worse than Di Grassi, Jerome D’ambrosio or Pic and the team will continue to be at the back.

  8. Not really sad to see him go. He was average driver, who was given 2 years in fast cars and achieved almost nothing in return. 2 podiums in 2009 Toyota is nothing to be proud about, as any top driver would win in this car or at least score much more podiums and points. Then his F1 career was prolonged by Virgin/Marussia, where he didn’t set world on fire (which you can do in backmarker car if you are talented enough, see Alonso in 2001).

    What is sad that he will be replaced by another average driver, but with bags of money. I would love to see someone like Wickens, Bianchi, da Costa or Frijns there, but I know the reality, unfortunately.

    1. You cannot compare Minardi to the current backmarkers. Different breed of animal.

      Also, if ‘any top driver’ could win in the dogs Toyota produced, why didn’t they? They certainly ran a few past race winners during their dreary non-existence in the sport.

      1. I didn’t directly compare them, but no matter how bad car is, top talent will always shine brightly.

        Because they didn’t have any? Salo, McNish, da Matta, Panis, Zonta, Trulli, Schumacher, Glock and Kobayashi – average to only good drivers, who were never rated as the best in business. When management in Toyota’s team realised in 2009 they need top driver to deliver (they made offers to Raikkonen and Kubica), board in Japan pulled out. Some 4-5 years too late to do that, because you won’t win with such inconsistent drivers like Ralfie, Glock or Trulli.

    2. I have to disagree with you here. Glock was very impressive in GP2 and then did very well in his first full year at Toyota. In my opinion, he has a lot of talent but simply was never given the chance to promote himself to a bigger team. If he could have stayed at Toyota for another year or two, we knows were he might have ended up.

      1. For me 2008 and especially 2009 were excellent chances to showcase his talent and he simply blew it. So many times he was outraced by Trulli by quite big margins (20-30 seconds) and that was Trulli past his prime, at 34 and 35 years of age. The best example of that was Bahrain GP in 2009, when Glock outdragged Trulli from the grid, led the race and then eventhough team made catastrophic strategy error, Trulli still finished on the podium, while Glock was over 30 seconds at the end, struggling badly on tyres he didn’t like. He achieved similarly poor results compared to Trulli in many races and vice-versa, he beat Trulli by big margins too, which for me is very clear sign of average drivers. Top drivers almost always delivers maximum, average or good ones have bad races mixed with good races.

  9. All my respect for Marussia is gone now, what a classless way to get rid of the driver that somewhat sacrificed his career to help them. They could’ve at least told him sooner but this sudden announcement makes me wonder that they initially thought they could keep him.

    As someone who used to defend the new teams I’m getting a bit bored of Caterham and Marussia. 3 seasons of all talk and no success not to mention the way they treat their drivers is embarrassing to say the least. If you can’t afford to compete in the top level of motorsport then why are you wasting slots that could be taken by teams with more potential.

    1. They could’ve at least told him sooner

      How did you come to the conclusion that they suddenly surprised him with this news? John Booth’s comments make it pretty clear that a) the team wanted to keep him, but b) had to let him go because of economic conditions. Which in turn suggests that this is something they’ve been mulling over for a while now, and have only let him go because they had no choice.

      1. Not to mention that its widely expected Glock will announce a drive somewhere soon, hinting that he has been aware of it and working on this for some time already too.

    2. @davef1

      wasting slots that could be taken by teams with more potential

      But this is exactly the point – they aren’t “wasting slots that could be taken by teams with more potential”. Where are these teams with more potential, and the resources to compete in F1? There was room for another team on the grid last year and there’s room for a second this year. Yet no one took advantage of the opportunity.

      This is proof that it’s not the new teams that are failing, it’s F1. It simply does not make financial sense for a new team to enter at the moment. Save for the three new teams (who were told they were entering under cost restrictions which were then abolished) no new team has entered F1 since 2006.

      1. This is proof that it’s not the new teams that are failing, it’s F1. It simply does not make financial sense for a new team to enter at the moment. Save for the three new teams (who were told they were entering under cost restrictions which were then abolished) no new team has entered F1 since 2006.

        This is exactly what is wrong. Its not as if its only the backmarkers having trouble.

        1. The problem is that the big teams will naturally oppose cost-cutting measures because they know that if they have more money to spend on developing their cars, they will be able to do a more-thorough job of it, and therefore perform better. If they have to sacrifice a smaller team or two to do that, they would probably do it without a second thought.

    3. Chris (@tophercheese21)
      21st January 2013, 11:03

      As someone who used to defend the new teams I’m getting a bit bored of Caterham and Marussia. 3 seasons of all talk and no success

      How can you say they’ve been all talk and no success? Do you realise the individual and collective effort it takes just to get 1 car on the grid of the most expensive sport on the planet? For 3 years, I think Marussia and Caterham have done exceptionally well considering they’re relatively small budget.

      Further more; what “talk”ing have they been doing? None of them have come out and said they want to win races right off the bat. They know what they’re (financially) capable of doing, and not doing, and it’s clear that scoring points in Formula 1 is an extremely expensive and difficult task.

      I think you’re asking a bit much for the smallest teams, with the smallest budgets, to be scoring points within 3 years.

      1. I’m not asking or expecting them to score points. In fact they are the ones constantly stating they will be regular points scorers (although it is Caterham that do this more). It’s become a habit of Caterham/Lotus/Team Green & Yellow to state before every season ‘We are part of the midfield’ or ‘we will score points this season’ and have they? No.

        No one expects them to win races and score points for at least another couple of years but if you visit Caterhams website after pre-season testing or read F1 magazines there will no doubt be an article saying ‘Mike Gascoyne convinced Caterham will score’. Heck a quick Google search will link you to many articles containing something along those lines.

        So I stand by what I said, they are all talk off the track instead of on it.

  10. Not good news for F1. It’s not like we’re talking about Andrea Moda. Marussia have proved that they have what it takes to be a serious F1 team. In 2012, they cut their deficit to the front runners from 6.85% to 4.83% and were fighting Caterham in the final races of the season.

    The fact that they are forced to take pay drivers to survive should serve as a warning sign for F1. A year ago, we had a poll asking which teams would still be in F1 in 10 years’ time and only 2% expected HRT and Marussia to last that long. F1F readers were convinced only about having McLaren and Ferrari on the 2022 grid. The only other team, which got more than 50% of the votes, was Red Bull (51%).

    It’s obvious that not everything is right in F1 and further cost cutting and fairer distribution of the prize money are vital to ensure healthy development of the sport in the future.

    1. I’d very like to see this as a COTD!

      You’re absolutely right…F1 needs to revise prize money policy more than anything else…but I’m not sure if more cost cutting will benefit sport…it’ll further slow down the cars which is not good!

      1. I’d very like to see this as a COTD!

        Would be two in a row for him – you’re on fire! :)

      2. @snafu

        I’m not sure if more cost cutting will benefit sport…it’ll further slow down the cars which is not good!

        Um … how? The idea behind cost-cutting is to reduce costs so that everyone can be competitive for less than they are currently spending. The likes of Caterham and Marussia will probably be unaffected – it’s the teams like Red Bull and Ferrari (who spend hundreds of millions of dollars per season) that will feel it the most.

      3. Thanks very much guys, I’m sure that Keith will have a lot of other comments to choose from today!

        As for the slower cars, I think it’s possible to find a good compromise solution. It’s true that the cars are now a few seconds slower than they were in 2004 when most of the current lap records were set but I don’t think that it has generally made F1 less appealing. For sure, the times shouldn’t fall to GP2 levels but I don’t think that would happen if costs were cut further. Even if Ferrari’s budget was suddenly as low as Caterham’s, Ferrari would still be quicker because they have been in F1 for so long and possess many facilities that Caterham don’t have. Furthermore, I believe that the rules and the number of tyre suppliers (single or more) probably have bigger effect on the speed of the cars than the actual budgets.

  11. It simply does not make financial sense for a new team to enter at the moment.

    It’s obvious that not everything is right in F1 and further cost cutting and fairer distribution of the prize money are vital to ensure healthy development of the sport in the future.

    Which makes doubling engine costs from 2014 a monumentally stupid idea.

    1. Someone has to pay for them…

      1. @optimaximal I wasn’t referring to the manufacturers’ (undoubted) need to recover the substantial development costs resulting from the change of regulations. That’s Economics 101.

        I was criticising the decision of the sport to abandon the existing engines, for which the development costs have been well and truly amortised, in favour of these wonderful new turbos. Which will increase costs (from about 8 million euros per season to 15 million according to the reports I’ve seen) to the detriment in particular of the backmarkers and make pay drivers more, not less, prevalent. You can’t buy half an engine, and the smaller teams won’t be able to avoid this cost. So they’ll reduce their budgets on everything else, to accommodate a change that will do nothing to improve the racing (and will in fact detract from it, given they’ll result in heavier, slower cars and will spread the field as we reintroduce the engine wars).

  12. Realy not happy about this! Glocks such a good driver and I’m just hoping another team grabs him! Only benefit is that Il now marussia will be more financially stable. Lets hope Bruno senna gets the seat

    1. Lets hope Bruno senna gets the seat

      Why? He was mediocre in a HRT. He was mediocre in a Renault. He was mediocre in a Williams. What evidence is there to suggest he would be anything other than mediocre in a Marussia, and how does being mediocre help the team?

      1. He was more than mediocre at Williams because he was scoring points on a regular basis. Also he was only given a year or less with those teams so if he could have more than a year with marussia then he might surprise us

  13. So i guess Petrov’s got a chance now.

    1. I’d say it’s more than a chance – when Nikolai Fomenko confirmed that Max Chilton would join the team (a day before the team announced it), he openly said that he wanted to get Petrov into the team if he could.

      1. @prisoner-monkeys Oksana Kosatshenko said today that they’re only discussing with Caterham and that they are not planning to negotiate with Marussia. Though obviously the situations may change pretty fast if Caterham chooses someone else…

        1. @huhhii – I’ve noticed Oksana is very, very good at playing the media, probably because she knows stuff can get lost in translation when it makes the transition from Russian to English. For instance, she admitted that Petrov had lost all of his government funding in the middle of last year. This was reported in the English media as Petrov losing all of his sponsorship. They were then able to report that they had funding from the private sector – Russian Helicopters is not a State-owned enterprise – and let the English-language media make of that what they will. Petrov never lost all of this funding; he always had backing from Russian Helicopters. But Oksana was savvy enough to let the media built her client up by having them run a story that made it look like he had found some sponsorship that he already had.

  14. even though he has said he probably won’t drive this year, does this open the door to kobayashi, as he has lots of sponsorship money now and does have reasonable experience, espeacially when compared to the majority of the field…

  15. Sad news, I quite like Tim o’Glock.

    I don’t think that the possibility of him getting the Force India drive (as many are speculating about) is really going to happen. FI seem to be taking ages to decide if they want a young paying driver (ala Bianchi) or an experienced old hand who is known to the team (Sutil). If Glock had a bit of a budget behind him he could tick both those boxes (having driven for Jordan in 04) but he doesn’t.

  16. Well, that’s sad! Having Glock around always have us a good gauge to the different drivers they brought in alongside him. Of course, he’s also a decent driver.

  17. F1 is for pay drivers. DTM is for talented drivers. I’m sorry, I never thought I’d be saying this. But just when Marussia were looking up(Pat Symonds and KERS and all), they’ve let go of an important person. Who will they take now? Petrov?

    1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
      21st January 2013, 11:11

      Certainly pay drivers are more likely to get the seat In a smaller team, but can you honestly say that any of the DTM drivers are better drivers than Alonso, Vettel, Hamilton, Webber, or Button?

      Because I certainly wouldn’t take a DTM driver over any of those guys.

      1. @tophercheese21 I’m talking about the present generation. Vettel was probably the last big find(question marks still around Maldonado, Perez, Hulkenberg et. al.). Look at some talents like Jamie Green, Gary Paffett, Edoardo Mortara, Bruno Spengler… all of them came close bt are now on top in DTM. Robert Wickens and Roberto Merhi were strong talents too…but they had no place in F1.

    2. Your comment is nonsense.
      1) DTM doesn’t take pay drivers? Then how do you explain Ralf Schumacher trolling around at the back of the field for the last 5 years. He’s not the only washed up former F1 driver who’s turned up in that series either
      2) The best drivers in touring car series such as DTM are often people who have failed to make a career in single seaters. Sure they are different disciplines and touring car drivers are still top class drivers but Formula One is still the pinnacle of motorsport. Look at Paul Di Resta, DTM champion and still he has yet to convince me after 2 years he is anything but average. Gary Paffett the same, been a champion in the past in DTM, been in the frame for more titles on more than one occasion and yet Mclaren have never contemplated putting him in one of their cars. And Mclaren aren’t shy if they have a special talent on their hands, just look at Hamilton back in 2007.

      1. What about Jamie Green, Bruno Spengler and Edoardo Mortara??

  18. Chris (@tophercheese21)
    21st January 2013, 11:07

    Clearly this wouldn’t have happened if Marussia had maintained their 10th place in the constructors.

  19. Even though he is out of a racing seat I don’t think this is the end of Glock in F1, maybe competitve racing yes, but I can imagine him becoming a third driver, maybe at Lotus or Sauber, he has enough experience and I am pretty sure he is a team player, after all he stayed with Virgin/Marussia for 3 years, so I definitely think he could help develop a car. As well as that I do imagine him now turning his hand to touring cars, this is what is probably better for him now, it would probably be better for him to shine in touring cars that to wrack up laps at the back.

  20. I wouldn’t say I am a Glock fan, but I like the guy and wanted him to do well but what I think this outlines more than anything is the direction that F1 is going more and more. We know that F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport and with that comes high costs but its looks as though Marussia are going to be having 2 pay drivers now.

    I just hope that other teams aren’t forced to go down this route and can find otherways of getting funding.

  21. Other people saying they arn’t surprised by this news…I am shocked, it’s not something I ever even thought about.. I guess i just assumed that Glocks seat was a given.

    I can’t help thinking that Formula 1 in general is not as prepared for this season as previous ones – there are still 2 Grand Prixs to be finalised, still 3 drivers to be announced, car launches are later and being announced later..testing is starting in a couple of weeks, is everybody ready? I don’t think so.

  22. according to joe sawards blog , glock is due to test a mercedes dtm car next week….

  23. Interesting news and some very interesting comments from you peeps.

    It really is a shambles, isn’t it. The whole economic model is pear-shaped.

    We need a ban on pay drivers; which is, of course, impossible at the moment. But we must get to the stage where salaried drivers are hired on driving and development abilities, not “dowries”. This surely is the only healthy way to run a sport – so that the best drivers from other series have a chance to move up into F1.

    The answer is, of course, for those greedy bar stewards who run the sport to share profits more equally. It will only profit all parties in the end. At the moment, they are being bloody short-sighted in my opinion.

    Queue Michael Douglas shouting, “Greed is good!”

    1. @shimks

      The answer is, of course, for those greedy bar stewards who run the sport to share profits more equally. It will only profit all parties in the end.

      No, the answer is to find a way to cut costs so that teams can compete for $50 million a year, instead of the $400 million that some of them are currently spending. “Sharing the profits” is only going to give the teams more money to spend when costs are already too high.

  24. I guess Glock’s move to BMW is a done deal.
    BMW works driver and long time friend of Glock had the following twitter conversation with him:

    Dirk Müller: @realTimoGlock Many congrats and welcome in the club:-)))
    Timo Glock: @muellerdirk ppssss danke
    Dirk Müller: @realTimoGlock 😉😉

Comments are closed.