Marussia, Yas Marina, 2013

Rival teams could block Marussia F1 comeback

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Marussia, Yas Marina, 2013In the round-up: A rescue package for the Marussia team may be jeopardised by rival teams who wish to claim the prize money owed to the team.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Marussia's F1 return threatened by rival teams eyeing a share of the prize money (The Guardian)

"Marussia’s path back to Formula One could be blocked by the other teams who want a share of their £40m prize money for finishing ninth last season."

Marussia could make 2015 F1 return (BBC)

"Administrators FRP Advisory said the company was making 'progress towards a longer-term viable solution'."

Ex-Sainsbury Boss Aims To Be King Of F1 Team (Sky)

"The identity of the other financial investors with whom Mr King is working was unclear on Wednesday, but he is understood to have joined forces with Graeme Lowden, Marussia’s chief executive, and the team principal John Booth."

Marussia back from dead (The Telegraph)

"One element that seems more certain is that any return for Marussia would not see Briton’s Max Chilton back on the grid for a third season."

Ex-Red Bull man to head Haas design (Autosport)

"Although the construction of its 2016 F1 challenger is being overseen by Italian racing car maker Dallara, Haas has appointed Taylor as its chief designer to oversee the project."

'If I drove s**t last year, I wouldn't be here' (ESPN)

Daniil Kvyat: "I don't believe in luck. I think it's all done by the decisions and the results. If I was driving like shit last year, I wouldn't be here even if Sebastian went away."

Tweets

Comment of the day

Are Force India’s troubles indicative of F1’s financial health?

Over the years, I have come to like the team, simply for their performance, year in year out, on track. They have kept the sport we all love much entertaining by their dogged approach to racing and determination to succeed, with meagre resources. Were they not running second to Mercedes at a certain time during the 2014 campaign?

If Force India cannot survive, irrespective of their level of performance and achievement in Formula One, then something is wrong with the current F1.

I don’t care what many might think about this, but a midfield team should be able to run a healthy team on their F1 earnings. Currently, that is not happening and it doesn’t bode well for the future of the sports.
James Devon (@Tata)

From the forum

Snapshot

Jordan King, FIA European Formula Three, 2015

Jordan King (see above) raced in the FIA Formula Three championship last year.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Tom Watson and Ian Hayward!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Happy birthday to former F1 driver Hector Rebaque who is 59 today. Along with Sergio Perez, Rebaque is one of just six Mexican drivers to have raced in F1.

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.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 101 comments on “Rival teams could block Marussia F1 comeback”

    1. I don’t get what the point of Marussia coming back anyway. Their development would be woefully behind and would be battling with themselves – surely no point?

      1. This looks to me like Mr King buying his way into F1 circles.

        He has long been rumored to be a candidate for replacing Bernie, and perhaps this is his first toward it? This will give him a perfect opportunity to acclimatise himself with F1 and its curious dealings. Perhaps the CVC is behind this?

        The car will be pretty far behind in terms of development, they could well be 10 secs off the pace. I doubt that would matter though, King has other plans.

        1. @jaymenon10 He could never realistically move into Bernie’s seat whilst his son is racing single seaters at a high level – it would be seen as blatant nepotism if he magically leapfrogged better talent into an F1 seat.

          1. @optimaximal

            ….this is F1 after all..anything is possible.

            I mean Max Mosely sold the commercial rights to F1 to his best buddy while he was President of the FIA for godsake!…anything can happen

            1. @jaymenon10 The terms of the sale were ludicrous but the EU required the FIA sell off the commercial rights to F1… He took the quickest, easiest & (at the time, best) solution – I think he’s even gone on record and says he wishes he never did it.

          2. you mean, its as ridiculous as say, the FIA president’s son running a leading GP2 team and managing some top drivers @optimaximal? Oh, wait …

            1. @bascb True, but using political nous to muscle your way into management of drivers & teams is nothing new – it’s always about who you know – but when the actual drivers are concerned, we know it really should be a talent exercise, not a money exercise.

      2. Best case scenario is they survive on life-support into next year with no real development (but with outstanding debt’s covered) when it’s rumoured McLaren will pick them up as a genuine B-Team, Super Aguri-style. Honda definitely need a second team running their engines and McLaren have got a talent log-jam they need to clear.

        1. @optimaximal It needs to happen, but, what could they call it? Acura-Mugen? The problem now is that McLaren and Honda don’t have any second brands! Tbh, it suits Honda, McLaren, Mercedes, Williams etc. just to have 3 cars. FIAT at least could call theirs Alfa Romeo!

          1. They could call it Manor-Honda. I don’t think that name change is necessary.

            1. @maroonjack Yes, I think that’s the most likely solution. Reminiscent of Super Aguri-Honda. Personally, I would like the two small teams to be Maserati and Alfa Romeo! Both successful in the 50’s..

        2. Ron Dennis already made it quite clear that he has no intention of running a B team on top of their A team. And he also mentioned that running 3rd cars is just a shorter way to ruin the field even further, although he would be contractually obliged to do so if the call from FOM came @optimaximal, @fastiesty

      3. Easier to buy an existing entry than make a new application?

      4. I for one really do see the point of having one more team on the grid.

        1. I think enough is enough of Marussia. The team name is absolutely ridiculous since it has nothing to to with the manufacturer anymore (yes, Lotus also has a similar problem, but at least it has some heritage as a Formula 1 name. Would like it, sincerely, if it was called Benetton again, but, heck, marketing).

          Also, what is the point of having 2 cars that will obviously be completely out of the pace of everyone else? Before, at least, they had Caterham to challenge and compete. Now? They will be 2 moving chicanes. And will they ever get the 107% time of qualifying at all? I’m all for more teams, but sincerely, people that take this seriously and with respect, not 2 moving publicity banners with 2 poor souls driving them and being ridiculed…

          1. To complement my previous comment, which might sound harsh, the thing is I think we have all given enough chances to Marussia and Caterham. They never felt capable of challenging any other team at all throughout their life span. How long have they been around? And they were no Minardi: excluding Jules, these two teams became F1 career ending stops for most of their talent. The back markers of yesteryear at least provided a chance for some remarkable performances. Yes, we had Jules brilliant performance at Monaco, but is this enough to legitimise these 2 teams that basically were for most of their 4 to 5 year lifespan moving chicanes? I honestly can’t compare these to a, say, Minardi or even Super Aguri.

            1. Erm, the backmarkers of yesteryear, if that is what Super Aguri are I have been watching F1 waaay too long. When I think of those I think Andrea Moda, Life, Rial, Coloni et al. Those teams where poor, Marussia, Caterham and HRT where not. They where all highly professional, well sorted outfits who performed admirably in a sport which has serious spending issues. In my opinion F1 needs the likes of Marussia/Manor, Caterham and Haas way more than it needs manufacturers who are more than happy to abandon the sport as soon as their accountants and board say so like BMW, Toyota and Honda (twice) did.

            2. GeeMac what did you think happened with Marussia and Caterham. There owners decided not spend any more money. Think about it Marussia could have settled all there dets if they completed the year with there price money they got, there billionaire owner just got tiered of the sport and left. Caterham owner found a new sport and decided to leave the sport with out paying for any thing. There is no difference between manufacturers and privates.

            3. Here is two link too a sites that shows how the money was more or less distribute for the 2013. If you look at it you will see that the distributing of the money is not so bad as the small teams make as believe. The first link is to show where the data of how the money is distribute come from. The second link is how the money was distributed. It is rely interesting.

              http://www.quora.com/How-much-does-an-F1-champion-win

              http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1955397-formula-1-prize-money-what-are-the-rewards-per-race-and-per-season

            4. @sergio-perez Despite what you may think about Marussia, it is a team that achieved great things, highly professional, but with another business model. It was betrayed because costs never went down, but still managed to finish 9th last year, before Sauber (which is remarkable). After such betrayal, it’s clear it needs a rethink, a boosted financial plan over the coming years. It is probably an ongoing process; who knows what ties there is with the likes of Haas, Ferrari, etc.. I really hope they can make it this year. As for the backmarkers you mentioned, I think like @geemac to older ones, lots of them could barely be qualified within 107%, which is something Marussia always achieved.

              I think we have all given enough chances to Marussia and Caterham

              Thank you so much for your gratitude in allowing them to exist, but I think it’s more related to rules and licences to comply with. If you are bored of them, it’s another problem. I have grown an interest for Marussia and their model, and what they demonstrate in the sport: 9th with a pocket budget. If they comply with the rules, I’d be happy to see them compete :)

            5. I’ve never understood people that make comments about there being no point in a given team, because they will be fighting at the back or struggling to survive. It just shows a complete lack of understanding of what sport actually is.

            6. @koosoos The teams that spend less, spend around $70m per year. How could Caterham and Marussia run healthly with an income of $35m and $14m? Even the teams that earn $50m were said to be struggling last year. And Ecclestone and CVC take at least 50% of the total money from F1, without running a single car.

              Not only the teams are struggling but even the race tracks are in trouble. Does this seems right to you?

            7. @corix No CVC only takes 37% of what F1 makes. Secondly only tracks in Europe are struggling. Every one goes on about it is Ecclestone fault but every one forgets that Ecclestone offered the teams a big slice of the pie when he bought the commercial right and they turned hm down. Now they are crying about how much he takes. Ecclestone has to make as much money as he can make to keep CVC happy (winch owns the part of the pie that the teams should have had if they bought the rights when he offered it too them) and the teams. People on here forget that the more money Ecclestone makes the more money there is for the the teams. If the struggling tracks country do not want to support F1 there is a lot of other
              country that will.

          2. I think enough is enough of Marussia. The team name is absolutely ridiculous since it has nothing to to with the manufacturer anymore

            @sergio-perez

            There not entered this year as Marussia, The name on the 2015 entry list is Manor Grand Prix (Which is what the initial 2010 entry was before Virgin came along).

        2. @spoutnik – I see the point in a competitive team being in F1 but I don’t see much point in Marussia coming back now – perhaps to race in 2016 but not in 2015. I might as well take my Ford Focus down to Australia and have a go – I wouldn’t be any less competitive!

          1. @Bookoi The point is tha Marussia and Catherham, for almost 5 years, never seemed to make any progress whatsoever. Yes Marussia made a brilliant 9th place thanks to lots of retirements, safety cars, and a brilliant drive by Jules Bianchi. This was on their last year. Realistically speaking, were they ever close to achieve anything similar if not at Monaco? No. Yes, they had low budgets. They expected the budget cap. But just look at the likes of Sauber, or even Force India. Sauber had a bad year last time. But they will for sure fight back this year. Look at Force India. Another privateer that did a good job, from a previous not so competitive team. There’s a difference between competitors , teams competing to win, to make a difference, and those only participating to finish the race. In football, for example, Marussia and Catherham would have long been relegated, and a chance given to other teama eager to fill their spot. I can’t wai, for example, for Haas GP. And they deserve 3, 4 years to mature. Lets see.

      5. You are so right. There is no point. I also don’t see the point of Lotus, Force India or Sauber racing next year since they won’t win the championship. Hell maybe even Rec Bull and Mclaren should just stop. What’s the point? Ferrari looks quicker and Merc are the favorites. Why do this people bother?

    2. It would realy be great to see Marussia (now Manor) back to the grid. It would mean, at least, two more drivers this year, even if the car was a dog.

      And I think Ecclestone himself would try to make this happen, as is way easier to sell a 20 car grid than a 18 car grid.

      1. @corix I wonder who would be driving.. Gutierrez isn’t doing anything this year, if that helps Ferrari accept the CVA agreement, and that leaves one more seat.. Van der Garde isn’t doing anything either, after being ousted from Sauber, with Chilton ruled out. It’d be interesting to see someone like Dean Stoneman get the seat after all he’s been through, but that would require a very benevolent owner.

        However, if Force India are in financial difficulty, would they grasp for the Manor money to survive? I previously thought it would be Sauber needing to do that..

        1. @fastiesty I think that Gutierrez is a possible driver. From what I see, Raikkonen can announce his retirement at the end of the season, so Ferrari would need to make sure his next second driver is in shape.

          The other seat could be probably occupied by Alexander Rossi, if he really wants to drive for Hass from 2016 onwards. Or even Stoneman or de Silvestro, if they have enough money for it.

          Manor could easily become a Haas demo team for 2015, with drivers eyeing a 2016 drive looking for a seat.

          1. @corix I can see Gutierrez doing it just to keep his eye in for Haas in 2016. Ferrari have an option on Raikkonen for 2016, so if he is resurgent against Vettel they might take it up. Apart from that, Vergne is now the ‘Bianchi replacement’, and Hulk is still an option.

            Manor in 2015, Haas in 2016.. both are now ‘who will drive alongside Gutierrez?’ :P

        2. Gutierrez will take for sure one of HAAS’s seats next season…I dont see Kimi retiring at the end of the year, but if it does happens Ferrari will go for a top driver to replace him. Gutierrez has a solid reputation of being a great development/test driver and he has been working with a Ferrari engine since 2011; if you add up the sponsorhip he brings (and great potential media support from Mexico now that they have a GP), that was the main reason why he was choosen as a reserve driver in Scuderia Ferrari…I honestly don’t believe he is being considered for a seat in 2016-2017, BUT I do see him continuing helping out in the development of Ferrari’s engines by racing with HAAS starting from 2016.

      2. While I don’t think marussia adds anything to F1 (only time they are even seen in the broadcasts is when they get lapped). Having a couple of gp2 cars running around could do the same job and more.

        As for marussia they did have a deal going on with ferrari. Bianchi was a ferrari driver and his spot in marussia was paid by ferrari. So it is possible ferrari could buy one of the marussia seats for Raffaele Marciello for example and marussia then finds some other driver with his weight in gold. But what good does it do for Marciello to drive for such hopeless backmarker team? Nothing.

        In the large scheme of things it could be even good for the sport to get rid of the 10th team. Now teams like sauber and force india will get little more money when marussia’s prize money probably gets divided among the teams. And F1 now has a golden chance to use that marussia prize money to balance the income more equally. Out of that 40 million give more to the backmarker teams to counter the top heavy prize money distribution. After writing that I’m starting to think there are nothing but positives in losing caterham and marussia! Their exit and leftover prize money actually can make the redistribution of wealth possible!

        1. Sorry to say, but I think your economic thesis of taking from the poor to give to the poor is flawed.

          We need teams like Marussia not because they are battling at the front but for the 9th place at Monaco which was one of the highlights (of not the highlight) of 2014.

          In short, we can love the back markers just as much as the front runners and in that sense they have ‘value’.

          1. @john-h ‘Support the plucky underdog at all costs’, absolute drivel, sorry. Highlight of 2014? It seems to me that F1 is not what you should be watching. Such an elitist arena of competition. You should get down the local banger racing, nothing but underdogs there…

            Manor/Marussia are a total waste of time and money. Be gone.

            1. @psynrg It’s not exactly ‘competition’ when the cards are stacked in your favour. Mercedes are lapping up the PR, but we all know they outspent Renault and Ferrari 2-1 on the new engines. Surely being the best is winning from an equal starting point?

              Pound for pound, Marussia and Caterham were probably better than Ferrari and McLaren in 2014/2013.

            2. Drivel?… Banger racing?… Meh

          2. Your idea of “value” is very subjective. The everlasting crusade for caterham and marussia was comical at best. So many seasons, nil points. Then by huge luck they managed to pull it off and that’s your top moment of the season? It was almost schadenfreunde feeling to see them achieve anything at all ever. Lol they finally scored some points because of massive luck. We need more teams like this. Like I said a gp2 car could achieve this same comical underperforming effect with a lucky points scoring once in every 5 years or so… Or 10 years depending how you count…

            1. @socksolid Fair enough, but I don’t agree. I’m sure with more money they could have achieved more, and that’s my point. Redistribute the wealth better from the top down, rather than letting the bottom fight over the scraps.

            2. I totally agree with @john-h. With more money these teams would surely do better than they have done. @socksolid and @psynrg seems to forget that Marussia have 2 points in a season where the experienced Sauber didn’t score.

              If this doesn’t prove that Marussia deserves to be around the F1 I don’t really now what does.

          3. F1 needs backmarker teams to finish in last place. Otherwise, the mid-field becomes the back-field and so on and so on. Eventually, you will be left with a single make. How many more Vijay Mallya’s are willing to blow their family fortune’s on an unsustainable business model?

        2. @socksolid

          …his spot in marussia was paid by Ferrari…

          No, it wasn’t. How else do you explain Ferrari being one of Marussia’s creditors?

          Bianchi’s presence may have greased the wheels, allowing them to move from Cosworth to the prancing horse, but it certainly wasn’t free!

        3. Absolutely disgusting to suggest the prize money Marussia won should be taken from them and given to others, because what, they don’t deserve it and the other teams do? That totally defeats the object of prize money in the first place.

          1. Spot on Dan

          2. Marussia is not getting any of that prize money because they are not racing…

          3. @danbrown180 I agree, but I have a feeling they will justify it as a means to survive. It’s human nature (survival at all costs.. even if that includes cannibalism). Force India are struggling to survive and this money will probably prop them up.

      3. Teams trying to block Marrussia/Manor come back to get their (Marrussia’s) hard earned money… oh my God!

        #ForzaJules

        1. @jcost

          That is a COTD right there.

    3. Appreciate you providing the Jerez testing forum Keith!

      I agree, Honda is dreadfully in need of a B team. Vandoorne and KMag would be an ideal lineup for a feeder team

    4. System sure is rigged in favor of FOM.
      They have a rule that you can’t pick up your prize money for the finished year, unless you enter the next year. It just doesn’t make any sense. Image having to work one extra month at work, before quitting, just in order to receive a paycheck for a month you’ve already worked off.
      Even if Marussia doesn’t enter F1 this year or ever again, they should be fully entitled to pick up their reward for 2014 since that’s exactly what it is – a a prize money for 2014. Not for 2015.
      How can this kind of nonsense be in existence.

      1. Exactamundo!

      2. If there is no team around to give the prize money to then what do you do with it?

        I’d also point out that the reason that this particular rule is in place is to try & ensure teams stay in F1. Don’t forget that before these rules were in place we used to get teams turning up on an inconsistent basis as they didn’t have to commit to anything & even if they did there was nothing stopping them from just not turning up.
        What these rules try & do is ensure that you commit not just to a season but for the long term so that you don’t get teams turning up only when it suits them & then taking the money & running off elsewhere & then randomly deciding to come back to F1 down the line.

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          5th February 2015, 3:07

          If there is no team around to give the prize money to

          There is a team! It exists; it is under administration; and the creditors would love to see the prize money.

          I agree that the prize money is for 2014 performance and should be paid irrespective if the team races in 2015.

          1. @coldfly, I believe that the FIA attached a clause to their entry conditions that, if a team goes into administration, the teams entry rights are forfeited back to the FIA. Once the FIA strips the team of its entry rights, they in turn are then ineligible for prize money since they are no longer recognised as a team.

            There was a similar analogy with Sauber a few years ago, when BMW voided Sauber’s entry rights by refusing to submit the application before walking out on them. Sauber technically lost their prize fund rights at the time (even when they did gain an entry, the FIA classed Sauber as a new entrant and therefore one without prize money rights), although in that case it seems that Bernie did intervene so Sauber were paid their prize money.

            1. Nope, Anon. Many thought this to be the case, but by now it has transpired that there is something along that lines, but it seems to have to be a complete end of the team (It might even be that the likes of Adam Cooper or J. Saward etc got this confirmed from insiders). Its clear that the administrators have checked with the FIA and FOM as well, because otherwise the slight hope of restarting the team would be long lost (now the FOM money could supply money to pay off debtors and bring about a 3rd of the money needed to go racing and its guaranteed for 2 year minimum – or maybe even 3, not sure about the detail)

          2. @coldfly True for Marussia, But I was referring more to situations where teams disappeared completely before the start of the following year as has happened a dozen times over the years.

            Also what about a situation where a team technically exists but dies before the start of the year, Who do you give the prize money to then?

        2. Id like to believe that it gets split up amongst the teams, but im sure Bernie gets some of it.

      3. Couldn’t agree more.

        I’m starting to think F1 teams must start asking help from Brussels to set F1 right.

        1. @jcost With the amount of red tape and due process involved in an EU investigation, the teams that need the changes will be up against the wall long before anything gets resolved…

    5. Couldn’t agree with you more @tata regarding your opinion that midfield teams must be able to run easily. It really is a sad case for the staff there as job cuts are inevitable. I would love nothing more than to work in F1, but seeing so many colleagues at Lotus, Caterham and Marussia must be really painful for them. Job security should be a factor when the top brass of F1 decide to allow such meagre prize money and they should be held to account on this I believe. So many lives are greatly affected because clearly Formula 1 is not stable financially. This really should not be possible given the profit the sport makes.

      Another sad twist is that we could lose 2 great drivers from the sport. If that happened, and its a very long shot thankfully but sadly still possible, I think many fans would completely give up on the sport. Perez and Hulkenberg may never be Champions, but anyone who has even casually watched the sport knows who they are and that losing them would be a big loss.

      Honestly, what will FOM do then? Losing a top European driver, and Asian-themed team and a South American driver would be a monumental blow to viewing figures. They would then have to do the dreaded 3 car team scenario and have lost even more respect from the fans.

      F1’s distribution of money needs fixed and quickly. I don’t want to see my sport die because of greed.

      1. Perez is North American.

        The Mexican GP was announced when there were two Mexican drivers in the field. we could potentially see the race run with zero mexicans now.

      2. While the prize money does need to be addressed, Force India’s situation is not all down to that as the team has been mis-managed on top of that as has other companies Vijay Mallya has been involved with where he owes a lot of people a lot of money.

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/11292117/Rainmaker-The-party-comes-to-an-end-for-Vijay-Mallya-Indias-King-of-the-Good-Times.html

      3. First of all, thanks to Keith for the COTD.
        Yes, you are right. From the outside it may look like a good job, but I regard working in F1 teams right now as the craziest place anyone could be employed. Dude, Team Principals’ jobs are not even secure. The current financial mess and the insecurities that come with it goes quite deep.

        Imagine that Sauber and Force India leave; as we have learnt, the remaining teams will have to run extra cars to beef up the grid.

        But chances are that fans will see that as a cosmetic solution to a much bigger problem and that could further lead to unpopularity of the sport and people like us who just can’t afford not to watch F1 might eventually switch off. Let’s not even talk of the millions of fans who were lost when their local teams and drivers went burst.

        In such a situation of unpopularity of the sport and fan-bleeding, I do not think car companies like Mercedes, Renault or Toyota would still want to hang around. After all, their end-game of being in the sport is to be more popular and to sell more cars. So what happens, the remaining teams of Ferrari, Maclaren, Redbull and Haas would run 6 cars to each to keep us ‘entertained’?

        On a final note, people tend to point to VJ Mallya’s other problems in his different companies as a reason for the current situation of his Formula 1 team. What I wonder all the time is why those who do that never bother to ask the most obvious question: How has this team been performing in championships in F1? A mid-field team is a 45-60% performer in F1. The money which they should earn, if the funds were distributed well, should be enough for them to function healthily. It may not be enough to fight with the big guys but if race strategy is calculated right and mother nature included, they could come off with a win here or there. Force India as an F1 team has enough clout to survive solely on her performance, irrespective of VJ Mallya’s other problems, the fact that is not happening should have all of us worried.

    6. Sorry Corey, of course it is! RogerA, I have seen some of these stories and indeed it does look like VJM is in serious trouble and has been for a while now. That said, it surely isn’t good enough that a midfield team is not sustainable. Had Force India been ridiculous over-spending and hiring lots of high earning staff and drivers, I would attribute more blame to Mallya personally. But I don’t think that’s been the case and there are so many losers when a team goes bust. It should be harder to fail than succeed when running a team with the objective of making up the numbers for racings sake. Look at Minardi, a team followed and admired by fans despite always coming last. Thanks to them young talent got a chance to shine in the many drivers they brought through. Everybody’s losing.

      1. YEah, I also think there is something completely wrong when a team running 4th-6th in the championship with a podium finish as well in recent years needs to rely on its owner to field the bill instead of surviving from the prize money @rbalonso.

        Sure, Mallya has made some serious mistakes and was living on the money his father earned. But in the end, the team IS having results because they are doing a good job, the same goes for Sauber in 2012-2013, they were doing a solid job, but still found themselves on the brink due to how the funds are distributed.

    7. ColdFly F1 (@)
      5th February 2015, 3:17

      Marussia to enter in 2015

      at least one team has made it known that they are not willing to let Marussia take part.

      That must be Sauber. Without Marussia they will be promoted to 9th in 2014 I would assume, and collect the additional prize money.

      Maybe Ferrari can help here, as they have most to win. Get some money back through the VCA and supply the engine in 2015 (they should ask for money up front this time).

      1. Nope, Sauber would not get the money instead, they still finished behind. As far as I understand, if the team that finished 9th is not there to receive the money, it is redistributed between all the teams, so really it could just as well be FI, or even STR or who knows .

        1. @bascb, I suppose that the reason why some have suspected Sauber is that Sauber is known to have made demands to receive Marussia’s prize money. I believe their argument was that Marussia had voided its entry rights and were no longer eligible to be classified in 9th place: therefore, Sauber should have been moved up into that position, and allocated the same prize funds accordingly.

          1. yes, and they got a no as answer from FOM. Marussia’s 9th place still stands and if they are not there to pick up the rewards it will be redistributed as part of the pot.

        2. Well, seems the strategy group voted on it and got a veto from (this year part of the group for the first time) FI.

          But other teams would likely have downvoted it in the F1 commission anyhow (mentioned are Red Bull, Williams, Sauber).

    8. For Marussia to come back, Bernie would have to compensate Sauber, but I haven’t heard Bernie say a single thing in recent months that suggests that likely to happen.

      As for those trying to bring Marussia back, where on earth were they three months ago, when they still had a factory, 2015 cars, and some staff. Now they have nothing but a couple of 2014 cars. What are they going to do – run the F1 team from a garage? I also agree with some of the other posts – they would be horrible uncompetitive, and would only show up to collect their prize money. If that’s all there is to it, then they can stay away as far as I’m concerned.

      1. still cheaper than having to pay the top teams to run 3rd cars I would think @adrianmorse

      2. I think they’ll run out of the original Manor premises, yes. But on the note of ‘horribly uncompetitive’, why not just run a field of Mercedes then? On that note, the pay drivers might as well not bother showing up either, leaving us a fight of Hamilton vs. Alonso at the front and some other drivers past their peak at the back. @adrianmorse

    9. I would actually see a compromise if this still allows Marussia to enter for 2015. As Sauber entered every race and Marussia did not, give Sauber a money for 9th place and Marussia gets it for 10th place even though they ended other way around.

      1. @bleu …but if the team does not earn the money for their 9th place, then the rescue deal will fail anyway. It’s all dependant on the team receiving the 2014 money to service the creditors and exit administration – they won’t get out of the frying pan unless Ferrari & co are paid.

    10. Would it be possible for Marussia to miss this year and come back in 2016? That would be my aim since right now it’s a bit late to hop back on the train. I do want them back, though.

      1. Not really. If they miss more than 3 races, the funds will not go to them – therefore losing a big draw for any potential interested party @joey-poey.

        1. Well, obviously. But I meant the idea being don’t participate this year to save the money and attempt to get better results by participating next year. Of course they wouldn’t get anything for not racing. But they wouldn’t spend anything either.

          1. The thing is, if they manage to make it to the grid, they will then have 2 years where they are guaranteed to get money from FOM (was it 30-40 million/season) and FOM should also pay the travel cost if I am not mistaken, but if they drop out they will have nothing for at least 2 further years (might be 3), and its even likely they would have to pay their own travel cost for all that time.

            In other words, if they make it to the grid now, they can count on a budget inflow of about 80 million, wich means the ability to pay off debts and end up with aobut 50 million towards their budget for the next 2 years.

            If they don’t race, they start anew, have to ask the FIA to be permitted to enter, lodge a pretty large fee as well as the entry guarantee of several million and then they have to find a budget for at least 2 seasons without any money from FOM.

    11. CVC and FOM ruled that Marussia’s prize money can’t be given to the other teams months ago.

      1. This was dependant on them competing in 2015 – if the team is legally dissolved, then there’s no entity to pay, so the money is spread around. To make things worse, the funds are paid across the year, so they have to remain in business all the time, meeting their racing commitments to the CRH, running up bills and debts in the process.

        It’s basically a racket for FOM to make money, because they charge the teams for freight, services etc.

    12. Jordan King and Max Chilton. What a line-up that would be… there’d be several extra crates of Marussia freight at every race, from the Bank of Dad.

      1. Thank god Chilton is now looking statesside (because he might be able to find a budget big enough for Indy Cars but not enough to buy an F1 seat anymore) @bullfrog

    13. Pointless; for fans, drivers and the sport itself.
      It’s never about quantity but quality.

      1. A couple of hundred people giving their all to compete on shoestring budget in a sport badly skewed in favour of the rich, not only surviving this long but actually making progress up the championship order? There’s plenty of quality there.

        1. @bookoi @supremacy Exactly, a lot of the staff have already been hired by teams like Williams, Ferrari etc.

    14. Without budget limits it will never matter how much prize money the teams are given, they will always spend everything they’ve got and the front running teams will still have hundreds of millions more than the teams at the rear.

      Natural selection – if the sport stagnates because there are so few teams and the fan numbers drop then the big manufactures won’t be interested in spending as much money

      1. yay some one finale see the point i was trying to make for months.

    15. So, apparently Haas F1 may have yellow cars when they enter…

      Can’t see Eddie Jordan being too pleased about that!

    16. Seems the teams are voting today on a series of rule changes that is going to ensure the quality of the racing declines massively.

      That been a big increase in downforce & a return to wider cars.

      The downforce increase is obviously going to hurt the racing as the cars will get much harder to follow again & the wider cars will make overtaking much harder on the narrower circuits.

      Guess it pretty much just confirms that were stuck with DRS forever. They shoudl be coming up with rules which improve the racing & remove the need for artificial gimmicks like DRS, Not going down the route to ensure DRS will be around long term.

      I like the talk of making proper racing tyres though & moving away from the artificially created High-deg nonsense we have had since 2011.

      1. If the downforce comes from mechanical things like tyres, it doesn’t have to hurt cars following others though. But it also means higher cornering speeds, which the FIA has been very reluctant about due to safety concerns.

      2. @Dizzy, On the other hand, there is the problem that people have been complaining about the cars being too slow and about the measures that have been taken in the past to limit cornering speeds, as well as those who want the cars to be made wider, as they were back in the early 1990’s.

        Now, whilst serving the demands for more power would make the cars faster in a straight line, it wouldn’t necessarily result in a huge increase in performance – at most circuits, the driver spends a large chunk of his time being traction limited (it was pointed out that, during the V10 era, drivers would spend about 5-10% less time on full throttle at each circuit compared to the V8’s so, even though they had more power, they couldn’t fully maximise it because they were traction limited).

        Ultimately, if the demands of those fans that demand that the cars are faster is to be met, it is questionable if it can be met purely through mechanical means – particularly in high speed corners where aerodynamics are key.
        Teams will ultimately push for the avenues that provide the opportunities for the largest gains, and aerodynamics is one area which has always tended to be particularly dominant, hence the push for relaxations in that area.

      3. Degrad Tyres are an insult to racing.
        The FIA can dictate on PIT STOPS if they need to.

        Pressing the ACCELERATOR, OVERTAKE or DRS button is all the same thing to me. I don’t see why DRS is any different. Drivers have ample opportunity to keep others out of their DRS zone.

        1. @supremacy

          DRS is nothing but an artificial gimmick whihc does nothing but produce boring, dull, uninteresting, unexciting, ridiculously easy highway passes down the straights.

          Its the key reason I no longer watch or even follow every race as i did religiously for 40 years.

          Its also said to be one of the key things German fans have said has turned them off F1 according to RTL & Sky germany’s internal viewer surveys. so its pretty much killing F1 in Germany.

    17. Firstly Sauber still get their money as the prize money received is based on the previous two years, this would have been Manors first prize money based on the same principal.

      If a team opposed this entry it would be in very poor taste, would show outright greed and in my eyes grand theft of prize money that was never theirs to start with. I am a Red Bull fan, if what Marko said is true, I would be appalled, would def not support such a move.

    18. It may transpire that the ‘serious’ party interested in Caterham is the same as the one interested in Manor, and were waiting for the first test to make their decision.

    19. They have been blocked from competing by Mallya. I hope Force India retires 19 races in a row now, selfish *****.

      1. @roald They might not turn up to 19 races in a row ;) – maybe they need that Marussia money to survive.. and under usual circumstances it would have been Lotus voting instead of FI, interestingly enough..

    20. i dont care about marussia at all. if they can make it or not does not make a difference to me, since they will be uncompetitive. what i think is completely disgusting is the attitude shown by the other team(s): for so many years the discussion topic has been that there are not enough teams on the grid and that to survive, F1 needs a healthy grid. and now that the grid could have one more team there is someone putting up obstacles!
      and sure: its a lot of money! so the question is: how dumb is FOM to sabottage F1 owns well-being by generating such a situation where the interests of the sport (one more team in the grid) can be put aside by the interest of one (or more teams) (the money). if one team folds, the prize money shouldnt be handed to other teams (or at least not right away) because that means those teams will never get the break marussia would need right now and is only detrimental for F1 in the end.

    21. Was told earlier tonight that Caterham staff have been informed that whats left of the team’s asset’s are to be sold off & the team closed down completely with all remaining staff been laid off effective immediately.

      Also been told that Force India were the only team to vote against Manor Gp using last year’s car.

    Comments are closed.