Roberto Merhi, Manor, Sepang International Circuit, 2015

Manor couldn’t run two cars in Malaysia – Fernley

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Force India’s deputy team principal Bob Fernley accuses Manor of only intending to run one car during last weekend’s Malaysian Grand Prix.

Codemasters F1 2015 now available to order

The official Formula One video game series comes to next-generation platforms in June and you can now place your orders for F1 2015.

If you order F1 2015 for Xbox One, PlayStation 4 or PC from Amazon using the links below you will also be helping to contribute to F1 Fanatic:

Win the Ultimate Codemasters F1 2015 gaming experience with NVidia

This year’s F1 Fanatic Predictions Champion will win a copy of Codemasters F1 2015 plus a stunning £1,600 gaming system from NVidia to play it on. The top 20 players overall will also win copies of F1 2015. Enter here for your chance to win:

Links

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

Roberto Merhi, Manor, Sepang International Circuit, 2015

Force India unimpressed with Manor no-show (Crash)

"I think it was a very clear strategy here to run one car and you have got to look at it from the point of view, is that the spirit of what you are trying to achieve. That is up to the FIA and the Commercial Rights Holder."

F1 must be more affordable - Ferrari (Autosport)

"We have to do our best to make Formula One a bit more affordable."

Smedley concerned by Williams deficit (F1i)

"To be 60 seconds down at the end of the race, absolutely it’s a concern. It would be remiss of me to say I wasn't concerned about that."

What next for Renault? (ESPN)

"There are many great brands that are not in Formula One, like Volkswagen and Audi, and that demonstrates you can be extremely successful without being in Formula One."

Ron Dennis: 'It’s challenging at the moment...' (Adam Cooper's F1 Blog)

"It will be Europe before we’ll have a pace we can measure."

Formula One Malaysian Grand Prix on NBCSN is most-watching overnight F1 race on cable in 18 years (NBCSN)

"NBCSN’s live coverage of the Formula One Malaysian Grand Prix, highlighted by Ferrari’s Sebastian Vettel earning his first win with his new team, was the most-watched overnight F1 race on cable in 18 years, averaging 384,000 viewers."

Tweets

Comment of the day

Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Sepang International Circuit, 2015Many different figures are being claimed as the cost of a new contract Lewis Hamilton will sign with Mercedes. But does it really matter how much he’s being paid?

I really don’t care how much Hamilton gets paid, it’s limited by the value the Mercedes bosses place in him.

The amount Ecclestone and CVC pay themselves is more relevant seeing as that pool is taken mostly from governments and us fans.
@George

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Majormilou, Nico Savidge, Ripping Silk, Christopher and Nic Morley!

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

Three-times F1 champion Jack Brabham, who passed away last year, was born on this day in 1926.

F1 Fanatic earns a commission on products sold via the links to our affiliate partners above, however you are not charged any extra. See here for more information.

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

  • 97 comments on “Manor couldn’t run two cars in Malaysia – Fernley”

    1. AMR (@aiera-music)
      2nd April 2015, 0:04

      Bob must have really wanted that prize money share :D

      1. Yeah, this is getting ridiculous. Fernley’s been fighting them being there tooth and nail. He should just be excited that someone’s car is slower than his…

      2. Considering how late Manor were able to start their season, Malaysia was essentially their first test session. Regardless of whether they physically could run two cars or not, I doubt if any of the teams would have managed to comfortably run two cars in Jerez (had the rules allowed two cars in testing).

      3. Sorry, but forget about the characters involved, someone purposefully running one car is not right and (I’m guessing here) against the sporting regulations.

        I’d love Manor to be on the grid and firmly blame the lack of fair prize money distribution and the existence of the strategy group, but that’s another issue.

        A team has got to try and not be dishonest about why they aren’t running now effectively 3 cars in races. It’s a shame, but I still foolishly believe in honesty in business and I simply don’t believe in Manor’s reasons.

        1. @john-h

          …but I still foolishly believe in honesty in business and I simply don’t believe in Manor’s reasons.

          Manor have generally stuck to a line of ‘we’ve made every effort to get both cars running’. That can still be true, even if they knew they effectively had no chance of running two cars (which is not something I believe).

          More to the point, it’s understood that Will Stevens is bringing some funding to the team, while Roberto Merhi is not. That being the case, if they really could only field one car, would they not make sure it was Stevens’ to fulfil their contractual obligations?

          Ultimately it doesn’t matter. The repeated attacks coming from other teams are the bigger issue here. It’s pitiful behaviour from a team that just least season was leading the charge for the struggling teams.

        2. Someone call the editors of the Oxford Dictionary, we have a new definition for the word “purposefully”.

    2. @George Yes, calling the priorities right. Spot on with the COTD. That is THE issue in F1 at the moment.

      1. The pool however, is NOT, taken from governments and us fans. So while I can understand the bandwagoning behind anything that blames Bernie, I can never understand how people still miss the keystone factor of the problem that is right in front of them. If you think it’s Bernie/CVC, I can tell you, they are happy to continue to let you think it’s them, they are the distraction from the problem, not the cause. “look over here! – not over there”

        1. Please enlighten us…

        2. Its not Layercake? Then pray tell, where does that pool of money come from?

          And what IS the issue?

      2. Along with their new fashion of nickle and diming fans.

        First, put F1 behind pay-tv.
        Second, put useful features of F1 app behind paywall.
        Coming soon, introduce +/Plus/Premium version of F1 app to help those fans who care more about F1 than others have a way to pay to have more race weekend information presented to them.

    3. I am one of the 384,000 viewers on NBC Sports Network. That is a great number, I assume in the USA only.
      NBC has very good F1 coverage, David Hobbs is one of the commentators.

      1. ColdFly F1 (@)
        2nd April 2015, 0:15

        Are races live on NBCSN? And how much do you typically pay for a package with includes them?

        1. Yes, every race is shown live; we also get qualifying and usually FP2. As for the cost, it’s part of my premium package which contains a lot of other stuff including internet service, so harder to estimate, but the whole cost (high-speed internet, phone and TV) is about $90 per month.

          1. They are also going to air Monaco along with the three North American Grand Prix on free broadcast TV. The commentators do a good job considering for almost all the races they call the race from a studio in the states, I believe in North Carolina.

        2. I have NBC Sport through my FIOS subscription package. With FIOS you can also watch it “NBC Sports on line” live.

        3. I am watching from the US as well and I agree that their coverage is good. They do a particularly good job with their commercials promoting the races. I also love Steve Matchett. The thing I hate though are the quantity of commercials. I would pay good money for a live stream of each race sans commercial breaks.

        4. The At&t Uverse package that includes it is $29 in my area.

      2. Agreed, coverage here is really good and very knowledgeable about f1. Matchett and Hobbs are great commentators but for some reason I can’t stand Leigh Diffey.

        1. I agree, and I’m an Aussie, but in every team of 3 there has to be 1 motormouth to ensure there is never a silent moment, apparently it is better to have false info than a moments silence, Bob Varsha used to have that role on Speed.

          1. @hohum but Bob Varsha was infinitely less annoying than Diffey. Diffey can’t pronounce any name to save his soul. He invariably calls Dietrich Mateschitz “Dietrech Matesitsch” which as a German speaker grates every last fiber of my being. Whenever I have the opportunity to watch races live I pull up UK streams for the commentary and mute my TV. I find the coverage overall sub par compared to what it once was on SPEED, despite the fact that they have added post race coverage.

            1. I like Diffey but have to laugh when he said that Nasr sounded like Massa & spelled them to demonstrate the difference. One ends with an “A” & the other with an “R” which are 2 distinctly different sounds. It also sounds like he puts an “R” on the end when he pronounces “Kyvat.” Is he from a region of Britain that adds “R’s” when a word ends in an “A?” Some New Yorkers do this.

        2. Let’s not forget about Will Buxton, as well. I think the 4 of them do a fabulous job. Sometimes I think the person calling the camera shots needs to be replaced. On the last lap in Malaysia they were showing the battle between Massa & Bottas, & only switched backed to Vettel winning at the last moment, after Steve Matchett mentioned it on air. This has happened numerous times in the past three years.

      3. I assume this is 384,000 tv sets? I somehow wrangled six other guys together after a night of ice fishing to watch the Grand Prix, where I almost always watch overnight races alone. I bet the 330 pm Sunday replay grabbed many more older viewers.

        Matchett is good. Hobbs is okay, glad the mouth engine noises are long gone. Leigh Diffey, meh, he tends to drone on at times.

      4. Probably helped that this particular overnight race started at midnight Pacific on a Saturday night. Was a struggle at 3am for me.

        1. Get a PVR, it’s part of the package from Comcast when you opt for HD @$10pm.

      5. I suppose this increase in viewers must be down to the improved sound this year, good work FIA/FOM.

      6. I’d be interested to know how these figures compare with the UK viewing figures for Indy Car.

      7. You think the NBCSN coverage is good??!?

        I’m a Brit and travel to the States once a year for work for a few weeks. The last time I was there I had to watch a couple of races on NBCSN and it was honestly the worst coverage I have ever seen: constant advert breaks which sometimes showed a split-screen, sometimes not. But most annoyingly after the ad break, that Matchett guy would then say what is coming up later on NBCSN, all whilst displaying the schedule full-screen, so you can’t see what is going on. It was so frustrating!

        The commentary was OK, but I found that Matchett guy pretty annoying after a while though…

        In short – watching NBCSN made me realise just how good the F1 coverage on Sky Sports F1 actually is and just how dire US telly is compared to here.

        1. As an American I totally agree. Our coverage is quite poor and the commentators are annoying and often miss the bigger picture. Sky is 100x better and I prefer to watch the race late and get my hands on a Sky feed rather than suffer what NBC gives us…

        2. @smfreegard I think he may mean that “it’s a lot better than we’ve been used to”, which is absolutely correct. I emigrated from the UK to the US fifteen years or so ago, so I have an idea of the level of coverage that F1 receives in the UK. F1 is still a very minor sport here. In the past, F1 coverage was extremely spotty – live events were in the minority, race coverage would hop between sometimes 3 or 4 channels, switching up the presentation team and quality.

          NBCSN now shares the same channel as much more popular sports, so F1 is always going to be a bit of a red-headed stepchild for any US broadcaster, but they’ve done a decent job with what they have. Sure, Hobbs drones on a bit, Diffey’s nasaly voice grates after a while, and all three have picked up the annoying habit of saying ‘boy oh boy’ far too regularly. The ad breaks bite too.

          But this is a channel that is reasonably affordable in the lower tiers of most satellite/cable packages (trimmed down, as mentioned, available for about $30-35/mo) and it also carries Indycar (live), NASCAR (coming live this year), GP2, motocross and other off-road series, every (with few exceptions) Premier League game live, and major league Ice Hockey live. In the same programming tier is FOX Sports 1, which has MotoGP, Xfinity, Truck Series and TUDOR.

          So Sky has vastly superior coverage and broadcast quality, without a doubt. But would I pay what Sky are asking for its F1 channel if I lived back in the UK?

          Hahahahahaha…

    4. ColdFly F1 (@)
      2nd April 2015, 0:11

      I’m unimpressed by Force India. #vultures #hypocrites #unsportsmanlike
      I hope that they will be the first to be beaten by them on track. And to think of it; it wasn’t the stewards giving them those penalties in Malaysia, but it was Karma.

      1. @coldfly while the thought of Force India being beat by Manor is entertaining, the posibilities of that happening are 0.

      2. @coldfly Please don’t use hashtags outside of twitter. They’re pointless and it’s a horrible (and quite annoying) way to express oneself.

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          2nd April 2015, 7:17

          Thanks for sharing your opinion, and sorry to hear you find them annoying.

          I’m glad though that they caught at least 1 person’s attention.

            1. #lol
              Masque: #lightenthef’upGrammarNazi or is it #proseNazi? ;)

        2. They’re just as annoying within Twitter. But at least you can click on them there, and annoy yourself even more…

      3. Rather than lauding them for their stellar efforts to make a comeback aginst all odds, Force India are still trying to ruin/steal Marussia/Manor’s hard earned prize money. The more Force India open their mouths regarding Marussia the more they damage their own image/reputation. They must hope to not get into a situation similar to what Marussia had at the end of 2014. I donot wish teams to disappear from the grid but if and when they go into a similar situation Force India may not be able to make a comeback like Marussia did/do.

        1. It was intended as reply to @coldfly

      4. Am I cynical when I mention that Fernley / FI have been talking this tune more or less since they got their FOM money up front to be able to get to the grid @coldfly? There is no free money/free deal, so I guess it had strings attached …

      5. @coldfly I think that Force India and Ecclestone might actually be right this time – Manor probably never intended to run in Melbourne and maybe they were not able to run both cars in Sepang. I guess they also know more than we do so perhaps they suspect that Manor as a project is unsustainable and will cease to exist after this season or even earlier.

        The problem is that F1 now needs every team, no matter how poor and messy they are. Manor’s “performance” in Australia was a farce but the fact that Merhi was able to finish the Malaysian GP should be applauded.

        1. Manor probably never intended to run in Melbourne

          I’ll help you correct it @girts.

          Manor probably were never intended (by Force India and Ecclestone) to run in Melbourne

          Seriously, you think it is rightful for Force India to lay claim on someone else’s money earned with sweat & blood but it is not rightful for the one who earned it to actually take it?

          Have we all forgotten that Marussia lost a huge part of its assets when they were auctioned off earlier – their factory, wind tunnel model of their 2015 contender, their data and computers et al? Have we forgotten that they got out of administration just 42 days before, and then went on to make their 2014 car modified for 2015 regulations and crash tested and made ready for freight just in time (all these just in 15 days!) for the Australian GP? Force India despite having so many sponsor logos on their cars and having not gone into administration were not able to make their car ready for all three winter tests. Why? They were fortunate their new cars were reliable out of the box.

          The Australian GP was in effect Marussia’s first test session with the new car while majority of the competitors had run thousands of kilometres already in winter testing and they had niggles which couldn’t be sorted out within time. Come Malaysia, they made both cars run but however due to fuel pump issue they couldn’t run one of their cars in the race. At least their other car saw the chequered flag on race day while McLaren with mighty budget (when compared to Marussia’s and Force India’s) and being works team of Honda were unable to make either of their cars see the chequered flag the same day. And Bob Fernley is not complaining about them, why?

          Till close of the last year, Force India were complaining about the Strategy Group and how the big teams are not considering the plight of the small teams, right? And they even considered boycotting the final rounds of the championship last year in protest of the indifference shown by Bernie and the big teams only to make a ‘Bernie’ turn now that they are in the Strategy Group and are now doing to Marussia what they alleged the other big teams were doing to small teams.

          Force India are like a domestic dog turning stray dog because of a virus. It (Force India) should be treated to get cured from the disease. Failing to do so may take its (Force India) own life after taking at least one another casualty (Marussia).

          1. +1 Bunny. But FI are not the real villain. It is so far past time for some reasonable TV revenue sharing, it is not funny. All teams should operate based on an equal sharing of broadcast rights money, with a 10% bonus for WCC. Any extra you want yo spend on top if hat is your own lookout.

    5. Duncan Snowden
      2nd April 2015, 0:24

      Fernley: Talk is cheap. Show us the evidence. We know FI has a beef with Manor being… well, being, and we know why. If this was coming from any other team, I might begin to believe it.

      Ron: Nothing we didn’t know, really. The upbeat attitude of the drivers is really telling. If they start looking frustrated while mouthing the usual platitudes, then we’ll know there’s a genuine problem.

      Comment of the Day: Pity we can’t upvote stuff here. Absolutely spot-on. F1 started going downhill the day Bernie realised he could persuade governments to hand him truckloads of taxpayers’ money. So now, instead of following the fanbase, Grands Prix go where the government is most generous with other people’s money. The FIA should pass a rule against it, only they won’t because they’re in much the same racket.

    6. People are going to slate Force India, but they are a team financially struggling. Their money issues have hurt this years car development, but at least it is this years car not some bodged car from last year with last year’s engine. At least they are running both rather than finding the spurious reasons to do as little costly track time as they can.

      They want to race which means money, and they can see a team which already failed, doing it’s bare minimum to claim prize money which we have no idea if it will be kept within the sport or if they will just cash out.

      I was cynical about the manor entry from the moment they requested using last years car unmodified, and every thing that’s happened so far is just making me more sure.

      They are a waste of what little track space they are taking.

      1. @phillipgb, I reckon the cost of running the team, even if you are right and they cut it to the bone all year will still cost them more than the 2014 points are worth, best scenario- they break even and still have a team/entry to sell.

        1. Yep. I don’t see how there’s anything to gain by faking it. The new financier has already put more money into it than they can get back from the prize money if they cash out.

          1. @repete86

            What are the figures to back that up? I know Fitzpatrick said they will have a budget of 60 million GBP. But it doesn’t seem to be being spent. They were operating on a budget of that amount in previous years with an actual new car, and going out during practice sessions and racing both cars. I’m not convinced it isn’t an accounting exercise.

            Freight to the races is meant to be free, Bernie can invoice them for it, but it’s not a cost until they pay. It can be argued out in court that they don’t have to pay the invoices if they claim they technically met the criteria.

            So far they have two 2014 engines to pay for, we’ll see how long they can stretch out their life cycle only running 1 car at a speed that see’s them lapped 3 or more times a race.

            Two drivers that are likely bringing funds with them to drive rather than being salaried.

            Minimal development costs tagging a few safety parts on last years car. And a skeleton staff.

            1. @philipgb the entire operation has been effectively put together in less than a month and yes, it is basically a shell operation being run with the intention of using the available prize money to clear debts and establish a working base for 2016 – they need all they money to get their promised 2015 cars out, which I believe will then run Ferrari’s newer engines, assuming they don’t fall behind on their 2014 payments. If everything does slot into place, they’ve got a chance of scoring points!

              I also don’t think it’s fair to accuse the team of minimal running – we know these new engines take a lot of time to repair or replace and the FIA seem to have accepted their reasoning in both Australia and Malaysia for their lack of track time, otherwise they’d be penalised…

              Based on Mark Blundell’s comments on the MSM podcast, Merhi doesn’t have much, if any financial backing and is either salaried or racing for free alongside his paid WSR campaign. We know Will Steven’s brings some money, but I don’t think it’s earth shattering

            2. You say “The money doesn’t seem to be spent” @philibgb, but doesn’t it make huge sence to try and make do with the updated 2014 cars and “leftover” engines while they invest that money into getting a 2015 car out?

              Who knows, with the windtunnel/CFD data showing that 2015 Manor car could be a big step, FI might just be feeling anxious of getting overtaken. If you want to accuse Manor of not bringing new bits to the old car, just look at FI itself, where is their investment and where are their upgrades?

              You don’t have to answer that last one, I know where the money is going and are perfectly fine with it (as am I so far not worried about Manor). FI are using it to make a BIG step using the Toyota wind tunnel.
              0See, more or less the same as Manor, they have to struggle now while they invest and expect big steps later in the year to be a solid base for the future.

      2. “Waste of track space”?! So you’d rather have 18 cars on the grid and 200 people out of work on the dole then?

        1. They brought no value to the last race. The other 18 cars had a great race regardless of them having one car trundle round keeping out of their way.

      3. I was cynical about the manor entry from the moment they requested using last years car unmodified,

        Which they never actually did.

        It was Caterham that asked if they could run 2014 spec cars & everyone then simply assumed that Manor would want to do the same. But as Graeme lowdon said on the sky f1 show a few weeks ago there plan was always to run modified 2014 cars which met the 2015 regulations & at no point did they ask if they could use 2014 spec cars.

    7. I think it’s not about whether they can run 2 cars or not but about that that they DON’T WANT TO. Let’s Accept they are not going to beat any other team over the course of the full season & as there are only 10 teams this year , they are going to get the price money anyway , So why would they bother to spend money on racing . They just need to be on track at every race , run as minimum as possible & save a lot of money .

      1. Perhaps, but next year Haas will be in and they will be unable to collect the 2015 prize money unless they compete in 2016, so I don’t think that it’s solely about money unless Stephen Fitzpatrick’s business success until now has been a fluke.

        1. Honestly, I don’t see how anyone would get into F1 to make money from it (apart from buying a piece of the CVC/FOM cake if you were in time, now its overprized too) @repete86, @pujarakishan.

          Yes, if Manor manages to make it through the year, they will have the advantage of getting the FOM money. That means they have their travel payed, and Ferrari/McLaren can be more or less guaranteed to get mony for the engine and MGU. Then they “only” have to make up a budget difference of about 30-45 million to go out and actually build, race and develop the car. My guess is that Stevens won’t be bringing more than 2-5 million towards that difference, Mehri brings none, so the team are probably talking with other drivers for part of the budget.
          Same for 2016. This buys the team time to get things a bit in order, to hope that governance changes a bit and money distribution gets solved in the long run, or time to find a long term sponsor to make up the difference and be able to pay for being able to compete at the highest lvl of motorsport.

          1. maarten.f1 (@)
            2nd April 2015, 13:43

            @bascb I hear there’s a certain driver with Formula 1 experience carrying 15 million in his pocket ;)

            1. yeah, but it seems that Bernie told him to forget getting back in the paddock when he proffed up the money to help Peter Sauber out there @maarten-f1, so don’t count on them even asking (BE already seems to have them marked, no good upping that further)

    8. “That is up to the FIA and the Commercial Rights Holder.”….. so we do you keep talking about it?

    9. populistpanderer
      2nd April 2015, 1:35

      Totally unrelevant, but I often see comments advocating the introduction of a voting system on comments and rarely if ever see anyone argue for the status quo – please, Keith, please for the sake of everything that is so good about this site, never implement such a travesty. I can only begin to imagine the abhorrent, trashy, point-scoring mess of argumentative types and trolls that would grow like a tumor, as I see on many other sites with such systems.

      I like that your vision for this site appears to be centred around quality journalism, and not in the least interested in clickbait and other headline-grabbing traffic. You’ve created the perfect breeding ground for what I and many others know to be the most respectful, polite, helpful and knowledgeable online community in the f1 world. Comment voting panders to populist comment writing and frankly I adore the variety of views I get to read about. I’m sure you aren’t the type to give to pressure from either those who’d like to see this site turned into formula one facebook, or those like myself, but regardless I love this site just fine like this and felt the urge to say so.

      1. Big, er, thumbs-up (it’s not a vote) for the second paragraph. I do like the balance in these round-ups, and they way the majority of commenters discuss them. No doubt there’ll be stories with Christian Horner sticking his oar in about what Bob Fernley says (and then denying it the next day) but the way they’re presented here makes them more bearable.

        I’m hoping that F1 finally bumbling onto YouTube will draw some of the stupid and worthless commenters away and raise the general standard of comments here…

      2. +1!!! Simple with quality and fun reading with all the different opinions!

    10. I don’t know if anyone else noticed, but Ron Dennis was one of the 103 “business leaders” to have signed a letter to the Telegraph warning that anything other than a “Conservative-led” government would threaten Britain’s economic recovery.

      The Guardian then pointed out that Dennis has donated £151,200 to the Conservative party since 2005. I didn’t know that about him. As one of the commenters pointed out (tongue-in-cheek), perhaps he should have given that money to the McLaren Formula 1 team instead…

      1. 151 grand will hardly make a dent in Mclaren’s coffers.

        Mclaren should be pretty ok in the pocket for now. They dont have to pay for engines or Fernando’s 30 million quid salary.

        I still cant understand why they cant get a decent sponsor in!

        1. …because they’ve massively under performed since 2011 and no big company wants to throw money at them until they get better?

          1. Sponsor deals usually run for a number of years, I can imagine that McLaren is asking for top prices, while not exactly delivering in track. If their asking price is at Mercedes – Ferrari level, I can understand why sponsor are reluctant to commit with them, at least until they can get some podium action.

            Same with Williams some time ago.

      2. @estesark Hadn’t seen that, thanks for mentioning it. Cameron visited the McLaren factory the year after he became prime minister:

        http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2011/11/18/1811/mclaren_171111-0625/

    11. It’s hard to believe what Ferrari is saying. I mean, it’s great! and i really hope they really mean it but now is the catch: If Manor says they want the F1 to be more affordable, it’s only a dream for them, they have no really political leverage. But, when Ferrari says so, then we must demand them to do something about it. If the F1 got so expensive is BECAUSE of Ferrari (and Red Bull, and maybe McLaren). Now let’s wait and see if Ferrari is only words, or they’re going to something about it.

      It’s amazing how Ferrari have turned around in more ways than the track. They seem to be more focused on the car and trying to improve it instead of whining and throwing tantrums like the used to say. If they kept this track, and do something with the budgets (or even TV revenues) they’ll automatically will become every f1 fan darling, am i right?

      1. @matiascasali unlike LdM, who was only interested in Ferrari succeeding because it boosted his image and position, the current people at FIAT are trying to sell cars (and not just Prancing Horses, but their other brands as well), which requires a different public mindset.

        1. I’d be surprised if much has changed. LdM spoke of cost cutting too, so nothing really new here. Oh sure, if F1 ends up in real trouble the big teams may have no choice but to finally agree to further changes to reduce costs. But only when it is truly affecting their bottom line and I don’t think it has yet…not the bigger teams’ bottom line anyway. So far any cost reducing measures such as less testing, and components that have to last longer, and limiting engine development, have only led to the teams with money spending that saved money on better and better simulators for example. So far, I think any talk from any of the big teams is just that…talk…not actions. And talk is cheap.

    12. Simon (@weeniebeenie)
      2nd April 2015, 2:16

      Just turn 4 Gasly is running at? How will that work? :p

      1. @weeniebeenie I was similarly confused, but Google gave me this:

        In Season Tyre Testing
        We only offer Team Packages for these events
        • Barcelona T04 12th and 13th May | • Austria T05 23rd and 24th June
        • Abu Dhabi | Post F1 Season Young Drivers Test

        Looks like test 4 of 6? With 4 and 5 for Pirelli tyre testing and 6 for young drivers.

    13. Increasing numbers of viewers in the USA suggests to me that the USGP is increasing awareness of F1 in the US and attracting new fans, I suspect that the opposite will happen in countries without a National GP, interesting that the previous record was set by the 97 GermanGP. Bernie is pushing F1 down a mineshaft without an exit.

      1. Wait, what? Normally I’d agree with you on that last statement, but how exactly did you come to that conclusion this time?

        1. Simple, taking GPs away from the heartland of F1 has to be detrimental to the fanbase as surely as taking a GP back to the US has been beneficial, a little good news does not mean all the news is good.

      2. Down or up said mineshaft?

        1. Down to the very last nugget.

      3. I think it has more to do with NBC’s efforts to promote F1 than anything else. Fox did basically no promotion, these days I see an F1 commercial every time I watch one of NBC’s hockey games.

        1. Well perhaps they’d like to expand into another market like Australia, same (almost) language, free trade of goods and no cable dominance, if so the 10 network could be had for a song.

    14. Force India’s Bob Fernley has criticised Manor for failing to run both cars in the Malaysian Grand Prix, suggesting the FIA should look into its no-show.

      What if FIA instead of pointing it out that they only ran 1 car, actually helped the team to run two cars?

      Half-empty, half-full situation. Considering their troubles to run the new car, they should know the effort involved, and the unfair finantial situation among the teams.

      Someone above said that they don’t want to run two cars. Who’s fault is that? the team struggling to survive or the sport that doesn’t allow teams to survive nor compete with each other?

      Those guys tried hard against everything to score points. They did, they beat one of the historic teams over a season, they finished in a position that guaranteed them a monetary prize, but because they had put so much effort, they had nothing left and they still managed to show up a year after to pick up the money.

      Those guys want to race, badly. But the system doesn’t let them, nor it makes it easier for them.

      Go ahead, and point it out. And tell them they are just showing up. And then Force India will be scrapping for last place on the grid and races. And then it’ll happen to them.

      Because that’s obviously how you kill teams. Making it more difficult.

    15. if Manor are going to run one car, or half run races only for the sake of prize money and then leave F1, then it’s better they get the boot.

      1. The prize money is likely already spent servicing debt, getting to the races and re-establishing the team. What they’ll get for 10th place/appearing won’t constitute a profit.

        Manor are there because someone wants them to race cars!

        1. I would think so as well @optimaximal. Afterall Manor is still planning to bring a “real” 2015 car later in the year, so its a safe bet to say that what doesn’t go into paying debts or salaries gets put into that car.

    16. I do not think ppl relic how little difference the money makes that CVC takes makes.if i can remember right F1 made a profit of $1.4 bilj last year or there about. IF we say that CVC only takes the norm 20% it will mean the teams will get another $15 to $18 milj. That amount will help the teams but it will not make the teams profitable. That is the big problem in F1 teams are not profitable. Even the big teams shows a lost every year.

      The seconded big problem with F1 today is reliability. Sins the 2000 the cars reliability became so good that it took alot of the smaller teams changes to get points away. A good example is Ayrton Sanna how retired a bit less then 25% of the races started.

      The third and most probably the biggest problem in F1 today is the fans.We got all this great ideas about how to fix F1 and only look at the the positive side of what we want but we never look at the negative side. Then there is also that all the fans do not want the same thing for F1. A good example is putting a cap on how much at team may spend. True the competition will be better and the teams will more financially secure., But the cars will be a lot slower then they are now. So for the ppl how wants great and close competition it will be great but for ppl how want to see the fasts cars going around a racing trake with cars that looks out of this world it will be horrible. We critics F1 because they want to improve the show but we put up a fass about the sound of the cars.
      The sound of the car is only part of the show it nothing more. What im trying to say is give the ppl how runs F1 a bit of breathing room. All of us has our expectations of F1 and they have to try and keep every one happy in a sport that is so divers as F1.

      1. ColdFly F1 (@)
        2nd April 2015, 8:21

        @koosoos,
        – Bernie/CVC keep 37% of profit, which is $52m/team if distributed.
        – Bernie/CVC paid themselves hefty/humongous dividends and now the FOM has $3b in debt. Servicing this debt costs another $200m/year (assume 7% interest) or $20m/team.

        You tell me which team cannot make a profit if they get an extra $72m per year!

        And the best part! If finances are like that, then other teams want to join the party. Before you know it we have a grid of 12-15 highly motivated teams, with drivers based on merit.

        1. So you want Bernie/CVC to give all profits back to the teams and not pay any dividens?

          That is never going to happen. Even when Bernie is in the ground.

        2. There is no promoter that will work that way in any sport. Even in Primer soccer the promotors take a cut of the income. But alot of ppl forget is that if Bernie makes 1 Pound more profit for the F1 the teams take 67% from that money so if F1 make 100 milj Pounds more profit for F1 the teams take 67 milj pounds of it. So the teams wants Bernie to make more and more money.

          1. Because that is the only way they can get any more money since Bernie and Max sold them up the river.

      2. Also I think the incoming money as compared to tobacco advertisement days, have significantly reduced. And this loss of revenue have hurt them a lot.
        FOM makes profit by milking the venues and getting the government subsidies which makes F1 looks like a profitable business. But for the teams that is not the case.

    17. I’m astonished how Force India manages to run two Mercedes-powered cars so slowly.

    18. I would say, RBR did not handle the PR with Renault as business partner well. Even when it was winning all, it was always If WIN = RBR responsible, If LOOSE = Renault weak.
      If gives an impression that RBR wants all the lollipops and moment they don’t have one, they start crying.
      Never once I got a positive vibe from RBR regarding Renault. Even if Renault was not upto the mark, ideally one will privately bash and publicly support. And I believe no two engines will be equal in hp, unless spec series. This is not drag racing so, it is always the overall package and handling that matters.
      Simultaneously Renault themselves did not market well on the basis of their participation in F1.
      I really wanted to like RBR, they have brought many positive things in F1 and have managed themselves well, but suddenly does not go their way and whole lot of negativity comes from them.

      1. @aks-das

        Simultaneously Renault themselves did not market well on the basis of their participation in F1.

        Renault shot themselves in the foot with their Energy F1 project. They want to be seen as the defacto EV car company, yet massively dropped the ball on producing a competitive package in the biggest motorsport arena.

        They won’t even be able to claim all the credit in Formula E next year as manufacturers start introducing parts to the cars.

      2. Renault had a terrible marketing record in F1 recently, but that has more to do with their own lame strategy rather than RBR taking all credit. Their V8 of late wasn’t the best product on the market, yet it had some good things going for it and it worked well with RB chassis. However, in a highly questionable marketing move, rather than pushing Renault brand, they tried to promote luxury Infiniti sub-brand, even appointing Vettel as an ‘ambassador of the brand’. So, now complaining that Renault didn’t reap anough benefits from RB success, they somehow don’t look like marketing geniuses to most.
        And of course, there’s no need to remind anyone of Renault’s brilliant marketing campaign with the new hybrid PUs (most expensive of all manufacturers and least reliable), which resulted in one of their client folding, another deserting, and ther remaining two (or rather one) openly hostile, when after a year of promises Renault appeared to have taken a step back instead of a leap forward. At this point Renault finds itself in a position of Cosworth a couple of years ago, where it is clear than no one really wants their PUs, and the ones that have to use them simply have no other option. If this alleged thing with Ilmor works out for RB, Renault will simply find itself out of F1, and not by their own choice.

    19. It is nice to hear those words, especially from ferrari man. btw that nvidia thing seems legit

    20. Reading Force India’s criticism of Marussia’s difficulties and Ferrari’s call to make F1 a bit more affordable I wonder would Ferrari allow Bernie to cut Marussia’s prize money thereby reducing/losing its own money from engines sold to Marussia?

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
    If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.