Lotus face winding-up petition over ‘unpaid bills’

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: A winding-up order brought against Lotus is postponed for two weeks.


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

Lotus winding-up hearing postponed by High Court (Crash)

"Lotus has been able to postpone a winding-up hearing for two weeks after being summoned to the High Court in a legal battle with a number of creditors."

Adrian Newey working on Red Bull road car with Aston Martin (Autocar)

"Legendary Formula 1 designer Adrian Newey is working with Aston Martin to design an ultra-high-performance road car to rival the likes of the McLaren P1 GTR and Ferrari FXX K. It is expected to go on sale around 2018."

More teams on Aston Martin's radar (Autosport)

"It appears a deal is more likely to happen with one of the teams currently powered by Mercedes - Williams, Force India or Lotus."

Aston Martin F1 deal 'improbable', says CEO (Reuters)

"The bottom line is that it would be very difficult for us. We as a company don't have the kind of money to go into Formula One and make a decent job of it."

Monday interview: Andy Palmer, Aston Martin CEO (FT - registration required)

"Christian Horner, team principal of Infiniti Red Bull Racing, worked closely with Andy Palmer to cement the Nissan luxury marque’s sponsorship. In a motor industry crammed with oversized egos, he says Mr Palmer is an exception."

NB. The article above was published in March.

Rob Smedley Q&A (Sky)

"Will the proposals to limit driver aids, particularly at the start, have any impact on the starts we saw today? 'I wouldn't have thought it will have a big effect.'"

Wolff: 2017 cars will be ‘much faster’ (F1)

"The cars will be much faster than they are now. We are putting the drivers back into the centre - giving them back responsibility for what they do in the car and giving it less a perception of being remote controlled by the pit wall."

Ferrari concerned 2016 speculation is distracting Kimi Raikkonen (ESPN)

"Is he in a good mood? No. I want Kimi to stay calm and do his job."

Maldonado: Ricciardo triggered first lap accident (F1i)

"I think Ricciardo made a mistake,” Maldonado told F1i. “He went a bit too deep on the inside of Romain."

British GP thriller a boost for Formula 1, say bosses (Motorsport)

"I don't share that we are always racing in front of half empty grandstands. We had great races like Montreal, which was full."


Comment of the day

Some more fine stats and facts additions from @Bleu:

This was the 109th race since the last win by Brazilian driver (Rubens Barrichello, Italy 2009). Brazil previously went 108 races without a win from Brazil 1994 to Austria 2000.

Both Lotus cars were out on the first lap for the second time this year, which also happened in Australia. The that team to suffer that fate twice during a season was Jordan in 1994 (Germany and Hungary).

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Ddonovan1993!

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

Nelson Piquet won the French Grand Prix 30 years ago today in a rare triumph for Pirelli against Goodyear at a very hot Paul Ricard circuit.

Piquet’s Brabham finished the race without a pit stop while the pursuing Williams of pole sitter Keke Rosberg had to stop to change tyres.

Alain Prost finished third after this scrap with Rosberg:

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.

90 comments on “Lotus face winding-up petition over ‘unpaid bills’”

  1. “Is he in a good mood? No. I want Kimi to stay calm and do his job.”

    Sorry, but you are the one who started to talk on Raikkonen’s contract in public with press. Now you cannot realistically expect them to drop it. If you didn’t do this on purpose, it was big big mistake.

    1. Exactly. Arrivabene went off like a loose cannon what with all the carrot and stick talks etc. Now he is says Kimi is distracted because of the contract talks?

      Ideally this all should have happened at the end of the season. Ferrari will have no problems getting any driver they want as they seem to have come back to form and improving as the season progresses.

    2. ColdFly F1 (@)
      7th July 2015, 7:35

      The ‘best’ parts of Arrivabene’s quotes are (bold added):

      he knows that his future is in his hands
      At the right time we will communicate our decision.

      Must be part of Arrivabene’s management style as well; see if Raikkonen can handle the pressure.

      1. Is any of those required to be revealed to media? Can he not say we will make an announcement at a suitable time and get the media off Kimi’s back?

        Now every weekend Kimi is going to be asked the same question until a decision has been reached. @coldfly

    3. Indeed, he was the one who started the fire. I don’t think Kimi is going to get any better in years to come so I think he will not be driving a Ferrari next year.

      1. @jcost You are right on both counts. This interview comes after a weekend during which KR was faster than SV throughout, until the rain came and SV’s higher downforce setup turned things around. If that’s not a clear indication that MA has already decided to replace Kimi, irrespective of what he does in the second half of the season, then I don’t know what is

        1. Just how do you know he had a higher downforce setup? You’ll say speed trap…
          If that’s the case, congratulations to him, since he was following Raikkonen with 2 sec despite “higher downforce”, and when it rained he went onto the podium.
          If this was another race where Vettel was 2 sec in front of Raikkonen, we would be listening to people claim how Raikkonen was actually faster than his teammate….

    4. Sorry, but you are the one who started to talk on Raikkonen’s contract in public with press.

      Which would have been in response to a question, so attaching any kind of blame to him seems a bit silly.

      1. @keithcollantine in fairness he could have avoided answering the question, or refused to talk about it.

    5. I’m sorry, how is this on anybody but Raikonnen? Every single driver at some point had to deal with wild speculation and insecurity over their future. A driver held in as high esteem as Raikonnen, with his experienced should be far above all that at this point.

      I understand he’s wildly popular among most fans, but the truth is he’s been laughably terrible since rejoining Ferrari. He was absolutely humiliated by Alonso and now he’s getting walked on by Vettel.

      If he doesn’t start showing what he’s made of very soon why should Ferrari keep him on? Plenty of more promising picks.

    6. I just read the same news on a different site. 50 odd people commented on it, and it is incredible, every one of them said the same thing: “It’s you who started it.”
      I have never in my life seen such an agreement in a comments section of a website on the Internet.

    7. Giorgio Terruzzi (Sport Mediaset): “The intermediate tyre choice was wrong. Too bad, because until then everything was going well. The fact is, he already seems to be out of the house: unprotected and under constant fire.”

  2. 3. Did Vettel make his own call to pit?
    A: Yes.

    1. And that’s why they are world champs

      1. Yeah sure. Hamilton’s stop was by necessity, if he wasn’t losing 2+ seconds a laptop to Rosberg he wouldn’t have stopped when he did. If the rain had held off another minute, Rosberg would have come out of the pits back in the lead.

        1. Yeah sure. If the rain wasn’t coming at all Rosberg probably only finished 4th, or if it was sudden downpour instead of quick rain to make the race damp for few laps, Rosberg probably in worse condition because they have no choice but to stack the pit stop.

          It’s sarcasm btw.

      2. Kimi is also a world champion… :)

        1. Lucky world champion..ouch did i say that out loud ;)

          1. Just like Lewis was in 2008 and last year? See two can play this game :-) @johns23

          2. JonFact23: If you’re in contention for the championship at the final race, it’s pure luck. If the other contenders have a worse final race, you’re a lucky champion. JonFacts brought to you by: @Johns23‘s wild imagination.

          3. They probably pushed each other during the season, but if either of the McLaren boys (Alonso, Hamilton) in 2007 hadn’t been there, replaced by another driver, the remaining driver would have won the championship. Hell, if the Hungarian Grand Prix hadn’t unfolded the way it did during qualifying, Alonso probably would have won the championship by either 1 or 2 points.

            I used to be a huge Kimi fan, and I definitely thought he deserved a WC for either 2003 or 2005, but it’s time for him to go.

      3. Because they’re magic weather forecasters. Luck Has nothing to do with it :-)

        1. Did you see Vettel measuring up the rain? He has a very scientific method :p

      4. That may be true. But they are also real champs in wet.

    2. To be clear, that tweet was in response to various questions I’d received, I wasn’t purposefully ignoring Vettel.

      1. No, I get that. It’s just something I saw a lot of people asking about.

    3. Vettel’s call was a lot more impressive than Hamiltons – Lewis was losing ground rapidly and announced his tyres were shot prior to his stop, so it was one of necessity rather than of inspiration. Seb by contrast was flying on his slicks.

      1. I would argue that Hamilton’s decision to pit was more impressive because there was a lot more riding on it.

        If Hamilton had stayed out he would almost certainly have been overtaken by Rosberg but, he would have in all probability finished a guaranteed second because he wasn’t under any threat from the Williams.

        The result of Hamilton pitting was:
        1. He pits, the rain increases and he wins the race because those around him would subsequently pit. He would gain on Rosberg points wise in the WDC.

        2. He pits, the rain doesn’t increase and he losing a chunk of time per lap, potentially resulting in a finish outside the top 5 (which would be terrible for his WDC points tally vs Rosberg).

        There was more at stake regarding Hamilton decision relative to Vettel. Ham getting the decision wrong could end up losing him the WDC come Abu Dhabi (if it’s a close battle again), Vettel doesn’t have that same worry/pressure. The Vet could afford to take a risk.

        Most drivers in Hamilton’s position would’ve just consolidated 2nd place. Then again, most drivers aren’t Hamilton.

        1. *The result of Hamilton pitting would either be:

        2. You are saying Hamilton gambled by pitting and this could have cost him a big chunk of points and the championship. If he didn’t pit, he would be much secure than the case he did pit.
          So he did a very foolish thing by pitting with that logic then? He gambled and won, but he could have lost a hell of a lot more.

          I don’t see Vettel pitting as gamble, so I am not particularly inclined to counting Hamilton pitting as gamble either, despite the circumstances with his tyres and Rosberg. They both made a decision based on the information available. Why would Vettel pit then if he didn’t really think it was just the right way to go? He wasn’t slower than anyone, he was actually really fast. It’s not like by the time he came around pit entrance it was obviously raining, since the guys behind him didn’t dash into the pits either. He was cautious about the right moment to pit. I think you are all underestimating their experience with wet, their judgment, and the feeling they get from the track and the car. The fact that it was Hamilton and Vettel who made the call lends them more credibility I think.

          1. @jak

            So he did a very foolish thing by pitting with that logic then? He gambled and won, but he could have lost a hell of a lot more.

            If you want to win big playing poker, at some point you’ll have to risk all of your chips and go “all in”, win or bust!! – you wont always have pocket Aces.

            True glory is never risk free, most of the time it’s the most fraught option available. That’s the difference between drivers like Ham, Vet, Senna, Schumi etc. They take/took risks that drivers like Rosberg, Webber, Barrichello etc didn’t.

            That’s why the former are champions and not the latter.

          2. @jak
            For the record I believe that both Ham and Vet’s call to pit were superb decisions and not just pure luck like some people on here have inferred. Very risky but genius nonetheless.

          3. I get taking risks, and like you mentioned some of the drivers have that killer instinct. But I don’t think in this particular instance it would be smart to risk a podium for a win. And I don’t think he did. I think it was obvious for drivers they needed to pit in a couple of laps anyway.

        3. I would argue that Hamilton’s decision to pit was more impressive because there was a lot more riding on it.

          Except that it wasn’t really a decision at all. He literally had no choice but to pit when he did. He said himself that his tyres were shot and also he was being rapidly overhauled by Rosberg, who as things stood would have passed him in the next lap.

          1. Except that it wasn’t really a decision at all. He literally had no choice but to pit when he did.

            As I said above, he could’ve consolidated/settled for 2nd place. That’s still a choice.

    4. Would also like to say that all of the drivers who stopped on the correct lap got very lucky. Nobody knew what the rain would do. Some gambled early and lost, some gambled late and lost, some happened to gamble at the exactly correct time, and won. The rain could have easily eased off again.

      1. top teams have spotters scattered all over the track. So yeah, they kind of DO know exactly what’s happening in regards to the rain – and can adjust accordingly.

  3. 30 years ago;The racing was a lot closer than it is today, nose to tail only centimeters apart for lap after lap, pity we no longer have the technology to allow that to happen today, might have made the UKGP even better !

    1. 30 years ago? 1985? McLaren TAG won, 6 wins 1 disqualification. A year before they won 12 times.That’s pretty dominant. 32 races 18 wins. 1983. was interesting though. If Renault’s gearbox didn’t lost oil in Kyalami it would be their first constructors title.
      Reflection on ‘good old days’ – I’d rather call them: less bad days – is always with romantic flair. But, I love F1 as it is now, except the financial aspect which is utterly unfair. Lotus won twice in seasons of 2012 and 2013, ended up on fourth place in the constructors. in 2013th they fought Ferrari for 4th and went into serious financial problems. Their good performance wasn’t rewarded at all in financial aspect compared to some… They are in an unenviable situation right now. I hope they’ll pull it off and continue as Lotus brand. Lotus for me represents British engineering skill at its best and hopefully they’ll continue to do so. I know it’s not sufficient to survive in this sport ( politics is more important ) but it would be pity to lose the brand. I wish them all the best!

      1. I was talking about the racing being physically closer, there will always be a team with a degree of dominance, that is why we have a constructors championship in F1.

    2. We can’t stop the time, can we?

      1. @jcost, no but we prefer to improve as time goes by.

    3. 3 years ago:2012. Need I say more?

    4. 1985 also had races where only the top 2 were on the same lap (Brazil, Portugal), Multiple drivers ran out of fuel (Imola), the British GP was won by Prost, a lap from the number 2 finisher, there were only 3 races where the top 6 finished on the same lap.

      People today would still be complaining the fights weren’t about the win, the champion won with more than two races in points advantage and probably complain about the chicanes at Austria, the Nurburgring and not to mention, all of the paydrivers and teams that make HRT seem like a fruitful operation.

      1. I’d accept those problems rather than have the cars space themselves 2 seconds apart to conserve tyres @npf1

    5. @hohum

      Just over a week ago there were complaints about the racing in Indycar being too close making it unsafe. Rose tinted spectacles always make us believe the racing was so much better in the past but go back to that time and there would have been just as much complaining about something as there is now (I should caveat this by pointing out that I don’t think this year is exactly part of a “golden-age” either, just that we should stop the constant knee-jerk reactions and trying to go back to the past as the solutions – the solution is to leave things alone for a few years and great racing will happen).


      1. Indycar on ovals is totally different, pack racing has them going 3 and 4 cars abreast through the corners, I’m talking about racing nose to tail in single file, totally impossible with these tyres. Pity Bernie hadn’t taken your advice 30 years ago.@jerseyf1

  4. Once Lotus is declared bankrupt the contract with Mercedes is terminated, Renault could then buy out the team at a very attractive price, who else would want to buy into F1 now?

    1. ColdFly F1 (@)
      7th July 2015, 7:37

      @hohum, the problem is that when declared bankrupt their F1 entry is contractually terminated as well!

      1. I don’t see Bernie refusing Renault an entry, do you ? @coldfly

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          8th July 2015, 10:26

          Not refusing but Ecclestone would cherish such a (legal) situation where he can act like he saved a team, and getting major IOUs and concessions from Renault! @hohum

    2. I think its rather just about suppliers trying to finally get their payments by forcing Lotus to actually talk with them @hohum.

      1. Quite likely, @bascb, I just wanted to point out the irrelevance of the MB contract.

    3. @hohum So, where does that leave Red Bull? Deciding on which VW brand to partner with? ;)

      1. Aston Martin Red Bull Mercedes ????? @fastiesty

        1. @hohum Yep, that’s the other possibility, depends on a straight swap with Lotus/Renault or whether RBR want to be a works team..

  5. Regarding the Williams tweet, the fans disappointed not because team order or no team order. It’s because they made a team order call that looks a really bad decision for the team at that stage of the race, and then seems to wash their hands by saying the drivers are free to race.

    1. They should have made up their mind and stuck with it. Since they made 2 opposite decisions within 2 laps, one of them is bound to be perceived as the “wrong” one.

    2. Felt like Williams didn’t even expect themselves to be leading 1-2 at that point.

      1. @praxis Yes, and even worse their team orders stance is not even anything close to protect those early advantage, which is (without benefit of hindsight) let Bottas pass and see what he can do. A sudden no team-order after explicit one and without any clear sign that the situation has changed (Mercedes still maintain same gap) is just look like PR decision of how the commentators calling their team order bad.

        Part of me also suspect Massa has a part of the blame because I think they told him that Bottas said he can go faster and want to pass and Massa said no. Also that typical Massa on interview, he never “do anything wrong” and Bottas “looks fast only because he has DRS” while the data really did showed Bottas has more pace on softer tire.

        1. petebaldwin (@)
          7th July 2015, 15:31

          Of course Massa said no! Every driver on the grid would say no if you asked them to give up the lead but if you could pick just one who would absolutely refuse more than anyone else – of course it would be Massa!

        2. How do you blame Massa for that!!??!
          You dreamed up a dialogue between Williams and Massa, and now you are accusing him…

        3. Part of me also suspect Massa has a part of the blame because I think they told him that Bottas said he can go faster and want to pass and Massa said no.

          Do you *really* expect a guy to overtook BOTH Mercedes at the start give up his position just because his teammate says he can go faster?
          I mean… wow…

          To me it still not clear the sequence of attempts by Valtteri and the radio messages. At one point Williams gave Valtteri the green light to try to overtake Massa in a “clean move”, and the answer was that it was “too late”. What? Two laps after you were on the radio complaining that you had more pace you say now that is too late? Is a joke, isn’t it?
          EVEN if Valtteri really had more pace (the data shows he was marginally faster in some sectors, and slower than Massa on the straights, even with the DRS), what benefit would Williams reap from letting Valtteri go through?
          It was the first time in the season (not sure, but probably in the last two seasons…) that one team managed to put their two cars ahead of the Mercedes, and you believe that the wise decision was to risk everything in an internal battle?
          I don´t know where you got that Massa said no, but if it’s true then he was right. Williams failed when he left Massa on the track for one more lap than Hamilton, at the end of the first stint, and then again later when they left Massa on the track without the inters. Williams strategy was conservative and they paid for it.

        4. It is clear that Williams management and drivers have made an agreement about the way how team orders can be used. Asking a race-leading driver to move over is not permitted. Even Bottas said he didn’t admire “faster than you”, “That’s not racing” he said.

        5. @petebaldwin and all the guys above, sorry I wasn’t too clear on my comment. Yes, of course no driver wouldn’t like to told to move over and I also don’t like those kind of team order especially if it make a clear distinction of number one and two driver (Schumacher and Alonso on Ferrari for example). However, personally I think if they go to team order route, then the correct order is to let Bottas pass at that stage of the race, because its more about doing what the best for the team instead of the individual driver. The best example of doing what best for the interest of the team I think comes from Red Bull in Monaco this year, let your teammate pass you if they claimed they can go faster, but if he can’t prove that claim, he should give the position back.

          Also to peras, I say suspect because its indeed pure speculation of my part (which has a basis that Massa surely have been told about Bottas want to pass him, afterall not all radio message is being broadcasted to public and in F1 they communicate all the time) and I never intended to presented it as a fact. Again, hence the word “part of me” and “suspect”.

    3. Also, fans are disappointed, as they completely made a mess of the strategy. It was clear to me at the time, they should have released Bottas to build a gap to Massa and Hamilton, reacted to the ‘box box’ message Hamilton got immediately with Massa and brought Bottas in on the next lap. That would have most likely kept them both in front, or at least Bottas.

    4. They told Bottas to hold station at the start because they didn’t want him diving at Massa and letting the Mercs past, after a few laps it was clear Hamilton wasn’t in a position to take advantage so they rescinded the order. It makes perfect sense to me, unlike most pit wall calls Williams make these days.

      1. Well, Bottas didn’t really hold station though, did he… They had to repeat their order.

  6. Fernando Alonso to bored McLaren fans: “So whoever is bored, turn off the TV until next year, or at least until Japan or later because it is going to get worse than this.”

    1. OMG :(

    2. Monza and Spa are going to be painful to watch :/

      1. @george All of the ‘tier II’ engines, Renault, ’14 Ferrari and Honda are 10-15 mph off Mercedes and Ferrari! But yes, McLaren’s top speed is lowest, even under Manor..

  7. Arrivabene says “Unfortunately we may have afternoons like this at Spa and Suzuka as well”.
    That’s really unfortunate. Considering their drivers’ history on those tracks.

  8. petebaldwin (@)
    7th July 2015, 15:29

    Pretty disgusting that Lotus aren’t willing to pay their suppliers which could potentially cost people their jobs and yet they are still spending huge money developing the car. Glad to hear the courts are stepping in for what is right.

    Secondly, I absolutely agree with the Aston Martin CEO – unless they have money to throw at F1 like Red Bull, Mercedes and Ferrari do, what is the point? There are plenty of teams in need of sponsorship and it’d have the same effect to do that with much less of a financial burden. Everyone knows that just because a manufacturer buys a team, the quality of the car they design doesn’t really reflect back on the manufacturer – if it did, you’d never buy a Honda again! Do you now think Mercedes are better cars than Ferraris? Of course not!

    1. @petebaldwin In fairness if they are actually owed funds by other companies / FOM then you cannot blame them.

      It all comes down to whether or not their funds are overdue too.

    2. In many ways, even a KIA is better than a Ferrari.

  9. petebaldwin (@)
    7th July 2015, 16:02

    Out of interest – what is the negative reaction to letting drivers race each other that Williams speak of? I can’t say that half way through a race, I’ve ever heard anyone say “I wish they’d stop racing each other and just follow each other around instead!”

    1. well, there were a lot of people who wanted Williams give TO having Massa let Bottas pass him. That is just as much a TO as telling them not to fight @petebaldwin

  10. Bottas was still trying to overtake Massa, after team had ordered them to keep their positions. They had to warn him again.

    1. I think he was just trying to keep close to Massa and throw dummies to hurry him up. I think he could have easily been much more aggressive if he needed to be.

      1. I think he was as aggressive as he could have been and he was still trying to overtake when they repeated the order. I thought he said as much on the radio, we’ll see in the transcripts in any case.

  11. So it seems that the Aston Martin rumours have mostly been squashed

    1. @fletchuk They simply don’t have the cash, they’re a small independent car company, that said, badging a Mercedes customer engine shouldn’t be out of reach for F1 exposure (see Infiniti).

      That leaves RBR who have the cash, and VW who have a lot of brands that could get involved in F1.. and not a bad Le Mans winning Porsche engine to get started with.

      1. Toro Rosso-Lamborghini sounds like a no-brainer to me!

        1. @fastiesty OOH that would be awesome! I just hope the FIA allows them to have extra inlets everywhere and an insane oversized rear wing!

          that’d sure bring the viewers back to f1!

          1. @fletchuk Lets see what happens for the 2017 rule changes, hehe.

  12. Btw, did you hear how Carlos Sainz DNF’d?
    “I had no tyres left and could see the cloud coming, so I was waiting, waiting, waiting… Then, just as it started raining and we knew the car would be strong, all the electrics on the car shut down and I had no steering, no radio… I was coasting and tried a hundred ‘on-offs’ to see if something was happening – but nothing worked!”

  13. Legendary Formula 1 designer Adrian Newey is working with Aston Martin to design an ultra-high-performance road car to rival the likes of the McLaren P1 GTR and Ferrari FXX K.

    I’m sure neither of those are road cars though. And Aston have only just released a track only car.

Comments are closed.