Jean-Pierre Jabouille, Renault, 1977

Renault vying for F1 ‘bonus payment’

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Jean-Pierre Jabouille, Renault, 1977In the round-up: Renault is hoping to join other long-standing F1 competitors in receiving bonus payments from Formula One Management.

Links

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

Renault in line for F1 bonus payment (Autosport)

"The final option, via a buy-out of Lotus, is being evaluated in depth, with one of the conditions being Renault joins Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Red Bull and Williams in receiving additional revenues from Formula One Management."

FIA extends new team deadline (Motorsport)

"Having due regard for the sustainability and future success of the Formula 1 world championship, the FIA has opened a new selection process to identify a candidate team to participate in the championship from the start of the 2016 or the 2017 season."

Kimi Raikkonen interview: Leave him alone, he knows what he is doing (ESPN)

"It's not like it used to be, the grip is less, you cannot attack certain corners, so I prefer the cars from the early 2000s to late 2000s."

Minute silence for Bianchi in Hungary (F1)

"The minute’s silence will begin at 13.45 local time on Sunday."

Richard Mille (Richard Mille via Facebook)

"Our family circle is now missing an essential link, and lies shattered and broken, even though we knew that the state of our friend was irreversible."

My Favourite Race - Paddy Lowe (Crash)

"Riccardo was being threatened by Ayrton so whenever he was threatened we told him to put the traction control on and he would leave him behind to open up a gap – then the Renault guys would come out and say 'turn it off!'."

2015 Hungarian Grand Prix preview (Unibet)

My Hungarian Grand Prix preview for Unibet


Tweets

Comment of the day

Thoughts on how the drivers have handled the recent tragedy:

I was just ten (and there was little info about F1 here at that time) when Ayrton Senna passed away. When you are a child and the news say your hero died, there is an obvious moment of disbelief, you may cry, but a child moves on quick when this is not related to a person you know directly.

But this time, and being now a true F1 fan, and watching the pictures of Jules Bianchi’s final goodbye, surrounded by his rivals during races, but friends outside the track, I felt moved and touched by the whole scene, you can see how close they really are. They are together as a family, no matter if the local press at different countries wants to highlight Massa or Hamilton. They are not looking for flashes or likes this time, they are there as the true friends they are and it’s good to see they will keep that respect as a motivation to work as the Grand Prix Drivers’ Association, to get improvements related to safety, so these kind of scene become the last ones in countless years.
@Omarr-pepper

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Matt and Lalit Palaparthy!

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

Jacques Villeneuve took his final IndyCar victory 20 years ago today on his way to the championship and an F1 debut with Williams. Villeneuve triumphed in an incident-filled race at Cleveland airport which came to a climax in this dramatic moment:

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

  • 54 comments on “Renault vying for F1 ‘bonus payment’”

    1. Always love seeing footage from that Cleveland race. Surely one of the most exciting motor races of all time…

      1. @jackysteeg Yeah, Great race on a circuit indycar need to get back on the schedule as it was always a place that provided entertaining races.

        This race & the 1993 race at the new hampshire oval (great short oval, another circuit indycar should bring back) were 2 of the best races from the mid 90s pre split cart/indycar.

      2. I remember watching this live back in the day, the thing that gets me is how the americans pronounce JV’s name, they absolutely butcher it.

    2. YAY! Less equality!! Because why push for more competition if you can get more money and beat the others?

      Basically you need to be a famous name in the sport to be given money. You, Mister Unknown, are lucky enough to be allowed here, in the “pinnacle of the sport” with all these “famous names”.

    3. So, in IndyCar you can’t criticize the series, but you can drive your race car out of your pit with the fuel rig still attached, spray fuel on your car and crew and on down pit road, dangerously spew fuel rig parts around a live track causing a full course yellow and still win the race!

      Irony, in the US if you drove out of a gas station with the nozzle attached, gas spraying everywhere, then continued down the road with gas hose, nozzle and fueling parts littering the road, you could be arrested. But, free speech is allowed by law. In IndyCar, the opposite is true.

      1. You could be arrested

        *
        *Then three days after that minor traffic offense, you’d be found dead after “hanging yourself”.

        1. @williamstuart – Pondering your comment has left me somewhat speechless and filled with too much to say all at the same time. Probably shouldn’t say anything but I think I’ll ignore my better judgement anyway.

          Hard to tell if your comment is “gallows humor” or political commentary and if so directed at the US in general or something or someone specifically. I don’t take things personally because I know what’s in my heart even if others don’t. Not sure what any of it has to do with racing or F1 either.

          I’ve always looked at F1 and racing in general as an escape from the real world and as my favorite sporting pastime. Sadly the real world intrudes and things happen like the tragic accident of Jules Bianchi and his subsequent passing. It hurts. As a youngster my favorite driver Jim Clark was also tragically killed and it took me a long while to enjoy racing again even though the heartbreak never really ends. I’ve been feeling that way again lately. Especially with all the talk of making racing more dangerous for the sake of the “fans”. And then IndyCar banning free speech so drivers and team members don’t speak out against the Series. This notion started after the talk about pack racing after the Fontana race where there was also a very dangerous pit incident that resulted with virtually no penalty. In other words, safety is not a high priority for IndyCar. It makes me not want to watch any more.

          I hate injustice. In racing, anywhere. Maybe that is your point. Even though we don’t have all the facts about the case you brought up, it certainly looks like injustice to me. I don’t know what we can do about it here.

          I’ve probably said too much. I guess the joy has gone out of racing again, at least for me.

          Peace. Out.

          1. @bullmello I won’t try to figure out how William’s comment is related to yours or why he posted it, but I will tell you that he is simply referring to Sandra Bland.

            1. @bullmello ok nevermind I didn’t read your comment closely enough.

            2. You already knew that.

            3. @satchelcharge – “I won’t try to figure out how William’s comment is related to yours or why he posted it…”

              That’s the part I don’t really understand either.

    4. To be honest, I can see the logic in Renault’s push for inclusion as a works historic team. These 6 spend the most, and now also receive the most almost by guarantee. What we now need is for new ownership/post-Bernie for the rest of the teams to also gain this money, and make it a 2nd equal payment outside of the prize money by WCC position (more of a level playing field).

      1. yes, I can see the logic in it as well. And I think they deserve it as much as Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Williams (I don’t think RBR earned theirs quite yet, even if they currently get it) @fastiesty. That said, I think none of them should get this money for the health of the sport!

        1. And I think they deserve it as much as Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Williams (I don’t think RBR earned theirs quite yet, even if they currently get it) @

          The part in bold is interesting. RBR has achieved more than Mercedes and Renault in F1 (as constructors). More wins, fastest laps, WCC’s, WDC’s, you name it. RBR has taken part in more races than Mercedes as well (they’re some 100 races behind Renault though).

          So what’s your metric used for determining who would deserve it and who not?

          1. Mercedes has been in the sport years ago, it came back 20 years ago with McLaren and it has now been relatively successfull as Brawn and in the last 3 years. That combined does more for F1 than coming on the scene in 2006 putting in a lot of money to get the best people in, reap in championships in 4 years, before starting to think about pulling out again. Apart from doing a better job with their money than Toyota (or BMW for that matter), its not all that different and not enough for me to qualify RBR as part of F1.

            Being part of F1 is not just about success in achieving things for me, more about being there and contributing to the sport often and long enough and being good losers as well as good winners.

            1. hm, somehow I let the “came back first with Sauber and then ” drop out of that sentence.

            2. So you’re not making the distinction at all between a constructor and an engine/PU manufacturer? Because in my view that’s a serious distinction to make. When talking about “historic works teams” then that’s constructors we’re talking about.

              And the simple reality, then, is that RBR has been in F1 as a constructor for far more races than Mercedes and that they have accomplished more than Mercedes and Renault.

              I mean, you say RBR should do more than enter F1, throw money at it, be successful. They should persist. Well, just look at Renaults history as a constructor. They’ve had two stints in F1 now, both with roughly the same pattern: they do well for a few seasons, then gradually drop off and quit F1.

              Both of these stints were shorter than the period RBR has been in F1. You fault RBR for “thinking of quitting” after 11 seasons in F1 but you don’t fault Renault for actually quitting twice after shorter stints. That just seems weird to me.

            3. First of all, its clear that we have a different view here @mattds! I do put it against Renault that they did quit, although the last time they quit F1 it had a lot to do with wanting to get as far away from Crashgate as they could, which I find understandable.

              Renault have been in F1 as a Manufacturer, they have been the engine to have for many years in the 1990s and have had success (podiums, winning races) in several episodes over the last 4 decades, including becoming multiple champions. And indeed powering Red Bull to all of its 4 (8 if we count double for WDC and WCC) championships. In my view that all counts towards Renault having a place in F1.

              I am do not feel that Red Bull is quite there yet in contrast to Renault and Mercedes.
              They have been active as a minor sponsor (Berger) and then as a major sponsor (Sauber, then their own teams) for a long time, they have had a huge success in the last few years, but I guess its the same as with people often feeling a driver is really great once he achieves wins and/or championships with several teams, its not quite enough. Its all subjective off course, but that is how I feel about it.

            4. @BasCB I guess that’s fair. I probably make more of a distinction between constructor and engine manufacturer than you do in this matter – which makes you see it as a continued investment in F1.

          2. @mattds No doubt Bernie will have that ready as his excuse for who gets the money and who doesn’t, if needed beyond the commitment until 2020 :P

        2. @bascb Looking at the small teams, Force India have 3 wins, Toro Rosso 1, Sauber 0, Marussia 0. The others are all multiple champion ‘franchises’, even if RBR’s are recent. Only by years in the sport are three beating RBR, but they were also sponsoring Berger in the 80s? Marko was a driver in the 70s, so they could even claim to beat them on time of involvement in F1..

      2. Once Renault gets it, 6 teams will have special payments. Consider a 3-car team and we have 18 cars that are financially sound. Add one team which comes and goes every few years with 3 cars and suddenly the F1 grid looks far more financially healthy than before.

        1. +1
          Means a more level competition too, as well as more drivers involved in the championship battle.

        2. Once Renault gets it, 6 teams will have special payments. Consider a 3-car team and we have 18 cars that are financially sound. Add one team which comes and goes every few years with 3 cars and suddenly the F1 grid looks far more financially healthy than before.

          Don’t you get how that’s backwards reasoning? What about using the money for the special payments and allocate part of it to all competing teams?

          It’s the small teams that need the money more than the big teams. Ferrari, Red Bull, Mercedes: they don’t need that money as much as the smaller teams do – they are financially secure of their own as it is.

        3. This 3 car team argument is crazy.

          If some teams are struggling to field two cars, how is running a third car going to make the sport more financially stable? It just isn’t. It’s a silly idea and I wish it would go away.

          Imagine how dull this season would be if we had three car teams. A Mercedes 1,2,3 week in – week out.

          F1 benefits from diversity. It always has. Introducing a third car is such bad idea. You might as well turn it into a stock series – and then ban the drivers from criticising it. Oh, wait…

          1. How is Mercedes 1,2,3 week in – week out possibly worse than Mercedes 1, 2 week out? A 3-way fight for the title is worse than a 2-way one? It doesn’t make sense at all and is the only crazy argument here.

            And the point here was not for struggling teams to field 2 cars as you say, it was for financially stable teams to field 3, read the original point again.

    5. The days when qualifying served to limit the amount of starters on the grid as much as set the order are long gone! The FIA now appear to begging for new entrants rather than holding back what should be dozens of potential entrants. The fact that Renault need to negotiate extra dispensation if they return as a full works team just confirms it.

    6. Oh man, buuuurn! K-Mag’s tweet is a classy onion.

      1. Quite funny indeed. But what prompted Button to ask him if he’s lost his car?

        1. seeing him “struggle” on a long bike ride as posted by K-Mag @satchelcharge

    7. Leave him alone, he knows what he is doing

      Really?
      I think I’ve heard 2012 called. It wants its joke back.

      1. @brace I agree it’s getting pretty old, and geez 2012, 3 years ago… time flies.

        1. @brace @xtwl

          Even the ‘Felipe baby, stay cool’ transmission didn’t endure this long…

    8. with one of the conditions being Renault joins Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Red Bull and Williams in receiving additional revenues from Formula One Management.”

      Yes, let Renault come in and take the opportunity to shut down those unfair advantages instead of giving it to Renault too!

      1. If everyone gets the unfair advantage, doesn’t it make it… fair?

        1. 6 teams isn’t “everyone”.

      2. Well said @xtwl.

        Sure, if everyone gets an “unfair advantage” its not an advantage and hard to judge it to be unfair @sumedh, but as @mattds points out 6 out of 9 (or out of 10 once Haas settles in) is only going to make it tougher for the have-nots

      3. I don’t know why F1 is so keen to get some of these manufacturers on board. They’ll just bugger off again after 5 years. Like they always do.

        F1 should concentrate on keeping them on board for the long term. That only can come when the investment to race in F1 becomes good value. For me, it doesn’t offer that at the moment.

        1. @andybantam Then again you are not one of the biggest car manufacturers or companies on this eath which have to sell their products worldwide.

          1. Andy (@andybantam)
            24th July 2015, 6:55

            And?…

    9. Renault should get the bonus. They are an historic team. If bonus are going to be given to Ferrari and McLaren, you have to include Renault because they are the pillars of the sport.

      Indycar is right to clamp down. If you don’t like it…there’s the door. There will be plenty of people to tell you “you suck”…you’re doing it wrong…etc. Really unproductive chatter that does nothing positive or constructive. So why have to deal with that from people in your own camp?

      Ever been on a road trip and you get a flat or end up in a ditch? There’s always that one friend just nagging and complaining. Completely useless and unproductive.

      BTW, just because you use vulgar language does not mean you have a “personality.” Sadly that is what people associate with “character” and “personality” these days. The more provocative and vulgar you get, the more people think you’re telling it like it is(character). Completely not true of course.

    10. Lewis’ tweet doesn’t sit right with me… it feels as though he is trying to turn Jules’ death into a competition and some cheap PR. If he wanted to arrange a gesture such as a sticker, it should be a personal thing.

      I don’t normally agree with the Lewis-“bashing” but I felt this was a little thoughtless.

      1. @ben-n : I agree too.. I thought I only felt that way..

      2. Willem Cecchi (@)
        23rd July 2015, 10:17

        #ScumbagLewis

      3. I read that and thought “hashtag?”. Can’t people get rid of the hash symbol and just use normal English? Does everything have to be tweets and Facebook and Instagram?

        He seems to be wanting to turn it into a gimmick. It would be far better if he came up with something himself.

      4. “but I felt this was a little thoughtless”

        I can’t possibly see how. He’s getting the fans involved in memorializing Jules in some small way. You’ve overthought it.

    11. Renault buying back team Enstone?

      So that’s what all those post-Kubica years lead to? Team Enstone turning to Renault again?

      1. @davidnotcoulthard Such are the whims of huge corporations!

    12. This bonus should be for historical commitment to the sport. Williams, McLaren and Ferrari deserve it because F1 is their raison d’etre. But Red Bull and Mercedes don’t have the longevity in my mind to justify it. And with companies like this, the boards are always looking at cost/benefit. They could pull out at any moment. And whilst Renault have a historical commitment, the threat of them leaving is already a viable option. If you can’t reasonably guarantee future involvement, that bonus shouldn’t apply, in my view.

      1. Just look at what Bernie says, if you read it carefully, he only promises that once Renault starts winning races and championships (like RBR and Mercedes have been doing recently) they can get a nice slice of the pie.

        And its pretty sure that Bernie would tie that to the same kind of payout vs. guarantee he has with Mateschitz (and with Mercedes, McLaren, Williams and Ferrari) where if they would quit earlier than 2020 they would have to pay a fairly hefty (billions rather than millions) penalty for stepping out @splittimes, the penalty gets lower with every year that passes.

        In other words, while they CAN step out any time, it also means that FOM get back a lot of the money they have “invested” in securing a solid grid of top teams if they do.

    13. Interesting investigation from the EU into the activities of Sky UK and several film studio’s to ensure that the footage can be watched only in the UK http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-5432_en.htm?locale=en

      In effect, it throws a bomb under the way TV deals are made per country for movies, and from there one can easily see the parallels with sport deals being granted based on territoriality:

      “European consumers want to watch the pay-TV channels of their choice regardless of where they live or travel in the EU. Our investigation shows that they cannot do this today, also because licensing agreements between the major film studios and Sky UK do not allow consumers in other EU countries to access Sky’s UK and Irish pay-TV services, via satellite or online. We believe that this may be in breach of EU competition rules. The studios and Sky UK now have the chance to respond to our concerns.”

      1. @basCB Makes sense. Would it not make more sense to have channels go by language rather than country? E.g. Sky UK (English), Sky Germany (German) etc., so if you are a Brit in Germany for example you would continue to subscribe to Sky UK for English commentary and films!

        1. Hm, I don’t think its easy to limit it to language @fastiesty. And what if I would like to get Sky coverage (or French, THOSE on boards :-D ) just because I like it, regardless of where I am or what languages I speak or don’t speak?

          1. @bascb True, I was thinking more like the language would be the default pick based on location, but that with barriers removed you could then choose whichever one you wanted.. those Canal Plus onboard highlights are great!

    Comments are closed.