Mateschitz insists Red Bull’s Renault deal is over and slams rivals

2015 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Red Bull owner Dietrich Mateschitz has denied claims his team could continue using Renault engines next year and criticised rival engine manufacturers for refusing to supply them in 2016.

Speaking to the Red Bull-owned publication Speedweek, Mateschitz insisted his team’s contract with Renault for next year had been “cancelled”.

Mateschitz described the Renault power unit as “hopeless” with “pitiful” reliability and said it was around 80bhp down on the Mercedes. “The disappointment with the performance and the posturing of the French are huge,” he said. “Instead of improving after the 2014 season Renault has further fallen behind Mercedes.”

Mateschitz also rejected claims Renault could take over the team.

Deals with any of F1’s other three engine manufacturers also seem unlikely. Mateschitz said a deal with Honda could not happen because it was being blocked by McLaren boss Ron Dennis.

Mercedes and Ferrari have already refused to supply Red Bull with engines. “The factory racing teams fear and know that we are faster than their factory team,” said Mateschitz.

2015 F1 season

Browse all 2015 F1 season articles

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.

152 comments on “Mateschitz insists Red Bull’s Renault deal is over and slams rivals”

  1. Sounds a bit childish from Mateschitz. No wonder no one wants to supply Red Bull next season if as soon as something goes wrong, he’ll go crying to the press and start slating them.

    1. @davef1 I can understand them being frustrated with Renault. But Horner said in December last year Mercedes wouldn’t give them engines and I can’t understand what makes them think whinging about it for months was ever going to change that.

      1. @keithcollantine, I think you have the quotations wrong. It seems that, for instance, the lines about the hopeless and pitiful Renault are from the speedweek writer, not from Mateschitz himself. Of course if Speedweek is Red Bull-owned then that may not make much difference.

        1. Yeah I cannot remember one instance where someone whined their way to a good deal ever.

          Can you imagine that? Whine so hard to force EU to order Mercedes to pay anti-competitive fine until they supply them factory spec engines.

          Geez, I have more faith in walking on water then seing them get what they want in a way they are doing it now.

          What they need now is divine intervention.

          This cannot be their real strategy, what is their real goal?

          1. I read the original in German and my impression was “Red Bull press statement done by interview with a journalist who just writes down what he is told to, instead of asking any hard questions” @jureo, @bigwilk, @keithcollantine.

            From the article it is very clear that this was exactly the message Red Bull / Mateschitz wanted to put out. Its not clear what exactly he is trying to achieve by doing so though.

        2. I spotted that too. It seems to be the author of the article describing the engine as pitiful so not really fair to attribute those comments to Mateschitz. That’s assuming Google Translate is doing its thing well…

      2. I’ve heard a lot of criticism of RBR’s behaviour, and to be honest it’s not how I would have approached the situation, BUT… Looking at it from the big M’s point of view, he invests prob upwards of $500 mil if not more in running two teams and a race teack, when RBR were dominating the FIA changed rules and tests (sometimes even mid season) to peg tem back, their domination was around aero which any team could try and replicate or innovate – Mercs domination is purely around the power unit and there is restriction around how much that can be changed. Further Renault lobbied hard for these engines and in fact I believe threatened to leave if they were brought in. If I was forking out $500 mil and my engine partner got it so wrong after that sort of stance, I’d be a bit peeved too. Personally I’m a RBR fan, but I would like to see them leave, use that investment to start a rival comp going back to control v8s and focus more on the drivers. F1 at the moment is a very sad and sorry sport.

        1. And that’s why redbull are 4th in constructors table behind 2 Merc powered teams and 1 Ferrari. Ferrari supply 3 teams and Merc supply 4. If the Mercs where so powerful you’d expect redbull to be at least behind all the Merc teams but they aren’t. McLaren would be exstatic to be 4th with their shoddy PU, even RB don’t want it.

        2. Don’t run two teams and build your own engine if you don’t like it.

        3. It says specifically in the rules that body flexing is not allowed and that if it is detected tests will be revised to stamp it out. That has nothing to do with Red Bull apart from the fact that they were quite clearly abusing the “no flex” rules.

          If anything they were allowed to continue using flexing bodywork for an eternity when other teams were doing it (Ferrari, Sauber, Honda, Toyota) , the FIA made sure the tests were changed immediately. FIA basically did nothing on RBR’s body flex for several seasons.

          When they finally did come around to try and improve the tests, the tests weren’t even really changed. Increasing the force and decreasing the “arm” (distance to pivot point) still gives the same force on the wing.

      3. @keithcollantine And later it was made clear that they actually did get an offer for Mercedes Engines and that RBR didn’t follow up on that offer. For whatever reason Red Bull had turned to Ferrari instead. When that deal didn’t happen they tried to get back with Mercedes again, but by then the mood had swung in the Mercedes board.

    2. Sounds to me more like he’s getting his excuses in early for when they withdraw.

      1. Exactly, he’s been doing this for a long time now. But it seems the guy never reads the news to see how much bad publicity his attitude (all his employees are just following his tune) is generating.

        1. And yet his Red Bull brand is mentioned in every other article. There is no such thing as…bad publicity.

          “Es wäre das erste Mal, dass wir keine alternativen Ideen hätten” – “It would be the first time that we had no alternative ideas”

          No doubt they have a card up their sleeve, moving the deadline (again) just to enjoy all the free exposure they get from all this engine talk (they started in the first place).

    3. Renault took some of their latest engines to America for the US GP and Red Bull refused to use them. If you are sick and refuse your medicine, who’s fault is it if you remain sick?
      According to the fastest lap times mentioned on a recent F1 Fanatic article, the third fastest lap time was posted by Daniil Kvyat, and the 5th fastest by Daniel Ricciardo, who drive for Red Bull and their cars are powered by the old Renault engine.
      I can’t see how an “old” F1 engine that is “80 hp down” can post quicker “fastest lap” times than 15 other cars, 11 of which supposedly are propelled by more more powerful engines.

      1. @drycrust, but where would the 2 Dans have finished if they had taken the grid penalty for exceeding their allowed number of engines. There is fault on both sides of this debacle.

        1. @hohum Vettel took a new engine, got a ten place starting grid demotion, and then finished third. While Vettel crashed out of this race, he did spend a lot of the race overtaking others, showing the benefit of the new engine.
          Red Bull went into the US GP with high downforce that only benefited them when the track was wet. The weather forecast was for the track to dry out, meaning they would expect to finish down the field, which is where they were when the race finished. If Red Bull had done the same as Vettel at the US GP with at least one of their cars, then that car would have been able to start this race without penalty, meaning that car could have got faster lap times than what they did. Whether that would translate into a higher finishing place or not is unknown, but one would expect it to be so.

          1. @drycrust, true, but for ferrari it’s a case of suffering this year to make gains for next year, RBR do not have that consolation prize to look forward to.

          2. @hohum I think Ferrari used this engine because they were trying to keep Vettel in the hunt for the WDC, and it would have paid off too if Rosberg had won the US GP, which he nearly did.
            If you believe that Ferrari had used the engine because somehow that would give them an advantage in 2016, then that wouldn’t surprise me at all, in which case the use of the engine had tactical and strategic advantages.
            The strange thing is Red Bull have made strategic decisions that, at a casual glance anyway, have placed them at a disadvantage for 2016.

          3. @HoHum, Red Bull could have used that new and more powerful engine for the remaining 4 races.

    4. he’s merely telling the truth and sometimes it hurts.

    5. @davef1 It’s his opinion. Dietrich’s reasoning is substantiated by hard facts, it’s not childish. I think it’s so strange to hear a honest incisive remark from an f1 team that we automatically disregard these comments as sensationalist.
      It’s revealing of F1 etiquette that only team owners on the brink of collapse, suddenly start speaking uncomplicated unadulterated truth, truth at least of where they stand. I don’t think there’s nothing dishonest with his comment.

      It think there is dishonesty regarding RB support for an independent PU, especially the remarks that most won’t be able to pay Pu’s by 2017. The veto has made the headlines but hasn’t ripped the paddock apart. Why? The motion for cheaper PU’s put manufacturers threatening not to supply costumer teams. It’s clear that manufactures can endure more financial squeezing than the smaller teams, that said manufacturers are volatile, partly because they have money to get in and get out but also because most aren’t tethered to F1. Teams are tethered it’s for most their only business. As there’s not enough money, you are always on a balancing act. I would force the engine price cut and force availability, then as there’s no money I would try to reward PU’s with a new engine championship points table.

  2. I’m getting quite fed up with this. As a team, you are entitled to nothing (manufacturing wise). I’m sure Ferrari would give Red Bull an engine in exchange for using the Red Bull chassis/aero kit etc. Or do Red Bull fear what Ferrari could do with the Red Bull aerodynamics?

    Develop your own engine, make a solid partnership with another company OR try not to upset the engine company you currently use before arranging an alternative.

    1. Hear hear!

    2. The difference is that you supposed to develop the car on your own in F1. But you can buy an engine, thus if Red Bull is willing to pay, then in a fair world the engine manufacturer should be willing to sell it. For example, how much FI or Williams paid for the engine? If Red Bull is willing to pay the same amount, then why they don’t sell it to them?

      This is why I don’t like the comparison between engine and chassis/aero whenever this conversation came up, because frankly, there isn’t any comparison to begin with.

      Of course I don’t like Red Bull behavior in all of this, but they do deserve an engine which nobody is willing to supply. It would be such a shame for the championship if a great car can’t compete.

      1. Didn’t Ferrari initially say Red Bull could get customer engines (sans proprietary lubricants/fuels, etc), but RBR in their arrogance retorted with their “works engine parity or we don’t want it” rant? Red Bull wants works team engineering at customer status. They enjoyed works team perks with Renault, but paid customer money & plastered Infiniti all over the car while Seb Vettel sold Infinitis for the street. Then they threw a tantrum, ended the relationship after bad mouthing their works partner, & like an ungrateful customer with deep pockets, they went shopping elsewhere… because that’s exactly what they are.

        1. Promoting Infiniti though was for Renault not in spite of them; Infiniti is the luxury Nissan and Nissan and Renault are like hip joined twins.

          1. I know about the Renault/Nissan tie up, but everything I’ve read (including statements from Renault directly) suggests that Renaultsport were more than a little cheesed off about it. It may have benefited Nissan/Infiniti a bunch, but Renault definitely got the crappy end of that deal.

          2. I am pretty sure that Renault wasn’t that thrilled by the deal, as the money Infiniti pays goes to REd Bull, and apparently far from all of it ends up paying for the Renault engines @ianbond001, Franz

        2. he’s merely telling the truth and sometimes it hurts.

      2. Absolutely correct but not quite; you are right in saying that “in a fair world the engine manufacturer should be willing to sell it”; but there is a big difference. Up until now there was always an engine matufacturer that did not have their own team in the competition i.e. an “engine supplier” only.
        There is none today; and every engine manufacturer out there has interest in protecting their main team. So i see this as a huge blunder on RedBull management failing to see that. Especially since one of their demands in the last year was that they were the preffered team of Renault.

      3. For your argument to stand up, you have to prove that the present engine manufacturers can produce more engines per year. I believe the manufacturers said they could supply four teams max, including themselves, and this is what has happened.

        Plus you have to take note that only the Mercedes team are using their latest engine, because the lead time to produce sufficient components for four teams is just not there. So in effect the team is acting as the test bed for new components before supplying the other teams. This also means that if the new components fail they are putting themselves at risk, as seen with Honda McLaren.

        1. I do believe that Red Bull had asked for Merc engine before Merc make a deal with Manor which probably didn’t come with a set of question like Merc told us about when Red Bull asked them about the engine. So they can accept the Manor offer but deny Red Bull? I think we all know that the reason for Ferrari and Merc reluctant to provide engine for Red Bull isn’t because of can’t provide sufficient components. That’s the manufacturer trying to justify whatever they’re doing for not providing an engine or only willing to provide last year engine.

      4. The difference is that you supposed to develop the car on your own in F1. But you can buy an engine, thus if Red Bull is willing to pay, then in a fair world the engine manufacturer should be willing to sell it.

        There are several problems with this statement.

        Firstly, there is an issue with manufacturing. These engines are not easy to build. They are all prototypes, in effect. Merc and Ferrari will have set up manufacturing facilities to produce a certain number of engines.

        Let’s say I walk in to a shop and ask for a particular model of TV. They tell me “sorry, we are sold out”. Can I complain that, “In a fair world, you should sell one to me, you just sold one to that guy and I’m offering the same money”?

        While I believe it would be possible for them to increase their manufacturing capacity to be able to supply RBR, it would not be an easy job (or cheap). I know, I have worked in manufacturing and R&D. Even in my current job, we sometimes have to say “no” to new projects because we simply don’t have the resources to do it.

        The second issue is that supplying F1 engines is not Merc’s or Ferrari’s core business. It is not even the Merc/Ferrari F1 team’s core business. The F1 team’s core business is building and racing a car, with the intention of winning. Selling the engines is a side business. To them, the main purpose of it is probably to spread the development costs, as well as to get more testing miles.

        Let’s say you were a TV manufacturer. Your core business is selling TVs to the general public. You also sell the LCD panels to other businesses for integration into their own products: Maybe all in one PCs, digital signage, that sort of thing. Then, another TV manufacturer comes to you and tried to buy your panels. You make better panels than they currently use, and they are a serious competitor in your core business already. If they have your panels, they will eat into the profits of your core business, because they will probably make a better overall TV than you. Do you sell to them? If so, how much extra do you charge to make up for the list profits elsewhere? Or do you sell lower end panels to them, to keep your advantage?

        F1 is a sport and a business. You don’t hand over one of your advantages to a rival without a fair price. The initial negotiations around using the Red Bull brand for Mercedes cars were one such price. It is not as simple as you describe by any means.

        As a final point, this will remain as long as the engine manufacturers are not independent, unless the FIA change the rules. While ever there are “works teams”, the engine manufacturer must think of their needs before the others. The only way I can see around it is a large change to the rules. My own take would be that engine manufacturers must set a price per engine, and make that engine available to any team (with enough notice, say by the mid point of the previous season)). The engines (or power plant components) must be supplied to the FIA, who then dish them out at random to the teams (to ensure there is no favouritism). There must be at least one spare engine per car using it lodged with the FIA at the start of a race weekend, ready to be handed over should a team need it. This would start to build a separation between the engine supplier and constructor.

        Even here, though, there are downsides. For example, nearly everyone would have jumped to Merc engines after the first season, which puts all the others at an even greater disadvantage, with less income and less testing.

        It’s not an easy situation to fix, by any means!

    3. Totally agree. Every time something did not go their way they threaten to quit!
      I guess it’s a legitimate business tactic but not very popular to the fans.

      1. You mean Red Bull are behaving like Ferrari do when they don’t get their way? Without the power of veto of course..

        1. You do know Ferrari have gotten a lot more co-operative and relaxed over the last decade, right? It’s been quite a while since they last threw their toys out the pram.

          1. Yeah they have settled down a lot. Wasn’t it only about 5 years ago they were threatening to set up their own series? I think Red Bull should just bail on F1 and do just that, they’re never going to be happy playing by other peoples rules

          2. The key was the departure of Montezemolo; the team mellowed out pretty quickly once he’d gone.

          3. @raceprouk Ferrari are melodramatic but ultimately I think they’ve used their power for the best. A tinge of selfishness and a huge language barrier. I actually think that Montezemolo’s thoughts were not revolting, it was his words.

  3. Think the Renault is underpowered and unreliable? You’ll love the Honda then…

    1. Did you even read the article? He even says honda deal is blocked by ron dennis.

      1. Why is that important?

        If he hates the Renault engine, he’ll hate the Honda engine, so why’s he bothered if Ron blocks the deal anyway?

        1. Honda has RB sponsorship in motogp, it’s the first time ever. RB always sponsored riders not teams. RB has ktm coming to motogp but that doesn’t not stop RB from sponsoring more than 1 team, Arrows and Sauber for instance. I think RB always want the best but I’m sure they would trade bad for worse if there was any hope in worse.

    2. plus 1 hundred and 10%….

  4. They deserve the horsepower they get, and if that’s none – then justice has been done.

    ‘French posturing’ made me laugh. It seems none shout louder or posture more than this idiot. Money does not buy respect.

  5. Seems like Red Bull is the only team to complain when you are going through a difficult time. Every team has ups and downs, but Red Bull is the only team to bitch about it.

    1. Red Bull is the only team to bitch about it

      As much as I hate the attitude of RBR at the moment, this statement is patently false. All the top teams have whinged about regulations, about tyres, about money distribution, or about whatever they feel is putting them at a disadvantage, from the beginning of time. Some of theses complaints have been valid, some have not. Some have been rectified, some not. All these complaints were argued against by whoever gained an advantage from the situation.

      It’s the way of F1, always has been and always will be.

  6. Please Ron, FIA, Please let them run year old Honda engines next year.

    1. Lol. There’s plenty of spare ones lying around, too. Barely used.

      1. When RB beats them with year old Hondas it would be the end of McLaren in F1.

    2. Honestly, don’t really know why they want Honda engines. Surely running old Ferrari or Renault engines is far better…

      1. Based on this year so far, a hamster in a wheel is better than Honda power; at least the hamster can get to the end of races

  7. Well that’s pretty uncompromising stuff, isn’t it?

    But without competitive motor demanded by Mateschitz meaningfulness of the [Red Bull Racing] project is not guaranteed.

    Seems as though they have painted themselves into a bit of a corner and are arranging their own Götterdämmerung!

  8. Unfortunately the arrogance of terminating the contract with Renault early in the belief that Ferrari / Mercedes et al would all be jumping to supply redbull with engines has come back and bitten Redbull in the exhaust blown diffuser.

    1. “bitten Redbull in the exhaust blown diffuser.” Man, that was funny as hell. :)

    2. I think it was Mercedes that insisted Redbull terminate in order to begin negotiating – and then promptly slammed the door in their faces.
      The mistake was believing them.

  9. Around 2003/2004, I remember there were rumours that Arden International could be making the step up to F1. Arden was and still is very much Christian Horner’s team. With Mateschitz hitting out at literally everyone who could supply them with engines, Marko being his usual cynical self, Horner has been negative about Renault’s engine, but seemingly in a much less vocal manner.

    This is speculation with nothing to back it up, but what if Horner pulls the old Rock ‘n’ Roll Swindle? Red Bull vacate ownership, Horner ‘buys’ the team, rebrands it as Red Bull Arden F1 or something, Red Bull continue to sponsor and Horner gets to pull the ‘that wasn’t me’-card with Honda, Ferrari and Mercedes. Jobs would be kept, Arden finally makes to move up to F1 and Horner comes out looking like a good guy, while Mateschitz and Marko get to leave on their terms.

    1. Interesting idea @npf1, but I think Horner is very much part of the problem.

  10. To quote EJ’s words in the intro of the 2014 BBC Battle of the Silver Arrows documentary:
    “Oh, what became of them along the way?”

    Seriously, what’s going on with RBR? Everyone in the team seems disgusted with their current situation, and while they have every right to be, their PR in the last 1,5 years consist of nothing else than spits in the face of the company which put them on the map, and brought them 4 consecutive WDC’s and WCC’s.

    It is completely understandable that they go through a period of hard times-everyone does at least once- i mean, just look at McLaren.
    But they could try to solve the problem with Renault, not urge them to do so in a minimal period of time and under an extremely stressful situation (facing threats of broken deal etc.) and when they fail to do so just give them more crap. If it weren’t for Ricciardo and his lively character, RBR could have become already one of the most hated teams ever by the F1 Community.

    It just gives me a whole new level of respect for Ron Dennis’ proffessionalism levels.

    1. It’s said that tough times don’t build character, they reveal it.

      In this case, I think it’s revealing quite a lot about RBR.

      I’m frankly getting really tired of their whining and complaining. They did it when they were winning. They’re still doing it when they’re not. Get over yourselves. Quit slagging your engine supplier and acting like self-entitled brats, then maybe someone will be interested.

  11. Will they also lose their Infiti sponsorship with the cancellation of the Renault contract?

  12. The factory racing teams fear and know that we are faster than their factory team

    No, you are actually slower than Mercedes, Ferrari and Williams. I recommend this book to Mr. Mateschitz as he obviously still needs to learn a lot about F1 cars: An F1 car consists of many components and the fact that one of those components is better than its “rivals” does not mean that the whole package is the best.

    1. @girts, According to the quote is actually:

      “The works teams are afraid we would be faster than them,” he explained. “That’s clear for all to see.”

      Which seems pretty accurate to me.

      I do not support any claim that Red Bull deserves the best engine, but I do agree with most of what Mateschitz say’s. Renault have done a terrible job going from bad to worse. With Mercedes and Ferrari saying No, and Honda blocked by Mclaren, there seem to be no options left.

      1. But if you go to the actual Speedweek site and read the original article, Mateschitz’s words translate as “The factory racing teams fear and know that we are faster than their factory team.”
        The editorial on Speedweek then goes on – “Red Bull is currently victim of its own success. After four wins and two second places in the World Cup Konstrukters is no Formula 1 works team wants to make a fool of by a drinks manufacturer.”

        1. @nickwyatt Well, they have a point since they probably have the equal, or not best chassis in the field right now. Hungary, Singapore and Austin proved that. All of their deficit to Mercedes and Ferrari can be traced to the Renault engine to be honest.

          1. Their posturing over their chassis is also quite rich considering they throw every year the budget that the others throw for the chassis and building an engine.
            Ferrari and Merc have a similar budget along with building engines.

      2. @me4me I read the original article and I agree that “would be faster” is a more accurate reflection of the quote. We do not know that though. Alonso could also say that he would be faster than Hamilton in that Mercedes and thus imply that he deserves to be world champion more than Lewis but that would be just a suggestion. In other words, it is not really noble to brag about something that you cannot prove.

        Mateschitz still pretends to believe that his rivals are obliged to give him their excellent power units so that the engine would not be a factor anymore. According to that logic, competition between engines is unfair, unsportsmanlike and should be discouraged. It does not matter that others have spent a fortune to develop complicated engines, let us forget about that and let us have a competition between chassis where we completely accidentally happen to be good at.

        For sure, I can understand why Red Bull are frustrated with Renault and why they are not happy about the current engine rules and are trying to change them. However, blaming your rivals for not solving your problems is not a wise thing to do.

      3. Manufacturer teams build chassis and engine as a package, Red Bull with equal budget to them only design the chassis, the others are not scared anymore than Red Bull would be if they had to hand all their senior aero team to Ferrari or Merc and 200 million a year for the engines. I would rather they leave and have 3 car teams at least then 2 of Ricciardo, Verstappen, Kyvatt and Sainz would be in equal cars to Hamilton and Vettel and that would be a great show.

      4. But Red Bull refused to use the latest upgraded Renault engines which Renault had brought to America for the US GP, and now, at the Mexican GP Red Bull posted the 3rd and 5th fastest lap times. How can Red Bull be saying they want engines that are more powerful when they turn down Renault’s latest offerings?

        1. because there was less that one tenth in the performnace and grid penalties would have made it even worse.

  13. So he’s willing to throw away decades of sponsorship leading to a decade of development after hiring some of the best designers and engineers on the market, building the team up to win both C and D championships 4 years running, finance and run the only proper B team in f1 for developing drivers, invest in a whole young driver program and pay for them to drive in C teams like HRT, finance the highest budget of any F1 team, buy a RACE TRACK and then host their own round of the F1 championship… because he refuses to stick with Renault for just a year so they can work out a deal for 2017 when everything changes anyway?

    1. Certainly seems that way . . . something like ‘cutting off his nose to spite his face’.

      1. Whenever he speaks directly, it’s usually contradictory to what Horner says… come to think of it, Markko is the one who supposedly has his ear, & lately they don’t seem to be on the same page either. I don’t recall many official statements from him that weren’t disparaging or combative. And this mystery reason he hates Mercedes… I just can’t imagine it being a secret if there was a reasonable explanation behind it. Dietrich, IMO, is exactly that type of guy. Just another rich 7th planet minus the “Ur”.

        1. His attitude is basically ‘if we can’t dominate instead of anyone else we’re taking our bat and ball and going home.’ What a crybaby.

  14. Red Bull aren’t exactly winning a lot of friends at the moment are they. If DM’s comments are meant to shame one of the big engine suppliers into agreeing a supply deal, I think they’re very ill thought out and will do RBR more harm than good. It’s so frustrating to see this as I’m sure that, had they played things differently, they would at least have some sort of power unit supply deal in place for next year, very possibly with either Mercedes or Ferrari. Very hard to see where they go from here though. It could spell the end for two very good racing teams.

  15. Make your own engine then if you’r not satisfied!

    1. They are too scared to build their own engine better to piggy back others superior engineering skills at a relatively low cost.

  16. The last few weeks I was coming under the impression that Red Bull was backing down just a tad, in order to have an engine supplier at all… but this makes me wonder whether we’re actually going to see Red Bull pull-out.

    1. It seems to be heading that way, manor seems to be imploding and Renault seem to have cold feet. Could we lose 8 cars before Australia next year!?

  17. It would seem that in this current era of Formula 1, you are not going to be doing much winning unless you are either a manufacturer team or working very closely with one. We are set for the first season since 2006 where every race was won by manufacturer teams and all bar three since 2014 has been won again by manufacturer teams (and those three were all on days where Mercedes tripped up).

    If you have a slight power deficit, you simply can no longer pile on the downforce to make up the time. It simply no longer works like that in this Manufacturers’ Formula. Everybody is talking about Ferrari being the ones to challenge Mercedes in 2016, not the likes of Williams. You need to have a good power unit behind you and the Renault in 2015 has simply been woeful, in terms of both reliability and in outright speed. Since 2014, the top two teams in terms of podiums achieved have been Mercedes and Ferrari, and in 2015, the only two manufacturer teams have locked out the top two in the championship already.

    Yes, Mateschitz has well and truly shot himself in the foot with this very public falling out with Renault and making the apparent assumption that one of his main rivals would (somehow) decide that supplying Red Bull with the main key to their success would be a good idea. However, his options were always limited:
    Stick with Renault and hope they did not build a dud power unit in 2016,
    Build their own power units (however take into consideration Honda’s struggles),
    Get friendly with an outside manufacturer (again, see Honda’s struggles),
    Take on inferior 2015 power units (it’s helped Manor to survive, but not much else).

    Mateschitz is still there to sell cans of energy drink at the end of the day, and floundering around in the midfield and/or having cars expire half the time is certainly not going to do just that.

    1. Considering in the last two years we’ve seen Williams, Ferrari, Mercedes, Force India, Mclaren, Lotus, and Red Bull, all standing on the podium, I’d say without the superior Mercedes chassis / engine marriage the ability for more teams to win would be far more open. Behind the silver arrows it’s pretty mixed up.

    2. @craig-o

      Mateschitz is still there to sell cans of energy drink at the end of the day, and floundering around in the midfield and/or having cars expire half the time is certainly not going to do just that.

      He didn’t exactly complain when the team was still building up to their success. He didn’t complain this hard when Toro Rosso beat Red Bull in 2008, but ever since 2011 the complaints about Pirelli, the sport and now Renault have been getting harder and harder. It’s not just that ending in the midfield sells less cans of sugary goo, the top of this team are sore losers. Luca di Montezemolo was amazing at overreactions whenever Ferrari lost a race/championship, but that usually meant an empty complain about F1 needing Ferrari or firing someone within the team. Red Bull is kicking against every chair they can find, biting every hand that could possibly feed. I’m not saying they’re worse losers than old Luca, but they’re damn sure trying.

      1. Well said Craig and Nick. The fact is Red Bull is a business that sells energy drink, and F1 is only a marketing tool to promote that. When they are winning races they are making the six o’clock news and that keeps them in the headlines, which hopefully sells drinks. So why should Red Bull accept an engine that under the current regulations, only allows them to compete in the midfield? From Red Bulls perspective, if they are not going to win races then they will not get the marketing return on the investment to justify the expense. I think Mateschitz looks at all sports as marketing opportunities and what they can do for his business. He is a marketer and business man at heart, not a racer like say Frank Williams. I think for Red Bull, F1 with its declining TV viewers due to pay TV, limited opportunities to compete on an even platform, and its internal politics to allow true competition, is just not that attractive any more. After all stunts like Felix Baumgartner jumping from a balloon are guaranteed to make the nightly news and probably at a cheaper price.

    3. @craig-o, with regards to your comment about Red Bull’s advertising strategy – even by that logic, Mateschitz’s current strategy does not make sense.

      Racing in the midfield pack may not generate as much of a positive image for your brand as you may like, but it is still nevertheless likely to have a net positive effect on their brand. It is, after all, part of their rationale for having Toro Rosso – that team will never move beyond the midfield pack, but the increased advertising exposure that the team generates is still considered to add enough value to justify its existence.

      However, for the past 18 months or so, Mateschitz, Marko and Horner have all been making disparaging and critical remarks that have ended up creating a negative association between themselves and the sport. Most of the damage to Red Bull’s brand is being self inflicted by their reaction to Renault’s performance, as evidenced by the fact that most of the posts in this thread are criticising Red Bull, not Renault, for the way they have handled this situation.

  18. Mercedes definitively said no from the outset. Looks like there will be no conciliation with Renault. Honda is a no (if RB even wanted it). Would Ferrari still offer a 2015 Ferrari power unit if RB came back begging? With no other suppliers that looks like the only option at the moment. And to be honest, it’s not a terrible option, probably better than what Renault or Honda would provide next year anyway. It might not allow them to win any championships but would at least allow them to compete next year before a potential shake up happens for 2017 anyway.

    1. @keithedin, actually Keith, I remember reading a couple of long articles recently on and I believe here in the round-up that, Red Bull actually believed they were getting a Merc engine and at the beginning Merc was on board with the idea, RB had to meet 2 requirements, a joint venture on their A-class vehicles to a younger generation and for RB to be contractual free of Renault. Red Bull met one of those, releasing themselves from Renault. So they seemed to think they sealed the deal just buying the engine but since Merc never really got a joint venture plan from Red Bull they scrapped the idea and left Red Bull hanging. Not that I blame Merc but that’s how I read it.

      1. The way you describe the facts might be close enough to reality @markM. But that really only shows that Red Bull somehow thought that fulfilling 1 of 2 criteria would work and ignored the second one completely.

        Its even stated in that same article, that Mercedes made it clear that for them the PR/Marketing tie in was the important part, while Renault not being opposed was more of a technical/administrative hurdle, but Red Bull just did not want to engage into such an integral deal, instead just asking to get an engine.

        1. That’s the way I understood it too. For Mercedes the most important thing was to get the terms of the marketing tie-in set in stone, but Red Bull never came to the table on that front so the deal went cold.

  19. Must be quite tough for someone so used to hearing the word ‘yes’ to have someone say ‘no’ instead…

    1. Indeed. So childish.

  20. Yoseph (@yshibeshiyahoo-co-uk)
    3rd November 2015, 13:12

    Here’s an alternative, an engine deal for Newey and any other staff the manufacturers want, lets see who says no.

  21. to those saying ‘just build your own’, if it were that simple I’d imagine they’d have done it by now. Plus its not exactly easy, just look at the cabbage Honda produced.

    I find it interesting Renault have stayed so silent. We know they’re chasing the historic payments they can only get with their own team so I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re happy Red Bull are imploding. Also makes me wonder if all Mateschitz is saying – as in the contract is terminated – is just as much the position of Renault as their own. Which would explain why he’s eager to stick the knife deeper into Renault’s back.

    I do feel bad for them. When engines weren’t as strong they dominated through aero – having a weak engine could be compensated. But now the rules stop that and hand supreme power to the engine. Without a good one it doesn’t matter if your aero is amazing you’re still going to lose.

    The Mercedes mess is strange, Red Bull seemed like they threw Renault under the bus because Mercedes wouldn’t give them the engine without termination of the contract, only to then reject the engine deal anyway once the deed was done. Ferrari backed out because they’d have to give Red Bull equal units and didn’t want to and McLaren are playing sour grapes. Honda seem stuck, they agreed with the FIA they’d supply more than one team but told McLaren they wouldn’t so that’s another mess.

    And in the meantime both Red Bull and Toro Rosso could be shoved out of the sport. Regardless of whether they deserved it or you like them, if they leave they’ll leave a huge hole and from the way things are going it look rather likely. I find it utterly insane that a front running team could get shoved out because not one of four different engine manufacturers will give them a unit.

    1. honda being there is partially their own fault cuz not accepting help.from McLaren… I bet if they worked together… development would have been better..

  22. So id RedBull decides to sit out next year, it’d still be a 20 car grid thanks to Haas. And with Manor getting the Mercedes engine, it should be more competitive tailend.

  23. For sale: 20 Honda engines, 2015 spec, all slightly used, might need a new compressor.

  24. Yaaaaaawwwwwnnn.

  25. Mateschitz described the Renault power unit as “hopeless” with “pitiful” reliability

    This is why Red Bull cannot have nice things. You don’t hear McLaren saying this about Honda, even though they have far more right to be upset. Instead, all we hear from McLaren is ‘we’re working with Honda to make things better’.

    1. Duncan Snowden
      3rd November 2015, 14:34

      Spot-on. Red Bull is lying fourth in the championship with this “hopeless” Renault engine, ahead of two Mercedes-powered teams, with two second-place finishes (more than Williams), and a third. Sure, it’s not good enough for them. They want to win. Do they think Ron Dennis doesn’t? But you don’t see him going around shooting his mouth off, criticizing the people who are busting their guts trying to improve the Honda engine as if they didn’t know what they were doing.

      Nor, more importantly, did you see him blaming Mercedes for every failure when his team was winning regularly. That’s the point. It’s not just recent; Red Bull has form. We know that, internally, Renault are concerned that they haven’t been getting the brand value they’d like from their participation in F1, and that’s why they want to re-enter as a manufacturer. And we know why that recognition wasn’t forthcoming. When Red Bull won, it was all Red Bull Technology, Vettel, and Newey, often “despite being underpowered”. When they didn’t, it was “a Renault problem”.

      Oh, sure, “the manufacturers are scared we’d beat them” is a great excuse, but the fact is that people noticed that. People they now need on their side. “Win as a team, lose as a team” isn’t just some slick motivational slogan; it’s common sense.

      1. Nor, more importantly, did you see him blaming Mercedes for every failure when his team was winning regularly.

        I may be remembering wrongly, but I’m sure some times when the engine was the weak point, Ron still termed it a McLaren failure, not a Mercedes one i.e. it was a failure of the team as a whole.

    2. It’s what we’re hearing at the minute, but by the end of next year if the situation is no different but Honda are still insisting on sticking with their current practices regardless of how ineffective they are proving, I don’t think it will be all sunshine and roses between McLaren and Honda.

      1. @philipgb
        I’m not so sure. The bond might become agitated, but McLaren have a history of being polite to even the worst engine suppliers. When Mercedes’ were blowing up all the time between 2004 and 2006, McLaren expressed their desire for a more reliable engine, but never saw Ron Dennis and Mansour Ojjeh going to the media to talk about ‘those damn Germans and their poor engines’. Even when they ran the Peugeot engines in 1994 they politely stated that Mercedes coming in for 1995 was because ‘they were better suited to McLaren’s philosophy’ (and Peugeot actually ended up kicking every team they supplied in F1 because their cars were bad, certainly not their engines, wink, wink). I think even in 1993 they only voiced disappointment that they weren’t getting the same engines as Benetton, but I have never found anything harsher than that.

        I’m not a McLaren fan at all, but I do not think for one second we’re going to see Red Bull like business at McLaren. They’re more likely to pull another engine from somewhere than publicly shame Honda if it goes wrong again next year.

    3. If Honda comes back next year with an engine that has lost more time to Mercedes and made them less competitive compared to what their current situation is, then let’s see how well things are between McLaren and Honda.

      1. Given the history and philosophy of McLaren, I’d expect no worse than a quiet contract termination. Certainly, McLaren won’t be looking to shame anyone; it’s not how they work.

        1. Though McLaren might pull a Magnussen and terminate the contract on Honda’s Birthday via email ;)

          1. Magnussen knew. That birthday thing was just tabloid hot air.

  26. This is not simply unreasonable, it is simply untrue to characterize Mercedes and Ferrari as afraid of the RB12’s downforce. Remember, Mercedes offered Red Bull an engine, they simply required the Red Bull brand to engage with Mercedes outside of F1’s dome. It is the kind of deal that happens on a continual basis in F1, and has resulted in everything from Kimi making his TV commercial debut in a Renault Twingo, to Fernando Alonso trading in his Ferrari FF for a Honda Accord estate for the drive to the circuit. In essence, all Wolff was asking was for Red Bull to cross out “Infiniti” and pencil in “Mercedes”…and for a pop-up Mercedes dealership to be gratuitously in range whenever Red Bull are doing a promo event…

    Why Mr Mateschitz, why were you so precious about commercial autonomy, so adamant that a better deal would materialize, that you have wantonly jeopardized your brand’s, until recently, unequivocally positive participation in F1?

    1. I think I can understand how Red Bull would not like to tie its marketing into a Mercedes partnership just like that – he would have to sort out a lot of other racing projects where they sponsor other teams, and it would tie his hands in their most important asset as a company (image building) @countrygent

      But to ignore this point completely from the outset and then claim that you thought a deal was done. Meh.

  27. No matter what everybody says, most of it I agree, still I don´t want to see next year´s grid lacking 4 cars, driven by very talented youngsters (Ricciardo for instance, not only is a great driver but also a good character, when you see the arrogance of Hamilton, Alonso and a few others it´s impossible not to like Ric, always smiling and in a good mood, F1 needs him).
    Honestly at this moment there´s a high probability RBR won´t be in the grid next year, with so many doors closed I don´t see a solution for this problem.
    They are a top team and F1 needs them, we are not in an era of prosperity where new teams could easly fill the gap (as we saw recently when FIA searched for new teams to enter the sport and none met the requirements).
    Bottom line, F1 would lose some value, either talented drivers, or competetiveness, or even sponsorship that brings money to F1.

  28. I completely agree with Mateschitz, the Renault engine is pants and it’s even worse than it was in 2014. They’ve won four constructor’s world championships and with the budget that they commit to the sport year in, year out, they deserve a better PU. Okay so maybe he’s not played politics very well in the media but that doesn’t change the fact that their cracking chassis has been neutered by a sub-standard (and by all accounts very expensive) Renault PU.

    Their commerical agreement means it will likely cost them $500m+ to leave but it’s debatable whether the annual budget, satellite programmes like the Young Driver Academy etc and the lost sales of finishing in the midfield for several seasons makes any participation worthwhile.

    Basically – if nobody’s willing to supply them with a half decent engine, why should they bother being around to supply a half decent chassis? I wouldn’t and from this I’d say that the F1 engine supply model is bust – there’s only two worthwhile engines out there, the rest are appalling.

    As for McLaren, the patience that they’re desperately trying to show with Honda is less than one season old, imagine what Ron will be like if it’s the same next year? Remember, they said at the beginning of the year that they should be judged in November…are things any better? They seem worse.

    1. But that’s the point, isn’t it. Renault might be rubbish, but you don’t shout it from the rooftops before you have a replacement signed up and ready to roll. and you don’t make demands about parity of equipment and then start shouting the odds when your demands are declined.
      Mateschitz hasn’t just done the politics badly, he’s done the business management badly and warned off the very people who could help him. To date, he’s displayed all the skill and business acumen of a six year old in a tantrum.

    2. ferrari said they would supply a client engine… but they didn’t like the idea… they wanted one identical o the one they will be running next season… so Ferrari said f…. off lol… a 2015 Ferrari engine is better than actual Renault… and let’s be honest… during their supremacy… rb never had the most powerful engine.. so I think… IMO.. rb gooooood chassis.. with 2015 Ferrari engine would be good.. to be fighting on top 4

      1. The most powerful no but that does not mean they didn’t have the best engine for them to win.

  29. So much hate for redbull… They entered the sport and beat the establishment… Then new ‘unsporting’ engine rules were put in place, so no matter how great red bulls car was, it could still not win with the renault. Ferrari and mercedes show what is wrong with f1 – it is a business, not a sport, they are scared of losing to redbull and do not want competition. In a couple years it might only be mercedes v ferrari the way things ate going. Redbull should shove it up the backsides of f1, it has done so much for f1 and brang so many great drivers into the sport, and they are getting nothing in return by those that only care about manufacturers bottom line, that is what it is about. So redbull should leave and make a better series. I want to see drivers like ricciardo vettel Alonso challenging hamilton, but the main players dont want this to be a sport. Bring back parity in engine power levels please, or allow power unit development, not ‘tokens’- the engine makers are spending as much or more then they did with unrestricted development

  30. I somewhat sympathise with their situation. Last year Mercedes arrived with the best overall package and both Ferrari and Red Bull/Renault compromised their engine for the sake of aero (Ferrari aero was also nothing to shout about but anyway) Ferrari still being a works team had the ability to put this right for this season but Renault have somewhat hung Red Bull out to dry. Hardly using any development tokens,showing up this year with an engine that seems less reliable and has a larger deficit than last year and rejecting Red Bull development assistance.

    I do really think an independent affordable engine is what’s needed but there is no way they will give it a separate set of rules and still achieve parity on power with the works engines. Even if they do then what is the point of the works engines? Ferrari can’t exist without building it’s own engine, but I can see Mercedes and Honda questioning the point of being in the sport when all their work to develop highly complex technical engines is shown up by some bargain basement offering.

    Surely if every team excluding Mercedes, Ferrari and Honda were to team up with say Cosworth they could develop a competitive engine within the current rule set? The FIA could make the teams financial contribution to it’s costs proportionate to the teams championship finishing position or points much like the entry fees are.

  31. OmarRoncal - Go Seb!!! (@)
    3rd November 2015, 14:53

    Just a crazy idea, but please somebody tell me if it is possible:
    Can they quit but at the same time buy Manor and Lotus, thus get the Mercedes engine, as there are 2 contracts between Merc and those teams? They would have to fire or move all the people working there, so their own RB and STR enter.

    1. They could theoretically buy other teams and submit a request for a name change. But they would still be in breach of their contractual obligations for their current entries if they don’t run their current entries as well.

      When they bought Torro Rosso to offload their Ferrari supply and switch the main team the Renault they were still stuck running both teams. Even if they buy Manor to have a Mercedes entry, they still need the current Red Bull entry to be active to avoid the financial penalties of withdrawing it and they still won’t have an engine to put in it.

  32. Plot twist: infinity supply their own engine..

    If only.

    1. Infiniti is a member of the Renault group. So nope, not going to happen.

  33. To quote Eric Boullier:

    “Clearly there is an issue in Red Bull which was created by Red Bull, not by anybody else and we are not a charity foundation,” said Boullier. “So we are not here to help.”

  34. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush Dietrich. Before you go burning your bridges with key suppliers you should be damn sure you have your replacement lined up and signed up.

    I honestly think the stance people are taking now has nothing to do with “fear of being beaten with our own engines” because OEM’s are always going to have a leg up on their customers. The simple fact is Red Bull’s attitude is poisonous and it is bad for the sport. Their attitude has forced a company that is intimately linked with F1 (Renault) to seriously consider its continued commitment to the sport and it has made the culture of doing your dirty laundry in public commonplace. I’d hate to lose two teams from the grid, but losing the bad press and negativity that Red Bull generate for F1 every single time one of their senior management team speaks is almost worth it in my book.

  35. All is not lost Mr Mateschitz. I hear Staples have a buy one get one free deal on boxes of large rubber bands. I’ve spoken to their technical department and they assure me they’ll be at least as powerful as the Honda, and more reliable.

  36. Would be fun next year if RBR still can sort it out to run with Renault engines and Renault team beating them.

  37. They could have Austin-spec 2015 Ferrari engines, which if they were being less childish they’d take. Ask Ron how he feels about Peugeot when you’re begging him for the Honda.

    Other than the obvious talent at Milton Keynes I really can’t think of any redeeming feature of Red Bull. I wish them all the best and look forward to getting more racing teams on the grid, as opposed to poor losers.

  38. Firstly the Red Bull Saga is getting more boring that Intresting.

    Secondly, It is quite understandable from Ron / Boullier side to deny the deal with Red Bull. They have taken the pain of bringing Honda to F1. They have gone through the shame of dealing with the reliability issues of a new engine partner and then Red Bull comes along with it marketing charm and technical muscle power to make Ron Dennis Looks ridiculous.

    I am guessing this is what would have happened when Horner went to meet Ron Dennis.

    Christian Horner- Ron Dennis Meeting Highlights
    Tips [ Horner = Hagen, Ron = Woltz, Don Corleone = Mateschitz ] :)

    Thirdly : Last but not the least Honda knows that Red Bull has better technical capability today than McLaren. McLaren might have legacy, McHonda Winning history and Peter Prodromou , but they have not won a WCC since 1998. Thanks to Nigel Stepney’s help and Leiws Hamilton’s talent they barely managed to win a WDC in 2008. McLaren has forgotten what winning is like. Honda knows that in the hands of Red Bull the Engine will mature faster. This is a Win (Red Bull)-Win (Honda)-Win(McLaren ???) Situation. This will not be a real win for McLaren because they will move from back of the grid to the midfield while Red Bull will get to the front row faster using the same Honda Engines.

    Both Honda and McLaren knows that as of today Red Bull has better resources and ability to build a race winning car using Honda Engines than McLaren Period.

    1. Oops did quotes instead of Bold in the formatting.

  39. Mateschitz represents exactly what my older son (14yo) describes as someone who “brings the lol”.

  40. Really unhelpful comments given what we’re let to believe is the current state of play.

    I’m wondering though just what has really been said behind closed doors to bring about this disaster. Businessmen of the calibre of Mateschitz are not prone to shooting themselves in the foot so things are either pretty dire or there’s already a deal in place and this is just smoke and mirrors designed to get a lot of press.

    I really feel for all the RBR employees that have to watch all this happen around them and won’t be at all suprised if a mass exodus from their Milton Keynes HQ starts happening soon.

  41. How can Red Bull give you wings when they don’t even have a engine. I putting a complaint into ofcom for false advertising. 😂

  42. At this rate, whoever supplying Red Bull next year just asking to be publicly blamed and slandered. Even if they have a deal today, there’s not enough time for Red Bull to design the chassis that fit the new engine optimally.

  43. It’s hard to avoid the feeling that Mateschitz got tired of F1 on realising that after 4 WC’s the only direction to go was down, and has been looking for a way to dump the team. Red Bull’s engine woes have been looking a bit manufactured for some time, they certainly seem to have been trying very hard to antagonise Renault.

  44. This will just serve to make Mateschitz and RBR look even more ridiculous whilst running Renault engines in 2016, albeit non-branded.

    Also, very wise and mature to reference “and the posturing of the French are huge” in your rant against everybody. I’m sure the Italians, Japanese, Germans and whoever else can’t wait to step up for their turn at the whipping post.

    1. Agreed. Build your own engine then Dieter! I get the impression he’s not used to being in a situation he can’t buy his way out of.

  45. I think a lot of whats come out of Red Bull about Renault the last 2 years has been totally down to frustration at the fact that everything Renault has said about there power unit has either not been done, not been met or turned out not to be true.

    Renault were the one’s pushing for the current engine formula the most, They gave Red Bull figures relating to engine performance that turned out to be way off reality, The figures relating to cooling were way off which caused much of the unreliability last year, The performance gains they said they would make with each upgrade have all proved to be off & they have not made the progress that they constantly claim they would & have refused to use any of there tokens through this year despite having the performance deficit they have.

    I don’t mean to defend Red Bull’s actions, But I do fully understand where the frustration has come from & why its built up to the level its now at. They were expecting & were indeed promised improvements & upgrades that haven’t happened.

    1. Very true @gt-racer. The negative development for this year must have been really shocking for the team. Though they’ve been burning that bridge ever since, and whatever they needed to say they didn’t need to say it in public. It’s one of those stories with no good guys.

    2. Exactly right. People seem to forget that at present RBR is the fourth “works” team and has been for a while.

      I think they could’ve endured the poor 2014 PU and even the worse initial 2015 PU if their works partner had actually shown and interest in turning that situation around.

      Here we are, end of the season and not a token spent.

      Definitely not condoning the sort or vitriol that’s coming from RBR but I get the impression that this has been quite a while coming and that you can only keep it toned down and in the back rooms for so long when your “cmon guys lets work on this and improve it – what can we do to help” approach gets ignored.

      Unfortunately there seems to be no way back in this for any party. The likely outcome is at least 4 cars (and realistically 8 if Manor and Lotus fold) will be missing from the F1 grid.

  46. Just wondering whether, if Renault pull out of F1 altogether, they’d sell the Viry facility to Dietrich? For a LOT of euros obviously.

    There was some speculation about that last year. I get the impression Ghosn is waiting to see what the 2016 engine is looking like, and if it’s not great then he’ll pull the plug.

  47. LOL… what an arrogant blert. And people wonder why there is no sympathy for RBR’s predicament.

  48. Ooh, this is delicious. I have sympathy for the mechanics and other staff on the payroll but top brass are fully responsible. Goodbye Red Bull!

    It would be poetic justice if Renault take over Lotus F1 and dominate next year/2017.

  49. Coming to the other engine manufacturers, hat in hand, and then demanding parity in engines, fuel, and lubricants, all things that are proprietary to the team and developed to give whatever advantage possible to that team, seems the height of arrogance. Bitching about it and threatening to pick up your toys and go home, may sound childish, but you have to consider what Red Bull is and how it is different from the factory teams. For Red Bull, this whole F1 endeavor is a marketing venture and nothing more. They are a bit of an anomaly in that they are an independent team that is financed as well as a factory team. Thus they can afford to put together the championship winning team they have. Unfortunately for them, they do not make engines and must rely on an outside supplier. When their current arrangement fell apart, in no small part due to themselves, no one was willing to compromise their brand in order to support another. As for RBR, if they are not winning, there is little marketing value for an adrenalin junkie brand like they are in continuing as they have no real historical deep ties to the sport like Ferrari/Williams/McLaren/Mercedes.

  50. So, Dieter Matachitz, (to mis quote Christian Horner’s wife)

    “I’ll tell you what I want, what I really, really want!”

    and the big bad Toto Woolf said

    “No. You can huff and puff, but you won’t blow my house down!”

  51. So just go and take your money elsewhere. Sell your team to someone who can use Renault engines next year. It will be all the better for F1 and sportsmanship.

  52. Let’s bear in mind that this situation re: engines is a very recent development in the history or F1. Before Cosworth withdrew, there had always been at least one indepedent engine supplier and any team that needed an engine always had at least one choice available. Once the factory teams controlled the engine supply, everyone invovled in F1 should have seen a problem like this coming.

    Let’s be mindful that if Red Bull quits F1 it will be a very serious blow to the quality of F1. The current situation now means that Mercedes, Ferrari and McLaren/Honda now have control over which other teams can race in F1. If one or two more teams leave F1 due to financial problems, F1 will move to 3 car teams and F1 will continue a downward spiral.

  53. I can only feel sorry for Ricciardo and Kvyat (And to an extent Verstappen and Sainz), all the uncertainty over the engines can’t be doing their drivers any good. My sympathy for Horner, Marko and Mateschitz are at absolute zero.

  54. These stupid rules about engines have to change or this will be end of F1. It is very clear then no works team=no win,even if u are works team and u don’t get engine correct you can’t DEVELOP and Honda misery this year is proof about moronic,retarded rules about engine development.Who will ever enter THIS F1 to be mocked and ridiculed and called Mctractor or whatever? And if you got it wrong and you KNOW what is wrong you STILL CAN’T CHANGE much because of “rules”? I really hated Vettel dominance and their bending front wings and everything BUT apart from 2011 and second half of 2013 it was great racing and nowhere near this retarded dominance of one team.This is comparable to MS dominance at start of 2000’s and 50 cent has even nerve to say “I did it on my ability not like MS”,jeeeez. Are those “dudes” Lauda and Wolf really think that this is good for them in long term when people start to cancel even more they expensive pay tv packages or stop watching few remaining free to air broadcasters because they are fed up with 50 cents and the other guy “kind of fight” with “others” for WDC and WCC but everything is already decided after first pre season test? Btw Vettel was bashed(50 cent was pretty loud about that) a lot about his car winning his titles but when i saw this in 14 and 15 it is absolute JOKE that 50 cent did anything remarkable by winning these 2 years.Almost any driver on the grid would win with Merc car last 2 years,with RB Vettel drove i am very in doubt that almost any driver would won it except maybe in 2011. So,stupid “freeze development” rules must change or this will really be end of F1.I for once am tired of all the *rap in last few years starting with drs,excesive aero that in basic disables overtaking cause u can’t follow other car,worthless tires and on top of all these stupid engines that actually increased costs instead of opposite.If someone wants to watch Fer vs Merc F1 because Renault and Honda could easy pull out and stop being running joke,be my guest.I won’t no part of it.This is not about just RB anymore.This is about F1 and stupid people making stupid rules that erase any competition until next stupid rule change.And who don’t get it out of drawer first time can easy PULL OUT cause there is no way to catch up.

  55. RBR has brought this situation on by themselves. F1 is a compettive sport, and no one is obliged to help them out, much less another competitor. Unfortunately they cannot exactly walk into a ‘store’ and buy an engine – at least not at this time, which pretty much means they have no choice than to accept what they are offered, or to withdraw from the running. Not a pleasant situation I agree, but I do not see the sport of F1 collapsing or ceasing to exist because Red Bull Racing leaves.

  56. How to make friends and influence people…

  57. How is it anti-competition to make a superior engine to your rivals and not give it to them in a sport that is all about designing your own car? If they wanted a level playing field they should all have the same engine and chassis, like Indycar. This sport is about the build of the car within a specified set of rules. That’s what the Formula in Formula 1 stands for. That includes the engine.

    If they want even competition, like they claim, they should do a contra deal – chassis designs for engines, spec for spec. But I doubt they’d call that fair. Why should we have to share our secrets if we did all the hard work and invested all the money…

    1. I know indycar uses different engines, I just mean the philosophy of parity.

    2. Let them go and share RB and TR prize money to the underdogs, or even divide it equally. Hundreds of competent and jobless staff willing to share their knowledge (together with the extra money) would make this shameful sport a little more competitive. I can´t see any harm to F! to get rid of such whinners.

  58. Give them a Honda Indy engine, tuned to parity.

    BTW, F1 — Indy Cars sound great, race great, and their 15-inch wheels look just right.

  59. I love how people are slag gin Mateschitz. He only built a multi-billon dollar, internationally famous company. He’s been involved in sports and motorsports, including F1, for decades, and built a 4x WCC/WDC winning team for the ashes of rather mediocre teams.

    Yet, he’s childish and whinging etc.

    It’s even more amazing when people then go on about “why would an engine manufacturer want to work with team that will slag the off in the press?”

    Like that’s the issue and RB would have reason to do that to Mercedes or Ferrari. The only childish thing is the simplistic universe some F1 fans live in and the motivations they assign to the players.

    For one thing, as been reported, it’s pretty clear that Lauda wanted to give RB an engine and Wolff didn’t, not for fear of being criticized in the press, but for losing races. And to convince the Merc Board, Wolff raised the specter of technology transfer to VW/Audi, Mercedes competitors.

    So we have 3 engine manufacturers (Ron Dennis as the proxy Honda guy) who don’t want to give any competitive advantage to RB, and one manufacturer who went from bad to worse and really didn’t seem to care from the beginning of the season that they did so — for Renault, it was probably a money and resource issue – they couldn’t build a competitive engine with the resources they have.

    But yeah, it’s all about bad press.

Comments are closed.