In her book ‘I Just Made the Tea’ Formula 1 hospitality doyenne Di Spires – who spent 30 years on the ‘beat’ – described the take-over of Stewart Grand Prix by Jaguar ahead of the 2000 season as follows: “Ford owns Jaguar and the Ford management had decided to promote the Jaguar brand through Formula 1, so that was the name under which the team would be known as going forward.
“Jacques Nasser, the Ford chief executive, had been so impressed by the sea of red Ferrari hats at every grand prix that he was determined to match it with a ‘sea of green’, as the Jaguar brand was just as impressive as Ferrari.”Nasser fervently believed that by buying Stewart Grand Prix – whose start up in 1997 was largely funded by Ford in the first place – and painting the cars British Racing Green, Jaguar would rank equal with Ferrari in the hearts and minds of fans. However, the project turned out to be arguably the most expensive five-year flop in F1 history, ranking high on the list of the sport’s most cynical projects.
The fact is that after numerous management upheavals – not to mention engineering disruption by bigwigs in Detroit – Jaguar Racing was ‘sold’ to Red Bull for a dollar (and employment guarantees) in 2004. Within five years (and a change of engines from Ford-owned Cosworths to Renaults) Red Bull scored the first of four double back-to-back world championship titles.
He was, of course, referring to Eddie Irvine, who won four grands prix during his three-year tenure as Michael Schumacher’s Ferrari team mate, but subsequently scored just two podiums during a similar spell with Jaguar.
‘Jac the Knife’ had overlooked that for all their passion for the sport, F1 fans clearly value authenticity. Painting a formerly white car a metallic green hue and hiring an ex-Ferrari hotshot fooled nobody, certainly not beyond the first race, from which both cars retired on the sixth lap. Still, Nasser impressed the paddock by hosting a pre-race extended shindig at brother Jamie’s legendary Melbourne eatery Silvers.
Two new manufacturer names arrive on the F1 grid this year. But is Aston Martin’s rebranding (into British Racing Green, at that) of Racing Point (formerly Force India and Spyker and Midland, nee Jordan) authentic? Does the same go for Alpine’s renaming from Renault and hue change to French Racing Blue – complete with Tricolore – despite the ‘French’ team operating from a base in post-Brexit Britain?
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
The same can be asked of existing teams. Can Alfa Romeo Racing (operated by Sauber) be likened to the team that won the 1950/51 world drivers championships with Giuseppe Farina and Juan Manuel Fangio respectively? Is the Mercedes – now owned in three equal parts by the eponymous car company, an Austrian dotcom entrepreneur and a British industrialist – a true descendent of the Silver Arrows raced by Fangio and Stirling Moss?
Does McLaren have an automotive heritage given its volume production activities commenced in 2011, three years after its last world drivers title and over a decade after its 1998 constructors championship? What about its great British rival, Williams, which has never had formal manufacturer shareholdings and whose control remained with its founding family for 40-plus years until it was sold last year to a US-based investment fund?
Which Formula 1 teams can lay claim to true authenticity in their image? Consider the backgrounds of each, in alphabetical order:
Alfa Romeo Racing
That said, Sauber has a tradition of operating race programmes on behalf of manufacturers. It ran the Le Mans-winning Mercedes sports car programme in the eighties and BMW’s F1 team (the Bavarian company was part owner from 2006-09) – so at least the operation remains true to its roots. The fact, though, is that pretence has not stemmed Alfa Romeo’s plunging car sales. Tellingly, Jaguar experienced the same phenomenon.
Authenticity rating: 2/10
AlphaTauri
The team bears the livery of its owner’s clothing label, having previously raced under the Italian translation for Red Bull – and its war-paint leaves little doubt about corporate connections between Red Bull and AlphaTauri. In short, what little pretence there may be is linked to its business model of sourcing parts from main company Red Bull Technology rather than producing everything to its own designs.
Authenticity rating: 6/10
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Alpine F1 Team
Alpine’s corporate objective is “To focus on the development of all-electric sports cars in the future” yet it is persisting with the premier internal combustion category, raising questions about authenticity: Is the brand in F1 purely to sell unrelated technologies? The operation colloquially known as Team Enstone suffered multiple personality disorders since its founding during the eighties, and these shows no signs of abating.
Authenticity rating: 3/10
Aston Martin Racing
Crucially, AMR is a totally separate entity from the car company – a listed company – but arch car enthusiast Lawrence Stroll owns both operations. The team sources Mercedes F1 technologies and running gear, and uses the Mercedes wind tunnel, this, though, provides a tenuous thread of authenticity as the Aston Martin road car company has technical agreements with Mercedes in place for such hardware.
The question is whether buyers in this notoriously fickle niche market will get sucked in: when Aston Martin, under different management, bagged title sponsorship of Red Bull and stickered up the rear wings with Aston Martin logos they weren’t; in fact, the share price went south.
Authenticity rating: 4/10
Scuderia Ferrari
True, Ferrari is now a listed entity, but so intertwined are the two divisions that a single umbrella structure oversees both. Indeed, production workers display Shell logos on their uniforms and no other team integrates its commercial activities as closely as does Maranello. Ferrari has always been a special case, and authenticity plays a major role in that distinction.
Authenticity rating: 9/10
Haas F1 Team
Is five-year old Haas F1 Team, though, an authentic constructor competing in a sport aimed at fully-fledged constructors regardless of regulatory nuances? Clearly not, nor is there a relationship between performance and products unless suppliers use Haas machinery. Nor do the race cars improve Haas products in any shape or form.
Authenticity rating: 4/10
McLaren Racing
Where once the road car and race companies were separate legal entities with different shareholder structures – albeit operating out of the same Woking campus – these have been integrated as part of a recent corporate restructure. Over the years McLaren suffered various identity crises and strayed far from its roots, with Spygate being the nadir; now though, the rebuilding of its legacy is ongoing.
Authenticity rating: 7/10
Mercedes AMG F1 Team
The F1 engine company is a separate entity with no cross-over shareholding, and its factory base has variously displayed BAR, Honda and Brawn signage, while the company registration is rooted in Jackie Stewart’s Tyrrells from the seventies. None of these factors have halted the team’s run of successes, but comparisons with Silver Arrows of yore – built and raced out of Stuttgart – are rather tedious.
Authenticity rating: 5/10
Red Bull Racing
Both operations will move up a notch in the authenticity stakes from 2022 when Red Bull Powertrains supplies (ex-Honda) units to its teams, thereby turning Red Bull into a fully-fledged constructor. Its status as oldest (and most consistently visible) team within the Red Bull stable means its rates higher than its sister.
Authenticity rating: 8/10
Williams
In seasons past Williams and WYSIWYG were synonymous: What you saw is what you got, which is the ultimate expression of authenticity. Whether new owners Dorilton Capital maintain that tradition is open to question and too early to judge despite initial assurances – already gearboxes will be outsourced – but for now the omens seem good and one hopes they stay that way. After all, why buy authenticity only to scrap it?
Authenticity rating: 9/10
Why authenticity is essential
Authenticity is the degree to which a team’s values and its heritage are consistently maintained despite the enormous commercial, technical, sporting and political pressures all F1 teams are subject to, with the most authentic surviving to fight another day rather than expediently changing direction in the face of the slightest obstacle.
Gaining authenticity is not the work of a moment but it can be destroyed in a split-second. Thus, it is no surprise that F1’s three oldest teams are our top scorers. Red Bull are next up despite having significantly younger roots than the likes of Alpine, Mercedes and Sauber. Authenticity is as much about maintaining heritage as it is about a winning attitude – and hence only on the strongest have rated highly.
RacingLines
- The year of sprints, ‘the show’ – and rising stock: A political review of the 2021 F1 season
- The problems of perception the FIA must address after the Abu Dhabi row
- Why the budget cap could be F1’s next battleground between Mercedes and Red Bull
- Todt defied expectations as president – now he plans to “disappear” from FIA
- Sir Frank Williams: A personal appreciation of a true racer
cduk_mugello (@cduk_mugello)
24th February 2021, 12:11
Yes Jaguar was a flop. But a very pretty flop. If Aston Martin have liveries half as good, they’re onto a winner.
dot_com (@dot_com)
24th February 2021, 15:43
I was a big fan of Jaguar F1 in those days. Eddie Irvine put in some great drives – his podium at Monza was amazing.
Sacha Gortchakoff (@gosac)
26th February 2021, 12:29
I will never understand how such a path can be left, once such an invest being done.
Sensord4notbeingafanboi (@peartree)
24th February 2021, 12:18
Alpine is not authentic at all but surely more authentic than merc and amr. There is a least a French conmection not just money.
Ianb
1st April 2021, 21:15
Really? Go to Norfolk in England and there’s not a lot of French going on there.
Aapje (@aapje)
24th February 2021, 12:22
Williams was so authentic that it killed the team.
At some point, authenticity hurts your performance and it’s pretty clear that fans favor results over authenticity.
Bullfrog (@bullfrog)
24th February 2021, 12:29
Aston Martin should get 7Up as a sponsor.
wsrgo (@wsrgo)
24th February 2021, 12:56
Wait I thought this article was gonna be about Lotus/Caterham…
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
24th February 2021, 14:32
@wsrgo Which is another example of why one must be very careful about trying to gain a foothold as a manufacturer in F1…
Omar R (@)
24th February 2021, 13:41
Deja vu?
faulty (@faulty)
24th February 2021, 18:48
A+ comment. Would read again.
Patrick (@paeschli)
24th February 2021, 13:47
It’s all a matter of opinion in the end, you could argue Alpine is more authentic than Williams
ajpennypacker (@ajpennypacker)
24th February 2021, 16:05
I don’t get why Mclaren is not ranked higher either.
x303 (@x303)
26th February 2021, 8:53
Neither do I. Reading the article, points were deducted from McLaren for not building their own engines but it didn’t stop Williams from scoring more than Red Bull…
Strange indeed.
Carbonized
24th February 2021, 13:49
You lost me when you rated RB higher than Mercedes. The strong arming shenanigans RB committed to keep a Honda engine that they will not even produce does not make RB a full fledged constructor. They themself stated that they want nothing to do with the development of that engine (hence the freeze rules). That Honda power unit will always remain a Honda power unit, no mater the re-badging.
S
24th February 2021, 14:49
I’m totally with this.
The engine may have a Red Bull logo on it next year – but it is no Red Bull engine, nor is Red Bull an engine manufacturer in any true, meaningful sense. It’s a case of badge engineering.
ajpennypacker (@ajpennypacker)
24th February 2021, 16:06
I don’t mind the Mercedes score. It makes sense. The Red Bull is the baffling one. Ranking Red Bull ahead of Mclaren? confusing
bosyber (@bosyber)
25th February 2021, 21:37
Yeah, exactly @ajpennypacker, can understand reasoning but only until RedBull. I suppose not pretending to be have another, longer F1 history than they do counts some, but remains abit odd esp with regards to McLaren.
Mikey
24th February 2021, 13:49
You say F1’s 3 oldest teams are rated highest followed by Redbull, however you have rated them:
=1. Ferrari 9/10
=1. Williams 9/10
3. Redbull 8/10
4. McLaren 7/10
Something isn’t adding up. Typo?
Rui (@colinmcrui)
24th February 2021, 23:18
I was going through the comments because of this! Hopefully @dieterrencken meant to give mclaren 8/10 and RBR 7/10 :)
Izzy
24th February 2021, 14:00
Lawrence knows branding, that’s how he’s a billionaire. Mercedes get their brand mentioned thousands of times every weekend, that’s what he’s after. I don’t know if ‘authenticity’ is an issue for him at all. Nobody thinks there ought to be a link between a fizzy drink and an F1 car do they?
Dean F
24th February 2021, 14:17
Ferrari 10/10
McLaren 9/10
RBR 9/10
Mercedes about right at 5/10.
Williams 6/10 before they got sold they used pay drivers for crying out loud.
Now about 1/10.
Matthias[Wlkp] (@matthias-wlkp)
24th February 2021, 14:23
I disagree with your authenticity ranking.
The team either has racing in their blood, a purpose, or it doesn’t.
Then, they either have funds to do it all the way, or they don’t.
You could argue that some teams lack purpose – Alfa Romeo, Haas, maybe Alpha Tauri (as a junior team) and “New” Williams (not yet clear where they want to go), but everyone else seemed to prove that they are here to race hard.
I read what you are saying and it sounds like “you can’t call this pizza a “pizza”, because it was not made by an Italian in Italy, therefore it’s not “authentic”, therefore worse”. I disagree with demeaning anyone’s efforts based on anything else than pure skill and effort demonstrated in the past.
Pedro Andrade
24th February 2021, 14:24
You could rate authenticity by how likely a team is to stay in F1 even when the political climate / results / global economy are against themselves. Ferrari, McLaren and Williams (at least until now) will most certainly stay in the long term unless they go bankrupt, that is a true measure that they are authentic teams. Despite their neverending threats of quitting, Ferrari will never quit, and even though they diverted to selling luxury cars, there’s no doubt what’s McLaren’s main raison d’etre as a company.
That’s why I wouldn’t rate Red Bull so high. They have shown great commitment until now, no doubt, but their main reason to exist as a team is to further sales of the mother brand. I would not be at all surprised if, in 5 years time, someone with a lot of money (a car manufacturer or other) happens to want to buy Red Bull and Alpha Tauri, Mateschitz would sell.
Aapje (@aapje)
24th February 2021, 17:17
Even if Red Bull leave F1, they will still fund extreme sports, which makes them a lot more authentic to me than a brand without that kind of marketing focus.
marcusbreese (@marcusbreese)
24th February 2021, 19:17
Surely this is no different to any other F1 team? If Ferrari races to sell road cars and sells road cars to fund racing then you could probably argue that Red Bull races to sell fizzy drinks, and sells fizzy drinks to go racing. Mateschitz is said to be a big racing fan and has spent lavishly but wisely on the team. They don’t profess to be something they’re not – and for that reason I would consider them to be authentic. Certainly more-so than Alfa Romeo who have just paid to have their logo slapped on the Sauber.
I’m not sure I agree with them being ranked more highly than McLaren though, whilst there’s obviously been a lot of change at that team you can still trace their lineage back to their inception. Whilst they’ve had different owners and shareholders they’ve operated on a continuous basis and whilst there have been some missteps along the way they’ve always managed to recover and prosper in a way that no-one else but Ferrari seems capable of.
All in all it’s a rather silly conversation, but also quite a fun one.
Aiii (@)
24th February 2021, 21:53
Mateschitz hasn’t shown any inkling of selling the team yet, he owns two teams, a race track, obviously the facilities and is now building an engine division as well.
If anything, he’s shown more commitment than pretty much any other team owner in F1 history.
JohnH (@johnrkh)
25th February 2021, 0:29
@aiii
No :))
marcusbreese (@marcusbreese)
25th February 2021, 9:39
@aiii Agreed. Well, just below Enzo anyway.
Pedro Andrade
25th February 2021, 10:56
@aiii Fair enough, agreed!
Arrows98 (@arrows98)
24th February 2021, 14:25
and this is why you never leave your branding to the upper management, my dear guys, gals, and non-binary pals!
Aleš Norský
24th February 2021, 14:47
Good one. Yet, I would argue that 2/10 is still generous for Alfa Romeo. It is really reminiscent of (among few others) the deal Bowmaker-Yeoman has made with Reg Parnell…all those years ago.
Dean F
24th February 2021, 15:52
Probably should have mentioned the disaster that was Niki Lauda at Jaguar. I don’t think he had much input at Mercedes though he was there to give Toto some credibility.
Rodber
24th February 2021, 17:06
Say what you like about Jaguar, they bought for Jackie Stewart the green tartan suit he is still wearing today.
Aiii (@)
24th February 2021, 21:50
From the footer of Ferrari’s own website:
Of course done to evade paying any taxes, surely Ferrari being a Dutch outfit pretending to be pure Italian would knock it’s authenticity just a bit further down?
bosyber (@bosyber)
26th February 2021, 6:54
That’s an interesting point indeed @aiii, so after Spyker there is now a Dutch team again, cool 😉
RedFive
24th February 2021, 22:24
In my opinion there are only three authentic teams in F1, Ferrari, McLaren and Williams. These are the only teams that are still operating under the same flag as they did when they were founded. Off course there were some management changes over the years and changes in share-holders, but the base of the team remained.
The two car-manufacturers with F1 heritage, Mercedes and Renault (Alpine), they only supply engines. The teams are based on several mutations of old-F1 teams who are running the operation under the Mercedes or Alpine name only, it’s just a badge. A company supplies the money to operate but the team underneath is not at all part of the parent company. Same goes for the Alpine WEC program that is run by Signatech. It’s probably the cheapest way to do F1 for a manufacturer, just pay an existing team to run your operation. I think Toyota was the last manufacturer to try and start up a team from the ground up.
Haas is maybe scored a bit low, this is still an operation set-up by Haas. They may be buying parts of their car and it can be argued they are not true manufacturers. But still, this is an authentic team build from the ground up.
As for all the other teams, these are true badge-operated teams. Whoever pays, that’s the name they will run under. If Alfa pay’s the bill, so it’s an Alfra-Romeo car. The same goes for the teams paid by Mateschitz and Stroll, the team is pure a marketing vehicle for their brand. As long as F1 pays off for them, they’ll be whatever they want to sell. As soon as F1 is no longer interesting, some other billionaire will come along and replace them as name sponsor.
The interesting question is, do we, as fans, mind? Obviously it is still too difficult or costly to start a new F1 team, all the current teams have been around since the 90s, except for Haas. In the last 10 years, no new team have formed, only name changes or buyouts.
The only car manufacturer to try and get into F1 with their own operation was Toyota. BMW and Honda were also using other teams to run their name.
Looking to the teams of the past, most F1 team was based around a chassis builder who runs a bought/sponsored engine. In the past the great teams like Lotus, BRM, Tyrell, Brabham used this method, and even today McLaren and Williams still are.
For me that is the line between authenticity and branding, the Canon-Williams-Honda team, John-Player-Team-Lotus or Malboro-McLaren were the authentic way of branding. And still feel were an authentic team. As fans we still talked about Lotus, Williams or McLaren, no matter who was sponsoring them. Marlboro or John-Player were as iconic in their days as RedBull is now, but are no part of F1-DNA. Times have changes, regulations have changed, brands (sponsors) come and go. Maybe in a few years we will look at sugar-based energy drinks the same as we now look at cigarettes, who knows.
JohnH (@johnrkh)
25th February 2021, 0:37
@aiii Piero Ferrari owns 10% and is vice chairman so there is still a family connection. I admit not as strong as it used to be.
JohnH (@johnrkh)
25th February 2021, 1:27
I think this is a similar type of article as who is the greatest driver E.TC. It’s a bit click batey isn’t it :)
Some of the reasons that give teams low scores can also be applied to teams that have been given high scores. All of the teams except maybe Williams race to promote a product, four of those teams Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault/Alpine and McLaren build and sell high performance vehicles. They also have a very long connection to Motor Racing in several categories.
Hass is a tool manufacturer but has been involved in Motor Racing for many decades as a team owner, but that doesn’t count?
Alfa Romeo is just a sponsor the car has no connection at all to the name on the side.
While Redbulls efforts in F1 are 100% aimed at promoting their business which is to manufacture and sell soft drinks. This from the Haas article except for the time line equally applies to RB surely.
“Is five-year old Haas F1 Team, though, an authentic constructor competing in a sport aimed at fully-fledged constructors regardless of regulatory nuances? Clearly not, nor is there a relationship between performance and products unless suppliers use Haas machinery. Nor do the race cars improve Haas products in any shape or form.”
RB will not be building ‘their own’ PU until 2025 at the earliest
Sajid
25th February 2021, 5:59
Jaguar is owned by TATA motors. Not by ford
Ancient1 (@ancient1)
26th February 2021, 13:54
…depends on the era one is referring to.
Ford owned Jaguar Cars until 2008, then purchased by TATA Motors.
Jaguar F1 ( ex-Jackie Stewart Racing ) ran from 2000 – 2004 & owned by Ford.
Nov. 2004 was sold to Red Bull Racing.
Cranberry
25th February 2021, 7:51
I think RedBull is every bit a 9/10 on the authenticity scale as Ferrari and Williams are. (With Williams probably being the last 10/10 until Monza 2020?)
There may not be much of a connection from F1 track to spicy-liquid-in-a-can you may buy at the supermarket, however, RedBull has been loyal to it’s mission to promote it’s brand in the most unique and extreme sports, and events, on a global scale. RedBull sponsors motorsports on every level one can think of, and have a driver program for drivers that gives them a direct path to F1.
All that’s left is for them to buy a dying car maker (Mitsubishi) and use that as a basis to kickstart their in-house engine engineering arm.
paulipedia (@paulipedia)
25th February 2021, 11:28
Same could be said of Mercedes and even Ferrari until recently.
F1oSaurus (@)
25th February 2021, 12:55
What’s with the wall of text to “answer” a simple question?
Plus what’s with pretending to be the preposterous authority on F1 livery design and “authenticity”?
Cranberry
26th February 2021, 7:18
I think it’s called modern journalism(blogging).
Sacha Gortchakoff (@gosac)
26th February 2021, 12:43
Authenticity indeed is very important in sports / marketing.
Imagine there still were Tyrrell, Ligier, Brabham and Lotus around.
What big, solid brands they might have become.
Imagine we could witness races on Jacarepaguà
or old Hockenheim.
Imagine there would still be old Wembley stadium.
In sports & arts (culture) both matters: evolution AND tradition.
Commercialisation / its overkill seems to hate tradition & heritage (the asset for max longterm profit).
And many (sports)marketers seem to be unsatisfied with just gardening a precious heritage.
What a pity — what a damned pity
Sergio (@blasbri)
2nd March 2021, 14:44
The story of Bill Ford’s surprise when he discovered the retainer of Edward Irvine has been widely commented; however, after @dieterrencken explanations of Checo’s contract before Force India became Racing Point, is seems to me a bit weird that Mr. Ford Jr. would find Irvine in a list of wages of the employees. In the end, the driver would have a Ltd. company more similar to a “service supplier”.
Were these societies a usual tool back then? I believe that, at least, they were already a common feature in other sports.