Axe hangs over Renault’s F1 team

Was Abu Dhabi the last F1 race for Renault?

Was Abu Dhabi the last F1 race for Renault?

Renault CEO Carlos Ghosn has said the company could close its F1 team at the end of the year.

He told reporters today a decision will be taken before the end of 2009. The team already has Robert Kubica contracted for the 2010 F1 season.

Toyota and BMW have previously confirmed they will not be racing in 2010. If Renault were to leave only Ferrari and Mercedes would remain as car manufacturers active in F1.

Like Toyota, Renault was a signatory to the new Concorde Agreement, committing it to remain in F1 until the end of 2012. The FIA has expressed concern at Toyota’s decision to leave the sport despite having signed the Concorde Agreement.

It also hinted the Max Mosley’s abandoned plans for budget capping could be resurrected by new president Jean Todt:

Toyota?s announcement demonstrates the importance of the original cost-reduction measures set out by the FIA.

There is no sign yet whether a third party might take over the Toyota entry. The slot could be taken by new BMW owners Qadbak.

Should Renault pull out the team could be taken over by another company. The Enstone operation was previously run by Benetton (1986-2001) and before that Toleman (1981-1985).

If history tells us anything about Renault it’s that we can expect them back within a couple of years if they do quit.

They entered as a full constructor in 1977 but withdrew at the end of 1985 having failed to win a championship. They remained an engine supplier to several teams in 1986 before leaving the team for two years and then returning with Williams in 1989.

After many championship wins with Williams and Benetton, Renault left again at the end of 1997. But they returned as an engine supplier to Benetton in 2001 and took over the team the following year.

They’ve had a difficult three years since their back-to-back double championships of 2005-6 with Fernando Alonso. He made a beeline back to the team after a one-year stay at McLaren in 2007. But their triumphant return to form at the end of 2008 has now been tainted by the Singapore scandal, and they had already lost title sponsor ING.

Alonso is now on his way to Ferrari and Kubica is set to take his place – but only if the team commits to F1 for another year. With the Pole potentially back on the driver market, it could lead to a further hold-up in driver signings for 2010.

Advert | Go Ad-free

108 comments on Axe hangs over Renault’s F1 team

1 2 3
  1. Tiomkin said on 5th November 2009, 16:26

    I think they should just fire up an F1 simulator and do the races from there. No more talk of teams jumping ship, no more accidents. Unless there is a power cut.

    • mp4-19b said on 5th November 2009, 17:33

      Dunno what’s up with all these teams? Its official, isn’t it? The great American recession has ended. Now is the time to be investing, but Toyota & Renault seem to be doing the opposite. Why?

      There is a old saying:

      Winners never Quit
      Quitters never Win.

      Toyota will never win.

      • No one is saying that the end of the Great American recession is ‘official’….

      • DomPrez said on 5th November 2009, 19:17

        ended…not really….more so leveled off, like we wont get worse. but despite false booms in auto industry, housing markets, and national economy, we arent getting ‘better’.

        • gee I am glad you guys aint economists…
          It aint over by a long shot, the goverment protective bubble will burst soon leaving a greater gasping wound than before. Why because there isn’t all the sudden more money in the world…it’s just been plastered over for the mean time.

      • HounslowBusGarage said on 5th November 2009, 20:52

        Because they are having to show their shareholders that they are cutting the losses incured in the previous year.
        Works like this. The company makes a loss in Year 1, when the results are announced three months into Year 2, the big shareholders say “What are you doing about the loss?” And the company has to be able to point to remedial steps it has already taken – “We’ve ended our $450 million F1 racing programme” – and even though sales might beginning to rise again, the company won’t be able to confirm the benefit until part way through Year 3 when they might say “We’re embarking on a racing programme . . .”

      • Platine said on 8th November 2009, 20:39

        Since when is the recession over, the falls have slowed, but thats inevitable, global economy is still in a mess, Toyota, leading automobile manufacturer just 3-4 years ago is on verge of bankruptcy.

        Investment to recover from recession would nnot be huge marketing investment anyway, but core business.

        Thats my two cents anyway.

  2. gazzap said on 5th November 2009, 16:30

    Kubica will end up somewhere I am sure should Renault call it a day.

    I find it a bit odd that teams throw the towel in because they dont win. I mean like many other sports, the winners often come from a small pool. OK we have seen Brawn come from nowhere and maybe thats part of the frustration of teams towards the back who have been plugging away for years.

    Renault may not be winning right now but in the recent past they were a big team. I hope they can be salvaged in a Brawn style buy out. Sponsors might be keener not to associate with ‘Renault’ after this season’s events.

    • mp4-19b said on 5th November 2009, 17:38

      Just had this crazy idea! What if Benetton re-purchase the team from Renault if they were to quit? Is there a possibility we could see Flavio back? I mean Max is not in charge anymore & who knows, Flavio & Todt might strike a deal or something.

  3. Ned Flanders said on 5th November 2009, 16:41

    If Renault were to leave too I fear it might mean that F1 is in crisis. Toyota are gone, there’s a question mark above Renault, QADBAK are suspicously secretive, and I won’t be convinced that USF1 are serious until I see their car.

    The recession may be all but over but a lot of experts always said its effect on F1 would be delayed for a year or two until contracts came up for renewal. Looks like they were right.

    • Charlie said on 5th November 2009, 17:16

      The recession isn’t over…

      • Ned Flanders said on 5th November 2009, 17:22

        No, but the worst of it is, most economies are growing slightly again. It peaked in late 2008/ early 09 didn’t it?

      • mp4-19b said on 5th November 2009, 17:40

        Its over, at least according to the US dept of commerce or something.

        • steph90 said on 5th November 2009, 18:08

          It usually takes time until we start feeling positive movements again as everything needs to build up confidence. Lots of areas are still in a financial mess.

        • the dept of commerece has a very weak statement about the end being near to trick people into buying crap….it’s not over. Also, the global auto industry was on of the worst hit and will not recover for quite some time.

        • rmac923 said on 5th November 2009, 19:50

          Rule #1 from an American, NEVER TRUST THE GOVERNMENT. The fact that more jobs were lost in September (and likely October) means we’re still in a recession. People are still tightly hanging on to their money. If any of you guys believe what our government says, you’re bigger fools than Peter Windsor!!!

          • Martin said on 6th November 2009, 0:03

            Speak more oh wise one!..Actually you are the closest to the truth about the “recession” of anyone here talking of it.
            Companies are still laying off employees and the ones they are keeping are working harder to keep up, and they wont complain as they dont want to loose their jobs.
            This is going to last another 18months minimum.
            These stimulus packages that they are trying to use to get the economy going again arent working either.

          • employment is a lagging variable. A recession can be over whilst unemployment is still increasing.

          • F1Yankee said on 6th November 2009, 5:34

            what gives with the uncalled for cheap shot at windsor?

        • Patrickl said on 5th November 2009, 20:05

          The Germans and China called it “over” a quarter ago already

          • Martin said on 6th November 2009, 0:06

            So that makes it fact! Seriously, you will know when it is over because there will be more people taking big vacations and buying things they really dont need again.
            The Chinese nor the Germans have half a clue as to when it will be over especially in the US. And only after the US recovers will the rest of the worlds economies recover.

          • Patrickl said on 6th November 2009, 10:02

            The US economy grew by 3.5% last quarter.

            This recession has hit the US hardest of all. The rest of the world has recovered much sooner than the US has.

  4. Hallard said on 5th November 2009, 16:45

    The worst part about all these departures is the smug sense of self satisfaction that Im sure Max Mosley is now expressing. Probably feels totally vindicated.

    “I told you we needed a budget cap! Now look whats happened!”

    I agree with Ferrari’s estimation of the situation; the sport is no longer a viable business venture with the owners waging war against the teams (and fans).

    • somehow I don’t think a budget cap would have made them stay.

    • Maciek said on 5th November 2009, 19:54

      If Max really is thinking I told you so, then for once he’s right and there ain’t much anyone else can say about it

      • Hallard said on 5th November 2009, 21:51

        I dont think so at all. If it was ever a choice between budget cap and not racing, the F1 teams (including toyota) would have known and would not have fought against it. Formula 1 SHOULD be a profitable business model for teams that participate. Its not, and there are many reasons, but budget capping would just be a band-aid on a bullet-wound.

        • Maciek said on 6th November 2009, 19:45

          I agree that there are many other ways to improve the return on F1 investments, but surely a strict budget cap is one way to stop teams from hurting themselves and level the playing field as well.

  5. bcnberg said on 5th November 2009, 16:45

    If Renault finally, as Honda, BMW & Toyota already have done, decides to leave F1 it would be fine with me. In general I think F1 was a lot more interesting back in the days where the F1 show was run by teams and not car manufactors. It was more about the sport and less politics

  6. Renault is considering leaving because they are not a private team. They are a publicly owned car manufacturer in the middle of a global recession. The board of directors demands fiscal responsibility. If the company is facing plunging car sales and the stock price has been falling they are sure not going to fund a racing team to the tune of, what?, 300/400K per year? It’s just economics. Hope they don’t pull the plug, but it looks that way right now. If they stay, they will undoubtedly move up the standings. The only teams that will outperform them will be McLaren, Brawn (probably), Red Bull, and Ferrari (maybe). Williams, no, sorry. Renault will surely outperform everyone else. Most of all, the newcomers. Should they choose to leave I would hope they remained as an engine supplier. Who would buy the team if they wanted to sell rather than just shut it down? Please don’t say David Richards. That guy is around everything for sale and never can get it together to buy. (Except Aston in which case that would’nt have gotten done except for middle eastern backing.)I remember when it was just Ferrari as the only manufacturer. We all worried what would happen to the independents as the manufacturers got involved. Now I kind of worry what will happen when all the manufacturers leave. (Except Ferrari) F1 will undoubtedly survive, but I got used to seeing the manufacturers involvement and the huge investments they all made. It really did take F1 to a new level. Can it continue to grow after they leave? Will it seem like it is going back to a bunch of smaller independents? I think Bernie will have quite the marketing job on his hands when all the manufacturers are gone and he is selling F1 to wealthy countries who have no idea what F1 is except that all the major car manufacturers are involved. Can he continue to do it on the strength alone of Ferrari? Stay tuned because I think we all are going to have the chance to find out.

    • Nitpicker said on 5th November 2009, 17:08

      they are sure not going to fund a racing team to the tune of, what?, 300/400K per year?

      An F1 team for 400k — what planet are you on? In the Toyota article their expenditure was discussed at a possible 450 MILLION.

      • thestig84 said on 5th November 2009, 17:17

        Lol I hoped that was a typing error! Run an F1 team for the price of an SLR…bargain :-)

      • Sorry Nitpicker, I meant to say MILLION. (Jeez…what a nitpicker!)

        • mp4-19b said on 5th November 2009, 17:25

          nitpicket, you’ll easily get a job at the FIA. There are so many pests to be cleared off there . You’ll be doing a great humanitarian service :P

      • Vapors. Teams do not go out of pocket for the whole 400-500 million. That is the team “budget.” When it comes time to turn tail, that’s the excuse—look at what we spent! Do you think a public company could put in its 10K: Expenses — 400Mil (F1 team)?

        They obviously recover some revenue from the endeavor though not all and some teams more than others. Red Swill makes a lot of money but do you think Mateschitz fields a team as a hobby? McLaren F1 would continue to be a profitable operation if they had to “buy” engines from BMW or whomever.

        The issue is that they failed to reach a level of success creating marketing value and corporate “goodwill” in excess of the opportunity costs of the capital committed to the team.

        • I agree with what you say. However, I recall when Jaguar, (Ford), was getting out. The board wanted to know who the heck Edward Irvine was, and why was he making more than the CEO of the company. They may not put up all of the “budget” but they are responsible to account for where it all goes. If it begins to get too uside down, this is what happens.

          • Well that’s a good point too. For a major firm, in a downturn, the cosmetics of certain investments and spending matter.

            But in many business, lots of key employees make more than the CEO. Is a bond trader worth his $100 million bonus? If that was the profit on his desk last year, then yes. This is much more true for certain business enterprises known as sports teams. So the complaints about certain people’s salaries in the support is nonsense.

            The irony is that the glamor and expense of F1, and the potential to burnish a bland corporate image run down by producing too many boring economy cars, is what has attraced companies like Ford, Toyota and Renault to the sport in the first place.

            So when the economy is properly back, they will back. Because no other automobile marketing platform is like F1.

            And there is no way Mercedes could get Nicole Sherzinger fortnightly to jump and clap in their garage in a clingly gown without shelling out a major six figure sum to her agent.

          • Mahir C said on 5th November 2009, 22:27

            And no wonder Ford is/was in trouble, thats what you get when your CEO doesnt understand the basic of economics. It isnt like you could grow F1 drivers on a tree, is it. They are expensive because there are so few of them.

        • Also the rumoured figures for Toyota’s budget were at the very top, whereas Renault were said to have the smallest budget of all the manufacturers when they had there World Championship successes.

          • DMW, you make a good point. Frankly, I care nothing of the salaries other than the talking point and the sheer hugeness of the numbers. Someone must think these guys are worth it. When I turn on the TV every other week it costs me nothing. However, when I have journeyed to GP’s…thats another story. I do agree that when the economy straightens out in a few, (or more), years most of the manufacturers could indeed be back. Now, regarding Ms. Sherzinger. Thats pretty funny. I thought the relationship thing with Lewis was what got her at all the GP’s and into the McLaren garage. I didn’t think she actually had to pay her way, but do you really think she’s getting paid for all that? Oh and by the way your description of her is right on. But, she’s easier on the eyes than the grid girls they come up with.

          • Mahir C said on 5th November 2009, 22:31

            I remember that Renault F1 actually made a profit in 05 and 06, their earnings were more than their spendings.

    • Achilles said on 5th November 2009, 17:54

      Ferrari survive Because of F1, F1 would survive without Ferrari…..
      The manufacturers have pulled out before, and F1 still finds people willing to sell their souls to participate, because of the manufacturers, F1 became hideously expensive, without them we will likely see great ingenuity with smaller budgets, hey, who knows we might see some racing….

  7. antonyob said on 5th November 2009, 16:59

    Yeh Max should look smug and good for him, he told them and they wouldnt listen. Now its payback time.

    The sport being back in the hands of enthusiasts and engineers is a far better end result than it being in the hands of greedy useless car companys. ANyone with any handle on history knows F1 does not become weaker just becasue a manufacturer bales out. This year has already proved to be a renaissance for smaller better run teams, long may it continue.

    • PeriSoft said on 10th November 2009, 2:18

      Back in the hands of engineers? Have you seen the tech regs? F1 is as much in the hands of engineers as A1GP.

  8. steph90 said on 5th November 2009, 16:59

    Kubica’s people are meant to be in talks with Mclaren. I imagine he is cheaper than Kimi but then again Anthony Hamilton has been rather complimentary about the Fin of late.
    This year has just been really unstable and the power is beginning to shift with manufacturers pulling out, ueventually the landscape will settle once evryone knows their place again. These little times of ‘crisis’ will happen every so often and the rumours surrounding Toyota and Renault have been going on for quite a while.

  9. Scribe said on 5th November 2009, 17:02

    I hope Renault don’t leave, out of all the manufacturors they where the only team you really felt where racers, as well as that they’ve got definite F1 heritage and they just signed a star driver!

    The problem with all this YAY the manufacturors have gone is that McLaren and Ferrari are essentially manufacturors who will keep on with the massive budgets, whether Redbull and Brawn can keep up I don’t know but don’t expect names simular to Lotus Brabham Tyrell an Jordan or even Campos USF1 Manor and Lotushackmalaysiaproton to occasionaly pop up and be properly competative over a season as in the age of the privateer. Unless things seriously change those days is over. And proper inovation won’t come back untill the age of aero is ended and mechanics becomes the name of the game.

    Maybe a budget cap would help but I think what we need is a major deregulation in everything apart from driver saftey.

    • Nitpicker said on 5th November 2009, 17:12

      And proper inovation won’t come back untill the age of aero is ended

      And when did this ‘age of aero’ begin exactly? F1 has always been about clever chassis and aerodynamic design, and that delivers plenty of innovation. Not that it makes for great racing. But if you think F1 doesn’t have ‘proper innovation’ then you’re not looking closely enough.

      • Scribe said on 5th November 2009, 17:32

        The age of aero began with the ground effect revolution of the Lotus78 and Lotus79. When groundeffect was banned and we moved fully into the age where primary performance gains started to be made from top side aerodynamics, hurting the performance of the car behind you.

        The last proper inovations where tuned mass dampers and brake steer. Both banned, everything since has been about aero aero aero. MECHANICAL innovations, F1 has not always been about aerodynamic design some of the greatest innovations to come out of F1 have had sod all to do with aerodynamics. The most “inovative” thing to come out of this season was the double diffuser which was hardly an innovation, more of a loop hole. The FIA is turning F1 into a spec series limiting innovation and if you can’t see that then you’re not looking closely enough.

        • mp4-19b said on 5th November 2009, 17:51

          Yep. Agree with you Scribe. Too much emphasis is being laid on aero. Seriously tell me how many of Adrian Newey’s or Neil Oatley’s aero designs have spilled over to road cars? No road car on this planet uses double decker diffuser :P

          None of the road cars implement F1 aero solutions. But the same cannot be said of mechanical innovations. Active suspension, ABS,damper systems, semi-auto gearbox etc have found their way into normal road cars.

          I think its high time we move away from aero & concentrate more on mech & engine issues. Even KERS has a great future. Aero should be left to Boeing & Airbus :P

          • steph90 said on 5th November 2009, 18:10

            Agree with every word.

          • Mahir C said on 5th November 2009, 22:39

            Active suspension was used in Citroens since 50s.
            ABS was introduced in 1971 in Cadillac as an option. What the heck is a semi-automatic gearbox, there are a million of them? Do you mean flappy pedals.
            I didnt see any road car with a J damper system.

          • Martin said on 6th November 2009, 0:13

            just Boeing

        • Right. Those tear-dropped Auto Union cars and the Ferraris of the pre-war era paid no heed to aerodynamics, and their engineers spent no time or money on the topic.

          Those who don’t know or care who Newey, Barnard, Oately, Gascoyne, etc. are spectators, not fans, and will never enjoy the sport until it is GP2 with slightly less restricted engines.

          • Patrickl said on 5th November 2009, 20:04

            That’s aero that actually works for road cars.

            All the stuff with wings and such doesn’t

          • Mahir C said on 5th November 2009, 22:45

            Word.
            Plus, can I add that aerodynamics was the reason independent teams could hang onto Ferrari in 70s and beat them in 80s. Some people here sound like Enzo Ferrari who said “aero is for people who cant design a powerful engine”. We all know what happened to Ferrari next, 21 years without a championship.

        • Martin said on 6th November 2009, 0:12

          spot on!!

  10. Maksutov said on 5th November 2009, 17:05

    Like Toyota, Renault was a signatory to the new Concorde Agreement, committing it to remain in F1 until the end of 2012.

    But who exactly made the signature. I do not believe the actual manufacturers did themselves. Concorde agreement is that between the FIA and its teams only, and should includes rules of the sport. Besides the team can still be blinded if they like, but the manufacturer is gone bye bye…

    It also hinted the Max Mosley’s abandoned plans for budget capping could be resurrected by new president Jean Todt:

    Toyota’s announcement demonstrates the importance of the original cost-reduction measures set out by the FIA.

    I doubt Todt will be stupid like Mosley to now create further problems to F1 by resurrecting the old Mosley saga, because it will not work and he should be smart enough to know that. Binding the teams with Concorde agreement was Mosley’s idea, a mystified man, who tried to take world law into his own hands and it shouldn’t have even been implemented, because it doesn’t apply, and it cant apply.

    • Nitpicker said on 5th November 2009, 17:17

      Concorde agreement is that between the FIA and its teams only, and should includes rules of the sport.

      The Concorde Agreement is between the teams, the FIA and FOM. And of course it is signed by the manufacturers you fool — it is signed by the teams, who are owned by the manufacturer. The manufacturer is responsible for whatever commitments are made by its subsidiary companies.

      Binding the teams with Concorde agreement was Mosley’s idea

      The Agreement has also been chased down by all the teams for a number of years. All three parties involved want long-term stability and commitment, instead of the one-year agreements that have been in force until recently. So it is not all Max’s idea that is forced onto everyone else, do your research.

      • Jim N said on 5th November 2009, 19:11

        That was one of Max’s complaints, that the Manufacturers would not themselves sign. Non of them including FIAT were prepaired to do so. They would only sign as the teams and would not offer any parent company guarantees….. that basicaly makes the signatures not worth the paper they are written on…. The teams have far more debts than assets… and without any guarantee from the parent company any of them can walk away …. the FIA can go to court but as the Teams have no money what is the point? …. It seems that BMW were actually the only ethical company here, not signing when they knew they were probablly pulling out…. Toyota and Renault must both have had at least serious doubts but signed anyway.

      • Maksutov said on 6th November 2009, 10:16

        The latest Concorde agreement was muddle up in under a month and did not include planing and preparation of years you talk about. No agreement can bind a car manufacturing company or any company to compete in any sport, that is outside of the jurisdiction of the FIA, even if Mosley wanted and tried very hard to implement it. Concorde agreements between the sport governing body and its teams should include rules relating to the sport itself and rules issued by the “sport” governing body. And yes it was Mosley’s plan to take more control, have you been sleeping for the past couple of years? Even if it was written in the Concorde agreement, it doesn’t apply, just wait and you’ll see. If an international company was inescapably contractually bound to compete in a sport, which in reality isn’t possible, then im sure they wouldn’t have pulled out. It doesn’t say anywhere that the latest Concorde agreement was in fact signed by the manufacturers themselves, none of us could be sure exactly who signed what and how. So stop talking **** #$%^head

    • mp4-19b said on 5th November 2009, 17:20

      Yeah. We don’t need Mosley’s “dead” zombies to be resurrected. Those sinister ideas can go into oblivion with him, if he leaves of course. But I highly doubt it. Ferrari’s press statement says it all. They’ve totally blamed Mosley for the Toyota debacle. What F1 needs now is stability, but Mosley’s overshadowing presence at the FIA will lead only to further complications.

      The best thing to happen to the sport is, is Mosley & Todt fall out. That would set thing in order :P

      • Scribe said on 5th November 2009, 17:35

        I don’t usualy agree with the bile that comes out of those Ferrari statements but I couldn’t agree more with what they said on Lotus, Colin Chapman’s rpm is climbing ever higher.

  11. How come all these smalltime outfits are queing up to get into F1 (Superfund, Stefan GP, N. Technology, USF1) but massive manufacturers can’t afford to stay in?

    Big manufacturers dropping ia worry for the future of F1, so it makes the decision to deny a place to quality outfits like Prodrive/Aston Martin and Lola look even more silly!

  12. MinusTwo said on 5th November 2009, 17:25

    I personally think Renault are already gone.

    Their shareholders have no doubt heard about how other car companies have left the sport, and there is no way that they will accept a drag on Renault’s bottom line when their competitors have taken this step to save money.

    It will be hard to justify, and even harder to tolerate the noize that those pushing for their withdrawal are sure to make. Dont forget, also, that as a publicly traded company, Renault’s board faces the very real threat of litigation from shareholders if they are alleged to be squandering company money on an expensive hobby while the company is struggling financially.

    • Scribe said on 5th November 2009, 17:56

      uuugghhhh, your probably right. Its promising that Renault haven’t quit with immediate like Toyota but this is the kind of thing I’ve been trying to block from my mind.

      denial I hear they call it.

    • HounslowBusGarage said on 5th November 2009, 21:07

      Absoluteyl right, Minus Two.

  13. James Bolton said on 5th November 2009, 17:30

    We’re going back to the early 90’s!! Remember the Ford adverts: “Half the Formula 1 grid is powered by Cosworth…”
    I agree with Steph90, it’s a natural ebb and flow. It probably follows the prospects of the world economy, albeit losely.
    If Renault quit tomorrow, it’s not good for the sport but I don’t see it as being a disaster. And maybe it’s worth mentioning that nobody is tipping them to win anything next year so it’s not going to change the course of the Championship in 2010.
    And whilst I’m at it: their car has been so ugly, both in livery and in shape, over the past two or three seasons. It won’t be a huge loss from that particular perspective.

    • We’re going back to the early 90’s!!

      I wouldn’t mind, but in the early 90’s F1 did not have a pair of guys exhausting F1 revenues.

      *Tyre Manufacturers: Michelin, Bridgestone
      *Circuits: Silverstone (in two days), France, USA (and some more to come)
      *Manufacturers: Honda, BMW, Toyota, Renault (quite possibly)…

      And not to talk about Team managers.

      F1 looks like a morgue in this days…

      • mp4-19b said on 5th November 2009, 18:24

        F1 looks like a morgue in this days…

        Sad :( but true.

        • James Bolton said on 5th November 2009, 19:15

          Ah come on, it’s not that bad. The perfect F1 would be 13 teams who exist to go racing in F1 and nothing else, with independent engine builders supplying the majority and some manufacturer presence to supply the others with engines.
          This would be more sustainable for the future because with this situation, the only thing the teams would need to protect is the F1 team, because that’s all they would have!
          And guess what? This is the situation F1 finds itself in right now.

  14. Oh..BTW,,I read yesterday the Kubica’s manager is making frantic phone calls to McLaren.

  15. steph90 said on 5th November 2009, 17:44

    I’m not sure what’ll happen if there are very few manufacturers left- more private companies that only want to race which is good (but that said look at some of the new teams and the doubts they have had surrounding them, with tight budgets they can drop out just as easily) however if the cosworth engine does prove to be less strong compared to the mercedes/ferrari/possibly renault units then won’t they naturally filter to behind the big teams?
    Possibly the big change will be the political clout as now most teams will seem to be more ‘neutral’ with the Cossies or that is what Mosley hopes/hoped.
    RBR were meant to be near signing another engine deal with Renault so there going to have to wait and see what happens.
    Personally, I would prefer it if Renault stayed. I like teams with history and who want to win. New teams have to come along and challenge and bring new competition but the traditional teams bring a lot of soul and inspiration to the sport. They tend to be more commited and know what to expect wheras new teams can be a bit more flimsy. Whatever happens F1 will go on and continue to do well.

    • Jim N said on 5th November 2009, 19:24

      Most people seem to forget that Toyota was the ONLY manufacturer team and now they have gone…. all the rest always were just glorified sponsers…. they ALL bought a priveteer team and rebadged it as their own …except FIAT who kept the Ferrari name (and Ferrari were a race team before they produced road cars)…. They often make the engines… but getting engines has never been a real problem in F1… and Mercedes didn’t even do that, they just bought an F1 engine business….. That I think is half the problem… they think of them selves as Manufacturers but in reality are little more than sponsers… and sponsership is hard to find at the moment…. Priveteer teams make money out of F1…. and the Manufactureres loose it… big time!

1 2 3

Add your comment

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

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.