Prodrive miss another chance to enter F1
18th December 2009, 7:00 by Keith Collantine 54 Comments »
Prodrive had planned to bring Aston Martin to F1
Renault’s successful sale of a stake in its team to Genii Capital, to keep its team in F1, is very welcome news.
But Genii were not the only company bidding to take over the team’s operation: another was David Richards’ Prodrive team. Not for the first time in recent years his attempt to acquire an F1 outfit have come to naught.
Why do Prodrive keep missing chances to get into Formula 1?
Prodrive boss David Richards has run F1 teams twice in the past. His partnership with British American Tobacco in rallying, where Prodrive ran the distinctive 555-liveried Subaru Imprezas, led the cigarette company to consider a move into F1.
Richards urged them to do this through the Benetton team, but the proposal was rejected. Nonetheless, Richards became team principal at Benetton from the end of 1997 until being replaced by Rocco Benetton at the end of the following year.
BAT, meanwhile, launched their own F1 effort, BAR, in 1999, run by Craig Pollock. After four years of chronic under-achievement Pollock was replaced by Richards, and the 2004 season saw the team finally scoring regular podium finishes, before Richards moved on once again.
Since then his Prodrive outfit have had four major attempts to move into F1. Away from F1 they run Aston Martin’s Le Mans cars, the Ford Falcon Australian V8 Touring Cars and other race and rally programmes.
2007: Customer cars
In an effort to reduce costs the FIA planned to bring in new regulations allowing teams to use chassis bought from other suppliers or teams in 2008. A tender process was opened which attracted dozens of entries, of which Prodrive’s was picked as the winner.
They planned to use McLaren chassis for 2008, albeit modified to meet the new regulations. This provoked concern among rival teams that it would allow them to become instantly competitive for comparatively little cost.
Facing arbitration from the like of Williams the FIA realised it could not bring the customer cars rules in and dropped them. With that went Prodrive’s hopes of making the grid in 2008.
2008: Honda
Prodrive’s next chance to enter F1 came when Honda – formerly BAR – went up for sale at the end of 2008.
Although Richards looked into taking over the team Honda instead opted for a management buyout headed by Ross Brawn and Nick Fry. But speaking in January this year Richards made it clear that with the failure of the customer cars rules he still considered F1 too expensive:
The cost-cutting process that has been put in place has not yet seen its full benefit, and I don’t think it will be until 2010 that you will see those issues roll out properly. The teams have still got a burden of overhead that is unsustainable. So consequently, with the window of time for entry, I just question whether it is right at the moment.
David Richards
Read more: David Richards says F1 costs are still too high – and he’s not buying Honda
2009: The budget cap tender
Having failed to bring in customer car regulations the FIA now turned to budget capping as its next proposal to bring spending under control. Right from the off Richards had misgivings, saying:
I don’t believe [budget capping] is going to work. I don’t think it is a viable proposition. I have seen it in Australia where it has been abandoned. I think budget capping is an excuse for poor technical regulations. With proper technical controls, you should be able to manage the costs of F1. It is also about sporting regulations as well.
David Richards
The FIA failed to get the teams to accept budget capping either, but it did open a new tender which accepted entries from three teams.
Prodrive was one of the teams to apply, revealing plans to bring the Aston Martin brand to Formula 1 by 2012. However attractive that might have sounded, the FIA wasn’t interested, and awarded the three places on the grid to USF1, Campos Meta 1 and Lotus instead.
The politics of engine supply appeared to determine the outcome of this one – the three teams which got the nod all agreed to use the FIA-backed Cosworth power plants. Prodrive planned to use a supply from Mercedes, and at least one other aspiring entrant discovered the FIA took a dim view of non-Cosworth applicants:
We got information from Cosworth saying they were the only one engine that is allowed, which is not in the rules and not possible to be put in the rules. However, when we started to discuss it with them Cosworth sent us an email stating they were entitled to sign a contract and take money for this.
Apart from Cosworth we had two different opportunities but we were forced to stop because we were told Cosworth was the only one which was allowed for us.
Zoran Stefanovic
2009: Renault
In the aftermath of Flavio Briatore and Pat Symond’s exit from Renault it became clear the team was looking for someone to take over it. Ricahrds visited the teams’ headquarters in September.
Earleir this week Renault announced it had chosen Genii Capital over rival suitors including Prodrive. Genii chairman Gerard Lopez has excellent business credentials and is best known for being an early investor in Skype. At this stage we can only speculate why Genii was chosen over Prodrive.
The consistent strand in Richards’ flirtation with F1 – apart from the fact that none of them came to fruition – is a desire to do F1 on his terms. Above all, it has to make financial sense.
Given the many that have gone before him, failed and disappeared in a short space of time, this is not unreasonable.
But at this rate it’s starting to look like we’ll never see him back in F1 again.
Read more: Renault keeps team in F1 for 2010
GeeMac said on 18th December 2009, 7:18
I’d love to see Aston Martin in F1. Oh well, guess it will never happen. Richards is paying the price for not being able to get onto the grid in 2008…
Lustigson said on 18th December 2009, 7:46
And rightfully so.
D.P. Richards CBE is an entrepreneur, and happens to be in the motorracing business. He has a responsibility to several hundreds of employees and has not got pockets deep enough to keep on pouring money into a Formula One thrill ride.
Just as team like McLaren and Williams did from the early 80s, and still do today: they are a company that has to make a profit to keep on investing in that company, to remain competitive in the market that is Formula One.
HounslowBusGarage said on 18th December 2009, 10:06
Ditto, Lustigon.
Probably one of the coolest heads arund F1, Richards is not in it for the honour of losing a few billion on a vanity team.
TommyB said on 18th December 2009, 8:21
I’d have loved Aston Martin in F1 and would have been an instant fan. If they have tried four times and failed though I guess it’s never going to happen
wasiF1 said on 18th December 2009, 9:23
Me too would love to see a manufacture like Aston Martin in F1,shame it was not possible cause of the X FIA President who force all new teams to use Cosworth engine.
Prisoner Monkeys said on 18th December 2009, 10:17
The idea behind using Cosworths to start with seems to have been to prevent manufacturers from absuing the new teams.
The problem with Toro Rosso is that they’re effectively a glorified GP2 team. Their drivers are only there to get experince before Red Bull plucks them away for their own team once they show promise, while the team don’t get chassis upgrades until well are Red Bull have used them (Toro Rosso had to wait until Hungary before getting the package Red Bull received at Silverstone).
My point in all of this is that it would be easy for a manufacturer team – say, Renault – to start supplying someone like Campos with engines. And since they’d be running Renault engines, it stands to reason that Renault would be the team Campos received most – if not all – of their support and advice from. It’s not much of a step from that to a situation where Campos start taking on Renault’s young driver program hopefuls, who then end up in Renault once they come of age. We’d effectively end up with an unspoken two-tier championship, with the top teams at the front an the new teams running under-developed cars and drivers so that it is easier for the new teams to pick a sure thing to beng them glory in the future.
By having the teams run Cosworth engines to begin with, it not only keeps costs down, but it allows them to develop an identity and get a fothold within the paddock without the teams trying to influence them. Then, when the Cosworth contracs expire, the new batch of teams can ally themselves with manufacturer engines, but they will be their own teams. They will be able to compete on even terms, even if they are three and a half seconds off the pace. Kind of like what Toro Rosso did, back when they were known as Minardi.
K said on 18th December 2009, 12:43
That doesn’t make sense. It’s disproved by Brawn and Force India last season (Mercedes engines), Red Bull (Renault) and by Toro Rosso even (Ferrari). These teams weren’t driver “hot houses” for their engine suppliers. Do you think McLaren will become a driver nusury for Mercedes next season? No. No they won’t. It’s true that Williams had to have Nakajima, maybe they’d have been better off if they’d got hold of Kobayashi then everyone might have been happy, but they still had control over their first driver and if the deal was that bad they could have said no. This is not the case with Cosworth engines.
The FIA forced the deal with Cosworth to break up the manufacturers political base. Now they have 4 new teams and an engine partner who will follow the FIA line and vote accordingly increasing their hegemony. Add to that the drastic reduction of manufacturers and the FIA are laughing, they’ll be no more talk of a break away for a while to come.
Jim N said on 18th December 2009, 14:04
My understanding of the situation on engines was that the entrants had to have a guaranteed engine supplier. Mercedes were already supplying the maximum number of teams allowed under the regulations so to use Mercedes engines would have required a rule change. So to propose to use an engine which was not available was hardly a guaranteed engine supplier. Cosworth on the other hand were available, as would any other new engine supplier such as Porsche or VW, the FIA spelt that out when asking for bids. So you have to ask the seriousness of bids to enter F1 which were based on something clearly not permitted by the regulations.
K said on 18th December 2009, 20:19
Where in the regulations does it stipulate how many teams an engine supplier can provide for?
If Mercedes can’t supply four teams then why can Cosworth?
Prisoner Monkeys said on 18th December 2009, 22:55
But Brawn was simply an incarnation of an old team, and Ross Brawn is far too savvy to let that sort of thing happen. As for Force India, they’ve been racing for three years now. They have that established sense. And Toro Rosso wasn’t Ferrari’s nursury, as you put it, because they’re already in Red Bull’s thrall.
Jim N said on 19th December 2009, 13:19
F1 Sporting Regulations clause 13.3 “A major car manufacturer may not directly or indirectly supply engines for more than two teams of two cars each”. Cosworth is not a major car manufacturer. This was not a new regulation, it’s been there for years. Brawn had to get special permission to use Merceedes engines. Pushing to 3 teams may be a one off exception, but 4 or 5 ??
K said on 19th December 2009, 14:11
“without consent of the FIA”
That basically means the FIA can say “OK” and they can do it. They’ve provided consent several times in the past, Brawn is not one off.
Anyway that’s beside the point, the new teams were required to use Cosworth power despite how many teams other engine manufacturers was supplying.
Jim said on 18th December 2009, 9:41
You can get all excited about Aston Martin in F1, gulf livery etc, but at the end of the day David Richards is a supremely smooth operator, and kind of a hero of mine. I think the F1 world would have been better off with him in it again. It disappoints me that he’s not.
Prisoner Monkeys said on 18th December 2009, 10:02
I don’t understand why people go all gooey over the thought of Prodrive. They have absolutely no experience running any kind of open-wheel racing car. Teams like Campos and Manor have better credentials in that respect.
And as for Aston Martin in Formula 1, I also fail to see why you’re getting all jazzed up about it. If Richards was bringing back a name like Mercedes – a team with a long and involved and colourful racing history – then I could see where you’re coming from. But as it stands, Aston Martin had just eleven Formula 1 starts and ten actual entries to their name, and it was fifty years ago. They never scored a single point in their two years of racing, and their second year was limited to one race. Their best result was two sixth places, both by Roy Salvadori in the 1959 British and Portuguese Grands Prix. It’s not like Richards would be reviving a classical name; hell, he’d barely even be reviving it.
The only other reason I can think of would be that people want to see Gulf-liveried cars. I’ve seen people melt at the sight of a pair of very professional-looking mockups, but wanting to see a team join on the basis of the sponsor it could possibly bring is one of the dumbest things I’ve heard for a while. If he really wanted to, Gerard Lopez could probably bring the Gulf name to Renault.
Prodrive had their chance, and they blew it. The last time the grid was opened up to entries back in 2007, I believe there were twenty-two applicants. I do not know how many of them re-applied for 2010, but I do know that the bulk of proposed entries were new. Prodrive’s failure to make the grid scared off a lot of potential teams, who no doubt saw their troubles as evidece that it is too difficult for new teams to succeed in Formula 1, even with the FIA, FOTA and FOM initiatives to support the new teams.
I know that the customer car row was a product of the Powers That Be failing to get it sorted in time – but that doesn’t completely exonerate Dave Richards. He chose to run a customer chassis from a very early point, and repeatedly stated that his entry hinged on the legislation being passed. To me, this is a very poor approach: Richards should have considered and even explored alternatives and he should have had a back-up plan in mind. He did not, and Prodrive failed to show. I believe this episode is the leading cause as to why they were overlooked for a 2010 grid berth.
It’s time to give up on Prodrive in Formula 1. There clearly isn’t a place for them. While the sport would be richer with their name, it is most certainly no poorer without it. I don’t think they’re ever going to appear on the grid until such time as Formula 1 needs Prodrive just as much as Prodrive needs Formula 1.
It’s time to let go.
Journeyer said on 18th December 2009, 10:13
And what exactly would Gerard Lopez’s experience be?
If people like Peter Windsor (who seems to be lost at sea with USF1) can get an entry, DR surely deserves an opportunity as well.
As for customer chassis, let’s say Prodrive lost out to Direxiv (the Jean Alesi and McLaren-connected outfit) for that spot a few years back. Were they any more likely to get on the grid given what happened? I seriously doubt it.
Prodrive deserves a spot on that grid, and that’s a belief that SHOULDN’T be let go.
Prisoner Monkeys said on 18th December 2009, 10:23
Lopez isn’t changing anything – he’s just the caretaker of the Renault name for the time being. There has been the suggestion that Renault will buy the team back once the economy stablises. It’s my understanding that Lopez will alrgely manage the finances; the fact that the team will race under the Renault name despite their minority shareholding suggests that they’ll still have some weight in all decisions that are made.
Was Direxiv intending to run a customer chassis? What about Carlin, or any one of the other twenty-odd applicants?
Based on what? What can Prodrive bring to the grid that Lopez can’t? Is it Dave Richards and the Prodrive name? Richards has just three years’ experience running a team, and Prodrive have never contested an open-wheel race before. It’s not as if he’s a Ross Brawn or Frank Williams. What does Prodrive have that the grid is sorely in need of?
Prisoner Monkeys said on 18th December 2009, 10:23
And if Prodrive are so deserving of a grid spot, how come they’ve failed to make it on no less than four separate occasions?
steph said on 18th December 2009, 11:48
I think I am (for once maybe
) going to agree with PM.
Firstly I don’t believe anyone ever deserves a spot in F1, they should earn it. F1 doesn’t need anyone.
The name would be nice not for it’s open wheel connections but just because it’s the car James Bond drove in and it does have history in racing and could make a fairly good looking F1 car.
As a team, they could either decide F1 isn’t for them (either not good enough or too expensive) or build a fairly solid long term project. But as PM says they have little experience in this area.
I would have loved the name honestly but F1 isn’t about that it is about getting the best and taking a chance. The new teams may not work out but there is no guarantee Prodrive would to. If Prodrive were the best option then why haven’t they been granted entry before? Why hasn’t it materialised?
With the Cosworth issue. It has its benefits but personally I prefer a free market and the teams can take whichever engine they want which is what I hope and believe they have done.
K said on 18th December 2009, 13:10
Personally I would like to see Prodrive on the grid, in fact I’d rather see the name Prodrive than Aston Martin. I’m not really a fan of re-badging new teams with iconic names of the past, Lotus, Jaguar etc.
I think the fact that Prodrive wanted a Mercedes engine already proves that they are more serious about racing than the other new teams.
Steph you say teams should earn their spot on the grid but if the sole requirement is that you basically kiss the FIA’s a$$ then you haven’t earned much outside my comtempt.
By my reckoning Richards has had 4/5 years in F1 as a team boss and in that time he was successful, winning races and taking his team to 2nd in the championship. How many of the Cosworth entrants can say that?
He’s consistently proved his desire and commitment to to be in F1 which leads me to assume once their he would be a fully committed member of the grid (unlike say teams like Spyker and Midland have been in the past), and whatever team he managed would have designs on moving up the grid rather than just bringing up the rear.
Prodrive’s success in other fields of motor racing is relevant. Knowing what it takes to win oganisationally and logistically is very important and Prodrive’s success is unquestionable. It is logical that they would attempt F1 with a winning mentality.
All in all it’s a travesty that Prodrive will not line up Bahrain (that feels wrong I want to Melbourne).
steph said on 18th December 2009, 13:25
I don’t think the new teams did
they had the plans there. I confess I wasn’t that pleased when the list of new teams first came out but I would be daft as hell to think the FIA would allow entry to teams who just sucked up to them and would probably fail lol
K said on 18th December 2009, 20:22
Look at the way the FIA is run, do you seriously think they make decisions based on what’s best for F1? They do what is best for the FIA and F1 comes second.
Gman said on 18th December 2009, 15:20
That’s what I always say about this issue.
PJA said on 18th December 2009, 10:28
I agree with the final point in the article that Richards is only willing to enter F1 if he can make a relative success of it and not be trundling around at the back making up the numbers, struggling to bring enough money in, which I think is the correct approach to take.
AMG Fan said on 18th December 2009, 10:32
Eh? Are you forgetting that Prodrive ran BAR-Honda for a short period of time, and successfully?
Prisoner Monkeys said on 18th December 2009, 10:36
Yes, and running a team for “a short period of time” before being purchased by a manufacturer totally qualifies them to run their own team from scratch …
AMG Fan said on 18th December 2009, 10:45
But you stated that Prodrive had no open wheel experience, and that isn’t true. Considering that Prodrive managed to turn around BAR to consistent point scorers in 2004, slower then only Ferrari. I think they deserve a little more credit then you give them regarding there participation in F1
Icthyes said on 18th December 2009, 10:34
Prodrive isn’t in F1 because the FIA and Bernie don’t want him to be. It’s as simple as that. Dave Richards is very much the Ron Dennis / Flavio Briatore type and the FIA have already gone through the effort of getting rid of them (although in Flav’s case it was handed to them on a plate).
PM, I really don’t understand your attitude on this. DR has proven, even if not spectacular, pedigree in F1. Do you really think an investment capital group has a better knowledge of F1? DR is a known quanitity, which is why most fans like him and why the FIA doesn’t. We want racers, interested in the racing. They want money, and money that can be expected to follow their way in the horrible direction they’re taking F1 in. This deal has the hands of Bernie over it, and is purely political.
PM, you blame Prodrive but it’s clear they’ve been shafted by the FIA at all hurdles, sometimes for peace in the sport (Williams whining) and sometimes for their own interests. There are some things about F1 I don’t like that I see are the teams’ fault, but you seem to be heavily biased against FOTA and any figure or team who is/could be an ally or member when it comes to stuff like this.
Prisoner Monkeys said on 18th December 2009, 10:39
Damn straight it’s purely political – if Renault backed out of Formula 1, they’d probably back out of GP2, the World Series by Renault and Formula Renault as well, three major feeder series for Formula 1. Formula 2 isn’t ready to stand on its own feet and there’s so many Formula 3 leagues these days that a single intermedary like Formula 2 wouldn’t be enough to support it.
Formula 1 needs its feeder series more than it needs Dave Ricahrds and Prodrive, that’s for sure.
Icthyes said on 18th December 2009, 11:47
There’d always be someone to fill their place, though. Renault themselves took over the World Series from Nissan. Even BMW are still keeping their own junior formula, though I do expect that to change.
Icthyes said on 18th December 2009, 11:45
Just to amend this, in this particular deal I think it was more Renault’s doing than anyone’s. Renault want to be able to come back; DR wants to turn it into Aston Martin. When I said the FIA and Bernie were against this, I should have really said in the general context of the idea of Prodrive coming into F1, not this particular buyout. Of course, this fact would have been weighed into Renault decision – why sell a controlling stake to someone who would be Public Enemy #3 to the FIA? – but I didn’t mean to suggest it was the overriding factor. Apologies for the misconception.
Red Andy said on 18th December 2009, 14:26
If the FIA didn’t want Dave Richards in the sport, why did they offer him the spot in 2008? There was plenty of competition, and his arguably wasn’t even the strongest application – the FIA overlooked Direxiv who were perhaps even better prepared than Prodrive were.
No, the simple reason that Prodrive can’t get on the grid is that they had their chance and they blew it.
John H said on 18th December 2009, 12:56
Nothing like a certain Toro Rosso team then? I’m still frustrated that TR are allowed to race!
Red Andy said on 18th December 2009, 14:21
STR are becoming full constructors from 2010. The only reason it’s taken so long is that they needed time to ramp up their in-house development capability.
Robert said on 18th December 2009, 13:05
Actually the third grid slot was awarded to Manor/Virgin. Lotus was awarded BMW Sauber’s slot (and then Sauber was given Toyota’s).
dsob said on 18th December 2009, 13:20
in this particular deal I think it was more Renault’s doing than anyone’s. Renault want to be able to come back; DR wants to turn it into Aston Martin.
dsob said on 18th December 2009, 13:26
well, the blockquote certainlt failed in THAT comment. But I think you all can sort it out.
donwatters said on 18th December 2009, 14:03
In my mind it does seem a bit odd that a highly experienced team such as Prodrive was unable to make the cut. I’ve got to believe that B. Eccelstone and Max decided it wasn’t in their interests, and therefore gave their blessings to other (less experienced)teams. David Richards belongs, indeed deserves, to be in F1. I honestly believe he would be a tremendous addition to the show. Just my take.
Red Andy said on 18th December 2009, 14:24
Keith, please stop misrepresenting the Cosworth issue. I’ve seen this point mentioned many times and it’s just plain wrong.
When teams submitted their applications for a place on the 2010 grid, one of the requirements for their application to be considered was that they had an engine deal already in place. The only engine manufacturer willing to sign contracts with teams that didn’t yet have an entry was Cosworth. That’s not the FIA’s fault, or Cosworth’s fault, it’s the fault of the other engine makers. Richards may have based his application on getting Mercedes engines but he didn’t have a contract with Mercedes.