Mark Webber, Korea, 2012

Renault “frustrated by lack of recognition” for success

F1 Fanatic round-upPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Mark Webber, Korea, 2012In the round-up: Renault believe they don’t get enough of the credit for powering Red Bull’s successes in recent years.


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

Renault: ‘We don’t get enough out of F1’ (Autocar)

Renault chief operating officer Carlos Tavares: “We are frustrated by the lack of recognition we get for beating the likes of Ferrari and Mercedes. It is true that I think we deserve better.”

Marussia still negotiating with Bernie (ESPN)

“‘We are in active discussion with the Commercial Rights Holder but, as of today [Thursday], we do not have a signed agreement with them,’ a spokesperson confirmed.”

Maldonado highlights the perils of F1’s pay drivers (The Telegraph)

“[Deceased Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez] had personally approved the contract that enabled Maldonado to become the most glaring example of the ‘pay driver’ in F1: a prodigy who owed his seat to a national government pouring up to ??45??million into Williams coffers to ensure greater cachet and recognition on the global stage.”

NBC Sports Group F1 coverage for 2013 (NBC)

“In its initial season of Formula One broadcasting, NBC Sports Group will air 19 Formula One races and 39 qualifying and practice sessions across NBC and NBC Sports Network. Four races will air on NBC, one will be on CNBC and the remaining 14 will be on NBC Sports Network.”


Comment of the day

@F1antics on the political context of the BBC/Sky deal following yesterday’s story about Sky’s forthcoming F1 channel price hike:

The UK Government put the squeeze on the BBC in a number of ways, not least that the BBC has to pay for the installation of rural high-speed broadband out of licence fee income, to the tune of at least ??300m. Labour and the Liberal Democrats had proposed a “levy” to pay for it, but the Conservative government rejected that. This is is the same government whose leader was (is?) close friends with Rebekah Brooks, CEO of News International and protege of Rupert Murdoch (who owns BSkyB).

I?m sure that the people who read and post here are aware of the many challenges facing the BBC, and the relationship the current government has with BSkyB, so I don’t really understand the vilification of the BBC or the defence of Sky.

The gradual move from public to paid content is a result of a plan to weaken public broadcasting in the UK, and to strengthen companies like News Corporation, and empires like the Murdoch’s. And, sadly, as more and more people give Sky their hard-earned money, more programmes will be lost to the average viewer and will only be available to those who can afford it. Eventually will all be over Sky’s barrel, and they’ll charge whatever they want.

It?s like watching frogs being slowly boiled alive. At some point in the future all the people here breathing a sigh of relief that they’re not the ones being screwed this time around, will realise it’s their turn. And they’ll have funded it.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Icthyes, Les and Preekel!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

McLaren dominated the first race of 1998 but there was controversy as David Coulthard surrendered victory to Mika Hakkinen.

Hakkinen had been leading comfortably until he accidentally pitted due to a problem with his radio. Coulthard later handed the lead back to him.

Heinz-Harald Frentzen was third for Williams, over a lap down. Here’s the moment Coulthard gave up the lead:

Image ?? Red Bull/Getty

129 comments on “Renault “frustrated by lack of recognition” for success”

Jump to comment page: 1 2
  1. This sounds like Renault are trying to have their cake and eat it, too. They gave up on having a works team to become an engine supplier. Now that they’re an engine supplier, they’re complaining that they’re not getting the level of attention that other manufacturer teams are. They should either commit the money to being a fully-fledged works team again, or bite the bullet and save money at the cost of getting less attention. They can’t have it both ways.

    1. Fully agree. I remember them being all too keen to distance themselves from the sport following Crashgate. They got plenty of publicity back then, just not for favourable reasons!

    2. fully disagree

  2. Some comments regarding the Renault story: this is actually great news. Formula 1 needs more engine manufacturers to participate as constructors: the likes of Honda, Toyota, BMW (and perhap Renault) have all withdrawn from the sport due to the economic crisis. So any of those teams to return would be very welcome!

    From a historic point of view: until say 1960, most of the constructors in F1 (and GP racing before that) were the engine manufacturers themselves (Ferrari, Alfa Romeo, Maserati, Mercedes), which changed when notably the British started realizing that they could beat them with good engineering. For decades, the engines were supplied by the likes of Coventry Climax and Cosworth. The number of engine manufacturers as constructors was at its peak right before the start of the crisis, but before then many engine manufacturers simply decided to supply their engines to privateer teams. If they would do a great job in building that engine, more customers would buy that engine and the manufacturer made more profit – simple as that.

    Today however things are way more complicated: of course engine suppliers have (since around 1965) always tried to promote themselves the best way they can, but this really started to take on a life of its own since 2000. Every engine supplier (bar Cosworth) has had their own team, as they found it necessary to promote their road cars by owning a team. And who could blame them: the engine manufacturers don’t get a lot of attention when the cars win, but get negative publicity when the engine keeps breaking down. Still, strange that they could cope with it pre-2000.

    Renault has been flirting with the idea of returning as a constructor for a year now. I can see them taking over Caterham for the 2014 season, with team pricipal Cyril Abiteboul, Charles Pic/Total and last week former Renault head of aerodynamics moving to Caterham. But more notably their coorperation with Renault for the Alpine project is a major clue. Also, I was quite confused when I read this sentence:

    The rule change will make it more a championship of the engine suppliers than in recent times; that will be key for our return

    Return? Hmmm.. It would be great if Renault would decide to return as a constructor, because at the moment there is a serious lack of them. It would be even better if this would spark the return of other engine suppliers/constructors like Honda, or perhaps Porsche or Volkswagen (though I’m not sure how likely the latter two are). Bring on the ‘engine championship’!

    1. O dear, this wasn’t supposed to be an essay..

      1. Sometimes you need depth, the problem for new engine manufacturers will be the development freeze in March 2014.

    2. @andae23 – Reading the article, the problem is that Renault want more credit for their role within teams like Red Bull and Lotus, but at the same time, they don’t want to increase their commitment to the sport.

      1. @prisoner-monkeys – What Renault want is simply impossible. Now with the Infiniti title sponsorship, Renault are getting even less public recognition, so the only way I see for Renault is either to just go with the current situation (which they are unhappy with), or return as a constructor.

    3. Every engine supplier (bar Cosworth) has had their own team

      Cosworth was the team engine for the works Jaguar team at which point it was owned by Ford so whilst the engine supplier didn’t have its own team, the team had its own engine supplier. I don’t think it’s all that different to Mercedes engines built by Ilmor is it? (except that Ilmor has now been rebranded as Mercedes).

      1. Had to read that one a few times, but I see your point :)

  3. Reuters have a nice interview with Williams’ Mike Coughlan up. Seems he is not a racing enthusiast (not anymore?).

  4. Funny article with Tilke – him being the one is more about Bernie choosing him by default than being the “god of track design”.
    And this even had me chuckle

    Thailand is the centre for the auto industry in this region and auto companies will benefit by testing their products here,” he said.

    – I don’t know what region he is speaking about here, but I doubt many people would see any part of Thailand as a centre for automobile in SE Asia. Please anyone from the region correct me if I am wrong!

    1. @bascb – The article is clearly trying to excite people about having a circuit in the region; people, it must be said, who may not have that much knowledege of Formula 1. They’re trying to hype the idea up, especially since it has recently been announced that a bespoke circuit will be built outside Bangkok, and while it’s not intended to rival the expected circuit in the capital, the owners are trying to get in early and sell the idea.

    2. thatscienceguy
      8th March 2013, 8:53

      I believe a number of manufacturers have factories in Thailand building for Asia-Pacific. Honda certainly do, i’m pretty sure other manufacturers do too. They’re just assembly plants though.

      1. Ah, that at least gives a bit of a basis for the statement.

        1. yes, Honda and Ford build in Thailand for the Australian and other markets.

  5. I love this quote from Booth in the Marussia article:

    “No [it’s not vital for Marussia ahead of Australia],” he added. “It’s vital for Bernie because he won’t be able to film us without it.”

    Just imagine the strange shots at the grid – suddenly it turns black when the Marussias would be shown at the back? Off course them being lapped would be a bit harder to blend out, but we did see that FOM are good at not showing a certain team at all if they want in Bahrain last year, when FI’s presence was completely ignored :-)

    1. Somehow I don’t think Marussia’s sponsors would be happy with their cars not being shown…

  6. out of 126 years of car racing, only 1 competitive team, in its current 32 year old incarnation, has granted equal status to its drivers in only 6 non-consecutive years (1988, 1989, 2007, 2010-12), resulting in 2 driver’s titles only when they were effectively the only cars in contention (1988, 1989).

    team orders have always been a part of motor racing (or any other team sport), always will be, and there isn’t anything wrong with that.

  7. Pretty fun news about F1 on NBC Sports. The schedule being released does assuage a lot of my initial fears and makes the season feel like it is finally here. We even get a free practice 1 session in Australia in glorious HD to enjoy. I’m not a massive Leigh Diffey fan, but the team should work well. I wonder where they’ll be broadcasting from now as clearly they’ll stick to a stateside studio to call the races still. No news about streaming though so losing access to P1 and P3 is a shame even if Speed’s streaming wasn’t always the smoothest.

    Couple other oddities in the NBC schedule. I assume they are just typos.
    Hungarian Grand Prix at Hungaroring, 7:30 p.m., NBCSN (re-airs at 1 p.m.)
    Belgian Grand Prix at Francorchamps, 7:30 p.m. NBCSN (re-airs at midnight)
    They must have meant 7:30 am. Having no races on tape-delay is a massive victory in itself I think.

    1. @eastman sure, but seeing as NBC SN is premium package cable television and speed was mid level package that most people had, I find it somewhat troubling that FOM went that route. If NBC can broadcast the olympics at any hour, surely Sunday early morning when nothing special is being shown isn’t too much to ask for. Fox/Speed had the best formula, the races closer to the U.S. or in the U.S. were on Fox and the rest were on speed. But just like ALMS which does ABC tape-delay races and then live races on ESPN3 (internet based channel that you must go through television provider to watch). I just think FOM should follow other motorsports and allow being broadcast in more viable channels instead of making people go out and get premium package and pay 20-30 dollars more to watch races. Sadly I will probably on get to see 5 races.

  8. Some good news from New Jersey (I guess Sandy put their activities a bit on the backfoot), I hope they really bring this event to us, even if it needs more than 20 races (how to fit that into my life).

  9. If they want recognition, they should probably stop badging their world championship winning engine as an Infiniti.

  10. WilliamB (@william-brierty)
    8th March 2013, 9:36

    I’m sorry but what is Renault wanting? They’ve built the best engine in F1, and as result their brand has been associated with the rise of Vettel and Red Bull. What more is there? Their own aftershave range, like Ferrari?

    1. @william-brierty

      They are probably just annoyed that Mercedes get recognition of Mclaren wins because Mclaren-Mercedes is a familiar F1 phrase, whereas nobody really says RedBull-Renault, instead they would say RedBull Racing or just RedBull.

      1. WilliamB (@william-brierty)
        9th March 2013, 13:59

        …and now with Lotus instead of Renault.

  11. Okay Renault, sure, we’ll give you more recognition. Do you want us to bring up your alternators while we’re at it?

    1. Funny how Renault are begging for a bite of RedBull’s cake, especially when the Champions’ weakest spot was exactly the Renault alternator.

    2. @klaas, @ninjenius – Magneti Marelli alternators. But yes, the engine was the weak link in the chain last year it appeared for Red Bull!

  12. luchingador
    8th March 2013, 12:38

    i think red bull could win even with a cosworth engine, so…..

  13. I do not care if Maldonado is a pay driver or not, as he is as fast as the best of them. – Also with regards to Chavez paying, good! the country needs some uplifting – their star junior drivers have no where near as much opportunities as rich middle class kids from England and to have one of them in F1 is great. good on him for being payed his way into f1, i could understand the uproar over payed drivers from England and Europe, but lets give South America a chance. it is hard enough as it is to get into f1, Maldonado is a talent and deserves to be in f1 no matter which way he came in. if he wasnt in f1 now, there would be other people crying about how he is unlucky to not be in f1 because of lack of sponsorship or whatever other reason. He has proved enough to show he deserves his seat in f1, and especially in a top f1 team.

  14. “”The name ‘Hermann Tilke’ is indeed holy in the world of motorsports.” Riiight…”

    If you define holy as “despised”, then you’re about right The Nation!

  15. Renualt will forever have the honour as the team that ended Schumacher/Ferrari winning spree. They should have continued from there as a proper team, then they would have held onto that recognition.

    1. @ivano You’re right, but Renault is actually lucky that RBR are still using their engines – I remember the season where the Renault engine failed RB every now and then and RB almost disgarded them. Renault also had to get a dispense to change some of the construction to make the engine reliable despite the engine spec freeze, otherwise they would have been out of the engine market. The problem about marketing of Renault is mainly – as others have pointed out – that the average owner of a Renault roadcar must have a fantastic imagination to be able to feel the F1 heritage when driving his Renault.

  16. Renault are the worst engine on the grid. Even Cosworth are better. Red bulls ignorance of the RRA and literal bending of the rules are the only reason we remember the Renault name. Oh and the blatant cheating.

Jump to comment page: 1 2

Leave a Reply

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

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.