Jump to content


Photo

Does Honda regret now?


  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

#1 qvn

qvn
  • Member

  • 765 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 29 March 2009 - 14:47

If I were them, I do. They should have been a bit more patient.

Advertisement

#2 Earthling

Earthling
  • Member

  • 3,483 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 29 March 2009 - 14:50

Look at it this way, would they have had more income from winning and exposure globally as opposed to quitting and saving a few hundred million $?

Remember that Honda ran with no sponsors as plan of their Earth Dreams project...

#3 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,117 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 29 March 2009 - 14:51

Who cares

#4 Jedi_F1

Jedi_F1
  • Member

  • 747 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 29 March 2009 - 14:54

40% no => still saved them a lot of money,.... money every carmaker needs in these times... but if there was a Honda engine in the back, would JB have scored a win?

60% yes=> missed chances to win again, to make huge publicity for Honda, ect.... and there will be a bit of 'happy for the Brawn GP, but it's a shame it's not with a Honda engine in the back'!

#5 Arion

Arion
  • Member

  • 2,353 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 29 March 2009 - 14:59

I imagine those executives at Honda have other more important things to worry about than F1. It's not like one model of their cars need to be recalled.

#6 Apollonius

Apollonius
  • Member

  • 601 posts
  • Joined: October 06

Posted 29 March 2009 - 15:05

Why would Honda regret anything? If Honda were still involved the team would not have one today simply because of the poor Honda engine.

#7 Monad

Monad
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 29 March 2009 - 15:08

Originally posted by Arion
I imagine those executives at Honda have other more important things to worry about than F1. It's not like one model of their cars need to be recalled.


Actually you are not completely right there. They believe that positive publicity from F1 brings them a mass profit in car sales. Why would they give so much millions otherwise.

Well the funny thing is what you hear sometimes. For example the commentator in my country said: "so we have the two Mercedes powered Brawns in the first places". And the Mercedes part was heard a little more strongly than the Brawn name actually. :rotfl:

#8 Arion

Arion
  • Member

  • 2,353 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 29 March 2009 - 15:18

Originally posted by Monad


Actually you are not completely right there. They believe that positive publicity from F1 brings them a mass profit in car sales. Why would they give so much millions otherwise.


maybe the boss who signed the cheques was a motor racing fanatic?

#9 peewit

peewit
  • New Member

  • 2 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 29 March 2009 - 15:33

Does anyone think that Honda failed as a team due to the Japanese style of management by committee that stifled individual flair, or was it down to the Honda engine. With Ross Brawn at the helm with a free hand they have had instant and well deserved success. Honda must be gutted. It makes you wonder if Toyota have the same problem with decisions by committee.

#10 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 8,301 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 29 March 2009 - 16:08

The Earth Dreams branding policy was their reason for the pull out. Had they run with decent sponsorship in 07-08 they may hav been able to justify another season, reap the rewards of its success and come out up instead of down. It must be absolutely gutting for the pro-f1 members of the board but at least they can take comfort in the knowledge they did the right thing hiring Ross Brawn.

#11 giltkid

giltkid
  • Member

  • 234 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 29 March 2009 - 16:17

Maybe in 20 years time we'll hear stories of the recently found Honda mechanic who got left behind after the last race of 2008 and still thinks Honda are in F1 ;)

#12 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,117 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 29 March 2009 - 16:20

It was mad to drop all sponsorship. WTF were they thinking ?

#13 BWL

BWL
  • Member

  • 276 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 29 March 2009 - 17:25

I would think that there has to be some regret after having poured so much money and effort into the project. Having said that I'm not entirely sure that we would have seen the same level of success in Australia with the Honda engine and Honda management in place.

I think Honda has many lessons to learn from this aborted adventure.

#14 Jack Burton

Jack Burton
  • Member

  • 400 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 29 March 2009 - 17:54

What I find ridiculous about the whole situation is that they brought in Brawn to specifically turn the team around, and decided very early last year to dedicate their considerable resources to being competitive in '09.

By all accounts the signs were good that strategy might pay off (and obviously has) and instead of going through with it they bailed out and thus wasted all of that money. It obviously wouldn't have cost them that much more money to start the season considering both what they have spend in the past and the fact that the team's management was able to arrange the buyout. Now Honda just look like fools.

I'd be willing to bet there will be some serious finger pointing going on in the Honda boardroom this week.

#15 Wouter

Wouter
  • Member

  • 5,778 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 29 March 2009 - 18:00

Originally posted by Apollonius
Why would Honda regret anything? If Honda were still involved the team would not have one today simply because of the poor Honda engine.

But isn't it exactly this perception that Honda should be worried about? That their engine is shit, and Mercedes is much better? Not great for their reputation.

And would Button have won with a Honda engine? Probably not as easily, but would the difference be that much as it has been talked up recently?

In any case, now it's very good publicity for Mercedes (which actually locked out the podium with their engines).

#16 revvin

revvin
  • New Member

  • 4 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 29 March 2009 - 18:08

Originally posted by Ali_G
It was mad to drop all sponsorship. WTF were they thinking ?


you assumed honda cares about sponsorship.

As for the boardroom, from the autosport article: http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/74071

"He also revealed that the Honda hierarchy in Tokyo had been in touch to pass on their good wishes to the team they put up for sale last winter.

"I had something before the race - they were very pleased," said Brawn."

#17 Apollonius

Apollonius
  • Member

  • 601 posts
  • Joined: October 06

Posted 29 March 2009 - 18:13

Originally posted by Wouter

But isn't it exactly this perception that Honda should be worried about? That their engine is shit, and Mercedes is much better? Not great for their reputation.

And would Button have won with a Honda engine? Probably not as easily, but would the difference be that much as it has been talked up recently?

In any case, now it's very good publicity for Mercedes (which actually locked out the podium with their engines).


To the man on the street, the casual F1 fan who makes up the bulk of those watching probably wouldn't even know about the alleged 80hp difference between the Merc and the Honda engine, just as the average fan doesn't know that a Merc engine isn't really a merc engine - it's a badged Ilmor (despite the buyout). So it probably wouldn't have damaged Honda's reputation at all.

What does damage reputations is posting record losses, laying people off at the plants but still continuing to splurge money on F1.
Even that pales in comparison to the influence of share holders, true $500M a year for F1 is a drop in the ocean to Honda but when Honda have to tell share holders that they wont be getting there dividends this year because of losses that $500M (or whatever the exact amount is) starts looking like an awfully large sum of money.

Honda had no choice but to ditch F1, as F1 fans we may not like it but that's how it is.

#18 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,117 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 29 March 2009 - 18:35

Originally posted by revvin


you assumed honda cares about sponsorship.


Err. they pulled out due to the cost yet sponsorship would have offset part of the cost.

This isn't rocket science.

#19 BrawnsBrain

BrawnsBrain
  • Member

  • 201 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 29 March 2009 - 18:57

The future isn't certain and you have to stop at some point.

I think that's pretty much it, no further explanation or regret needed.

Advertisement

#20 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 8,102 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 29 March 2009 - 19:03

The 'Japanese model' is being blamed, and possibly to an extent that is correct, however it is hardly the whole reason / story. When BAR entered F1 they were were smug, very arrogant and very unsuccessful. Even though hidden behind the BAR moniker, then everyone knew that BAR was Honda's project, so from the moment that BAR bought Tyrrel, until Honda sold to Brawn is the tenure of Honda in F1 this time.

Money and use of money in the amounts that Honda have gone through with basically zero success is NOT a drop in the water, we are talking in excess of Usd 3 billion, possibly in excess of Usd 4 billion. The failure of Honda, and so far Toyota as well is that the board room interfere and measure success in other parameters than mere success while racing.

F1 is about racing, money is nice, and a lot can be done with a lot of money, however money alone will never buy success, and poor management will most times be a detriment to racing success.

Renault have had pretty good success with a relatively modest or conservative budget, their race team is being run as a real race team, and apart from confirming that Renault will remain in F1, the boardroom does not interfere with the running of the team.

BMW bought a team and placed the BMW effort in Switzerland, and is being run by Dr. Mario, there are no indications that the BMW boardroom is interfering in any way with BMW Sauber.

Honda have been staggeringly inept in running a F1 team, and they should regret big time that they now see all which was intended with the hirering og Ross Brawn, coming through in thee first season where he could possibly have an impact, and Honda is mentioned only as the bumbling fools who left at the wrong time.

For all intents and purposes, Ross Brawn was gifted a winning F1 team by Honda, if running a F1 team is only seen as an expense, then you are not selling your involvement very well.

:cool:

#21 330R

330R
  • Member

  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 29 March 2009 - 19:35

Originally posted by KWSN - DSM
The 'Japanese model' is being blamed, and possibly to an extent that is correct, however it is hardly the whole reason / story. When BAR entered F1 they were were smug, very arrogant and very unsuccessful. Even though hidden behind the BAR moniker, then everyone knew that BAR was Honda's project, so from the moment that BAR bought Tyrrel, until Honda sold to Brawn is the tenure of Honda in F1 this time.

Money and use of money in the amounts that Honda have gone through with basically zero success is NOT a drop in the water, we are talking in excess of Usd 3 billion, possibly in excess of Usd 4 billion. The failure of Honda, and so far Toyota as well is that the board room interfere and measure success in other parameters than mere success while racing.


BAR had no Honda involvement in their first year, when BAR used Supertech engines. Honda supplied engines to both BAR and Jordan in 2000-2002, wanted to buy/buy into one of those two teams, initially went after Jordan but Eddie Jordan didn't want to sell. Honda bought into BAR and became more than just engine supplier. BAR didn't start to become Honda's project until after Jordan was out of the picture.

I don't know if I'd call 19 podiums and one victory basically zero success, but it wasn't the ultimate goal, either. It's a waste of money if nothing was gained from the program, and I wouldn't be quick to say that nothing was gained. Engineering, competition and marketing efforts were exercised, which is why teams go racing in F1.

#22 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 8,301 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 29 March 2009 - 19:42

Originally posted by Apollonius
Why would Honda regret anything? If Honda were still involved the team would not have one today simply because of the poor Honda engine.


It was the poor Honda aero, not engine that they were so bad the last two years. Jenson and Rubens were 6k down in the speed traps today with the fastest car. Just look at the McLaren with what is presumably a slightly better spec engine.

#23 pongkai

pongkai
  • Member

  • 279 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 29 March 2009 - 19:57

If you knew anything about Honda you would know that they do not stifle individual flair. There are books you can read on this.

As to the engine, I don't believe that using a Honda engine would lose them their .6 second (or whatever) advantage. Maybe a couple tenths if that. They would also have had a fancy KERS system. In any case the car would still be the fastest in the field.

And do they regret pulling out? I would certainly think so. I also think they regretted it the instant they did it. But somehow they thought they didn't have any other option.

Originally posted by peewit
Does anyone think that Honda failed as a team due to the Japanese style of management by committee that stifled individual flair, or was it down to the Honda engine. With Ross Brawn at the helm with a free hand they have had instant and well deserved success. Honda must be gutted. It makes you wonder if Toyota have the same problem with decisions by committee.



#24 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,117 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 29 March 2009 - 20:15

Originally posted by 330R


BAR had no Honda involvement in their first year, when BAR used Supertech engines. Honda supplied engines to both BAR and Jordan in 2000-2002, wanted to buy/buy into one of those two teams, initially went after Jordan but Eddie Jordan didn't want to sell. Honda bought into BAR and became more than just engine supplier. BAR didn't start to become Honda's project until after Jordan was out of the picture.

I don't know if I'd call 19 podiums and one victory basically zero success, but it wasn't the ultimate goal, either. It's a waste of money if nothing was gained from the program, and I wouldn't be quick to say that nothing was gained. Engineering, competition and marketing efforts were exercised, which is why teams go racing in F1.


Honda started to supply Jordan with engines in 2001. Jordan ran with Mugen Honda engines in 2000.

#25 330R

330R
  • Member

  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 29 March 2009 - 21:05

^ Yes, thanks for the correction.

#26 John B

John B
  • Member

  • 6,284 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 29 March 2009 - 23:09

My thought all weekend was this was an exclamation point on what had to be one of F1's most disapointing runs. As mentioned above Honda had a few moments, but based on expectations in 2000 with BAR and Jordan, and their past history of dominance it was overall a huge letdown. Then the spinoff team with a Mercedes goes 1-2 in their first qualifying and race as an independent group.

#27 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,212 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 29 March 2009 - 23:37

Honda kept the team alive after they decided to sell it. Without that, there would be no BGP. It appeared that they changed management style specifically with the arrival of Ross Brawn. I'd imagine they learned a thing or two from it. Sometimes it takes a considerable amount of money to learn. Regretful for Honda it is, IMO if they didn't learn from all of this.

The man having more reasons to regret IMO is Prodrive's David Richards. BGP is all what his team should have been. They had the entry, the engines, McLaren support.

#28 alexbiker

alexbiker
  • Member

  • 583 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 29 March 2009 - 23:54

The real question is: How smug are Mercedes right now?

Two teams in history have had a debut 1-2 - both driven by Merc engines.

Now, can the alpha geek of the Atlas F1 forums answer this: Apart from the Cosworth DFV, has there ever been an engine 1-2-3 before?

#29 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,097 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 30 March 2009 - 00:04

Honda invited Brawn to bring the team up to scratch. its likely he's done that.

Honda's President changed with their loss of profits announced a few months ago. The new President chopped the F1 program.

From a financial viewpoint, there is now a high opportunity cost from not having a winning F1 team. Honda, the biggest manufacturer of petrolium engines in the world, just gave the first GP win to Mercedes, instead of themselves (presuming the Honda F1 engine is as good as the Mercedes plant which does seem unlikely).

On a micro level - a business tactical level - the President made a big mistake. But the probability of the team being able to win was very small, and there were several broader corporate strategic issues that made the sale of the team sensible.

There is also controversy - perhaps Honda did not want to be associated with an aggressive interpretation of the rules, which is what Brawn is following? Toyota turned up at Melbourne with an alternative rear diffuser arrangement (they did not use it) . If Honda had still been steering the Brawn led effort, they'd also have had to bring with them to Melbourne an alternative diffuser arrangement like Toyota did - just in case the Stewards rejected the controversial diffuser arrangement. The fact that Brawn did not bring an alternative diffuser arrangement shows how free a team can be when the multi-super national's Honda's corporate restrictions don't have to be worried about.

IMO however Honda would have been smart to have kept the naming rights to the engine which the team used. Then the Honda name might still have been able to draw some positive publicity from their F1 campaign. Honda sold an SUV in the USA and other places, that was made by Izuzu. Why not label the MB engine Brawn is using with a Honda sticker? That MB can now get the credit, seems to be a bit of a mistake on Honda's part IMO.

#30 Rob G

Rob G
  • Member

  • 10,890 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 30 March 2009 - 00:16

Originally posted by alexbiker
Now, can the alpha geek of the Atlas F1 forums answer this: Apart from the Cosworth DFV, has there ever been an engine 1-2-3 before?

I'm not the alpha geek, but it's been done many times, just not in a debut. Alfa Romeo, Mercedes-Benz (including a 1-2-3-4), Maserati, Ferrari and Climax all accomplished that feat in the '50s and early '60s. Honda did it twice in 1987 (one was a 1-2-3-4) and twice in 1988. Not sure if it's been done since then.

#31 330R

330R
  • Member

  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 30 March 2009 - 00:35

Originally posted by Melbourne Park
Honda's President changed with their loss of profits announced a few months ago. The new President chopped the F1 program.


Honda's withdrawal from F1 was announced on December 5, 2008 by President & CEO Takeo Fukui.

http://world.honda.c...81205Formula-1/

The announcement of Fukui's successor was made February 23, 2009. Takanobu Ito will assume his new role as President & CEO in late June 2009.

http://world.honda.c...-President-CEO/

Fukui stepping down as CEO shouldn't be seen as tied to the global economic downturn. Honda periodically renews its management when elders get close to retirement. Those changes are always announced in the 4th week of February. As in Fukui's case, executives and directors usually take an advisor role for a period before retiring from the company. Fukui's predecessor Yoshino did the same. Yoshino was 63 when he stepped down from President & CEO. Fukui is 64. With this transition in June, Yoshino will finally be retiring from the company.

#32 tonic

tonic
  • Member

  • 48 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 30 March 2009 - 00:55

I think if Honda instead of Brawn to remain. the Diffuser row outcome would have been negative. I think the diffuser row result has more to do with Brawn as a privateer then legality of it. Honda see the writing on the wall.

#33 EvilPhil II

EvilPhil II
  • Member

  • 530 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 30 March 2009 - 01:10

Originally posted by alexbiker
Now, can the alpha geek of the Atlas F1 forums answer this: Apart from the Cosworth DFV, has there ever been an engine 1-2-3 before?


1995 Brazilian GP Round 1

Qualifying
Pos No Driver Constructor Time Gap
1 5 Damon Hill Williams-Renault 1:20.081
2 1 Michael Schumacher Benetton-Renault 1:20.382 +0.301
3 6 David Coulthard Williams-Renault 1:20.422 +0.341
4 2 Johnny Herbert Benetton-Renault 1:20.888 +0.807

1995 French GP
Race
Pos No Driver Constructor
1 1 Michael Schumacher Benetton-Renault
2 5 Damon Hill Williams-Renault
3 6 David Coulthard Williams-Renault

1995 Portuguese Grand Prix
Race
Pos No Driver Constructor
1 6 David Coulthard Williams-Renault
2 1 Michael Schumacher Benetton-Renault
3 5 Damon Hill Williams-Renault

1995 Pacific Grand Prix
Race
Pos No Driver Constructor
1 1 Michael Schumacher Benetton-Renault
2 6 David Coulthard Williams-Renault
3 5 Damon Hill Williams-Renault

1995 Drivers' Championship standings
Pos Driver Constructors Points
1 Michael Schumacher Benetton-Renault 102
2 Damon Hill Williams-Renault 69
3 David Coulthard Williams-Renault 49
4 Johnny Herbert Benetton-Renault 45

1995 Constructors' Championship standings
Pos Constructor Points
1 Benetton-Renault 137
2 Williams-Renault 112

1996 Argentine Grand Prix
Race
Pos No Driver Constructor
1 5 Damon Hill Williams-Renault
2 6 Jacques Villeneuve Williams-Renault
3 3 Jean Alesi Benetton-Renault

#34 vmk

vmk
  • Member

  • 187 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 30 March 2009 - 01:25

Originally posted by Melbourne Park


IMO however Honda would have been smart to have kept the naming rights to the engine which the team used. Then the Honda name might still have been able to draw some positive publicity from their F1 campaign. Honda sold an SUV in the USA and other places, that was made by Izuzu. Why not label the MB engine Brawn is using with a Honda sticker? That MB can now get the credit, seems to be a bit of a mistake on Honda's part IMO.


I don't think Benz would have agreed to re-badge their engine a HONDA or any other manufacturer.

#35 Crazy Canuck

Crazy Canuck
  • Member

  • 2,517 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 30 March 2009 - 01:29

honda execs look like short sited idiots. they would have made their investment back today!

CC

#36 Zdeus

Zdeus
  • Member

  • 309 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 30 March 2009 - 02:16

I'll give you my very naive analogy to the situation.

You buy a particular stock for 5 years, every year and dump it weeks before it quadruples based on all the right decisions that were taken in the last year , which you are very well aware of.

I would kick myself no end in such a situation...

In my opinion, at-least some % of the Honda board would be going through this exact feeling...

But that's just my view...

#37 stevewf1

stevewf1
  • Member

  • 3,259 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 30 March 2009 - 02:41

: Some here make it sound like F1 success would somehow save an entire car company...

#38 SB

SB
  • Member

  • 1,789 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 30 March 2009 - 02:41

Originally posted by alexbiker
Apart from the Cosworth DFV, has there ever been an
engine 1-2-3 before?


Honda 1-2-3-4 in Silverstone, 1987 ...

#39 RiDE

RiDE
  • Member

  • 1,026 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 30 March 2009 - 04:15

Originally posted by stevewf1
: Some here make it sound like F1 success would somehow save an entire car company...


Not to mention that Honda just cancelled the upcoming cars that F1 fans might have the slightest interest in.

Advertisement

#40 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,097 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 30 March 2009 - 05:12

Originally posted by 330R


Honda's withdrawal from F1 was announced on December 5, 2008 by President & CEO Takeo Fukui.

http://world.honda.c...81205Formula-1/

The announcement of Fukui's successor was made February 23, 2009. Takanobu Ito will assume his new role as President & CEO in late June 2009.

http://world.honda.c...-President-CEO/

Fukui stepping down as CEO shouldn't be seen as tied to the global economic downturn. Honda periodically renews its management when elders get close to retirement. Those changes are always announced in the 4th week of February. As in Fukui's case, executives and directors usually take an advisor role for a period before retiring from the company. Fukui's predecessor Yoshino did the same. Yoshino was 63 when he stepped down from President & CEO. Fukui is 64. With this transition in June, Yoshino will finally be retiring from the company.


Thanks for the post.

I think that the previous President was pro F1. He became President in 2003, and in 2004 changes to BAR-Honda were well under way, including a contemporay engine, and some stars such as Willis. Within a short time Honda had got rid of BAR too and owned the F1 operation outright.

One might think it coincidence - but its typical of new leaders to make their mark. I think the evidence is plain that Fukio was pro-F1 - while he may have announced the team's withdrawel, he knew what was going on in the group IMO.

One cannot blaim him for quitting F1 - its the new bosses fault without a doubt. It may not seem so on the surface, but its clear to me - and I think to you also? You don't shut down a big and pretigious operation, in a company like Honda which proclaims a racing heritage, against the wishes of the forthcoming President.

#41 slideways

slideways
  • Member

  • 3,241 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 30 March 2009 - 06:23

Do you have any evidence this time MP or is this just more 'without a doubt' speculation from you?

#42 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,097 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 30 March 2009 - 06:55

Originally posted by slideways
Do you have any evidence this time MP or is this just more 'without a doubt' speculation from you?


Its not possible that a major change in marketing strategy would be performed by an outgoing President. Further to that fact, as said before, the retiring President was the leader of Honda that spent a fortune on F1. It's obvious the new President was changing strategy - or do you disagree?

#43 muramasa

muramasa
  • Member

  • 2,994 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 30 March 2009 - 07:18

Originally posted by Arion
I imagine those executives at Honda have other more important things to worry about than F1.


that pretty much sums up everything. regret? yes. but no bitter feelings or finger pointings (lol). how one can overlook the fact that Honda did everything they can to help BGP's survival is beyond me.
maybe wanting to laugh at others is the human nature. but better acquire some literacy to gain/understand infos before pathetically lol'ing at them.
Honda's F1 cost was said to be around $400m. 2009 fiscal net revenue ending Mar 2009 is estimated to be around $1500m (but latter half of the year is big loss). F1 for Honda is hardly a drop in the ocean. plus outlook for the next few years is nothing but grim. it was so shame and regretfull, but they are car maufacturer in the first place, they need not only to survive but also strengthen its core business. the economic is changing rapidly, circumstances/availability of resources (both oil and materials) is changing rapidly. significant shift of technology is needed. they ditched/postponed some sport type car projects, and i'm fully for it. sport cars concept is appealing, but oldfashioned/outdated model and will be the thing of the past in not so distant future.
they have clear vision. this F1 withdrawal is to shift and focus their resource to new technologies, with a span of 5 years, 10 years or more, not just a few years.
their F1 operatoin since 2000 was nothing but a disaster and deserves criticism/laughter. but no one can hardly blame withdrawal. again they are car manufacturer. but Honda is the one that invested heavily on 2009 car from very early on and facilities over years, and helped BGP survival alot.
it's very shame that they didnt reap the reward themselves... but if they care about such things as "face saving" as some people enjoy and love to see it, dont forget they could cut the tree and burn it very easily if they didnt want others to harvest.

#44 slideways

slideways
  • Member

  • 3,241 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 30 March 2009 - 08:23

Originally posted by Melbourne Park


Its not possible that a major change in marketing strategy would be performed by an outgoing President. Further to that fact, as said before, the retiring President was the leader of Honda that spent a fortune on F1. It's obvious the new President was changing strategy - or do you disagree?


So I'll take that as a no.

#45 taran

taran
  • Member

  • 1,751 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 30 March 2009 - 10:32

Originally posted by Tenmantaylor
The Earth Dreams branding policy was their reason for the pull out. Had they run with decent sponsorship in 07-08 they may hav been able to justify another season, reap the rewards of its success and come out up instead of down. It must be absolutely gutting for the pro-f1 members of the board but at least they can take comfort in the knowledge they did the right thing hiring Ross Brawn.


As I understood it, the Earth Dreams branding scheme was not to run without sponsorship.

Allegedly, Fry was unable to find another title sponsor after Lucky Strike withdrew (even though he had years to find one as the tobacco departure was well known). They then came up with the Earth Dreams scheme as the car's livery and umbrella scheme. Sponsors would still pay the team but just not appear on the car. Instead, they would be listed under the scheme and get the usual promo returns.

The scheme simply didn't work as advertised (pun intended ;) ) and there were no big or mid-size sponsors willing to fork over money without getting room on the car. In the end, Honda was forced to pick up all the tabs while some minor sponsorships existed (see the old Honda F1 website listing of the 'partners'). After the poor 2007 season, there were no sponsors for 2008 and the scheme had to continue with Honda still picking up the tab.

#46 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,212 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 30 March 2009 - 11:57

Originally posted by RiDE


Not to mention that Honda just cancelled the upcoming cars that F1 fans might have the slightest interest in.

According to Sergio Marchionne the entire production of cars worldwide amounts to 94 Million a year, and about 30 Million of them are superflous...

Links to that interview is German

Fiat-Sanierer Sergio Marchionne liest der Autobranche die Leviten

He thinks that only 5-6 car makers will survive the current crisis and calls on governments to stop supporting auto makers as they produce way to much, but it's unsustainable.

So maybe Honda consolidating themselves early is a smart move.

#47 ZenSpeed

ZenSpeed
  • Member

  • 1,192 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 14 May 2009 - 01:31

Self explanatory. You invested hundreds and hundreds of millions and only obtained one win. You focused on ludicrous environmental campaigns with a car looking like a planet but racing like a pig. Finally, you hire the most successful strategist manager of the last 20 years, you decide the current season (2008) is a lost battle and decide to start on the following campaign 6 months ahead of everyone else, equipped as much money as you need. Than the recession hits, you panic (while Toyota keeps it cool), sell the team and the team finally is a winner and in a big way.

Ther only one getting any recognition is Ross Brawn. This must be the marketing debacle of the century. If I were Honda's CEO, I would probably consider self castration or a similar punishment

Edited by ZenSpeed, 14 May 2009 - 01:33.


#48 Knot

Knot
  • Member

  • 375 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 14 May 2009 - 01:35

I'd feel regretful, but far from stupid. Honda's sales are down 30+% with no recovery in sight. Honda was footing the $400M/year bill for their F1 effort, a bad expenditure in a global recession.

#49 ZenSpeed

ZenSpeed
  • Member

  • 1,192 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 14 May 2009 - 01:45

I'd feel regretful, but far from stupid. Honda's sales are down 30+% with no recovery in sight. Honda was footing the $400M/year bill for their F1 effort, a bad expenditure in a global recession.


If you are Honda, should your focus be on the next 12 months or long term????

#50 rayyu882

rayyu882
  • Member

  • 432 posts
  • Joined: May 00

Posted 14 May 2009 - 02:08

If I'm Honda's CEO, I will feel good that Honda is out of F1. Even with the current success of Brawn GP isn't going to help the company to sell 35% more cars ever month!