Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Caterham F1 - 2014


  • Please log in to reply
1098 replies to this topic

#1051 givemeabettercar

givemeabettercar
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: August 14

Posted 27 October 2014 - 22:14

Not that anyone expected anything different, Kamui has issued a statement that he won't drive the next two GP:s...:

 

“Unfortunately, due to team’s situation, I will not able to race in United States GP and Brazilian GP. I am very sorry for the fans looking forward those races. While I am carefully observing the situation, I will evaluate possibilities and make best choice for my future.”

 

I've also read that Marcus hasn't heard a single word from anyone at Caterham since the situation escalated.

 

So this should be it for him in F1 ):

Even though he deserved a chance in a better car he still had a very solid career, 125 points, a home podium and usually getting the better of his teammates is nothing to be sniffed at.



Advertisement

#1052 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 1,180 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 27 October 2014 - 23:07

Fernandes did to Caterham what's he's been doing to QPR. He has no clue how to run a sports team. You can't keep your staff costs continually higher than the money you are bringing in. That his staff costs were as high as the research costs says it all about how Caterham were never improving. He was paying people an awful lot of money not to do very much. 

 

Caterham had money, but it was being spent in all the wrong areas. Areas they weren't going to get the money back in. Fernandes is to blame for this IMO, he started the chain that led to where the team is now. He sold a team that was in terrible shape, a shape that no one would have been able to bring it back from unless you were a multi billionaire willing to spend spend spend and write off all the debt Fernandes seems certain he never left.

 

But it was his money. Fernandes pumped as much of his own money into the venture and when it wasn't enough he tried to find a buyer to continue the team rather than just closing everything down and walking away. Sadly, the buyer that he found just wanted to run up more debt and play at running a team.



#1053 Laura23

Laura23
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 27 October 2014 - 23:33

But it was his money. Fernandes pumped as much of his own money into the venture and when it wasn't enough he tried to find a buyer to continue the team rather than just closing everything down and walking away. Sadly, the buyer that he found just wanted to run up more debt and play at running a team.

He never put the money in the right places and he and people telling him that in 2010. He never listened though and so the debt spiralled as the staff costs kept going up. He just doesn't have a clue how to run a sports team as a business. That kind of tactic can work in the airline industry, it doesn't in F1 or football. Fernandes came into F1 expecting a fast buck for his efforts and got a huge shock that it doesn't work like that. Martin Brundle even said Fernandes was just using F1 as stepping stone but ended up achieving nothing. He didn't give a toss about the sport, just like he doesn't really give a toss about football. That's the problem with sport these days, there's too many people who enter it just wanting to make money with no passion for the sport they enter itself. I'm very happy Fernandes has left F1, it doesn't need him.



#1054 taran

taran
  • Member

  • 1,815 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 28 October 2014 - 09:23

He never put the money in the right places and he and people telling him that in 2010. He never listened though and so the debt spiralled as the staff costs kept going up. He just doesn't have a clue how to run a sports team as a business. That kind of tactic can work in the airline industry, it doesn't in F1 or football. Fernandes came into F1 expecting a fast buck for his efforts and got a huge shock that it doesn't work like that. Martin Brundle even said Fernandes was just using F1 as stepping stone but ended up achieving nothing. He didn't give a toss about the sport, just like he doesn't really give a toss about football. That's the problem with sport these days, there's too many people who enter it just wanting to make money with no passion for the sport they enter itself. I'm very happy Fernandes has left F1, it doesn't need him.

 

So out of curiosity, what have you put in the sport? If you are going to diss a guy who spent millions creating a team, hiring staff (and apparantly paying them very well until the end) and running it for multiple seasons, please tell us what your contribution is?

 

Just so we can decide if F1 needs you.



#1055 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 1,590 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:03

But it was his money. Fernandes pumped as much of his own money into the venture and when it wasn't enough he tried to find a buyer to continue the team rather than just closing everything down and walking away. Sadly, the buyer that he found just wanted to run up more debt and play at running a team.

 

Well, he did walk away as he left the team with great debts.



#1056 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 1,180 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:06

Well, he did walk away as he left the team with great debts.

 

No, he found a buyer.



#1057 alfa1

alfa1
  • Member

  • 1,846 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:41

So out of curiosity, what have you put in the sport? .. please tell us what your contribution is?

 

 

So just remind me again, what is the old "not allowed to have an opinion on art unless you're an expert artist" fallacy formally known as?



#1058 taran

taran
  • Member

  • 1,815 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:56

So just remind me again, what is the old "not allowed to have an opinion on art unless you're an expert artist" fallacy formally known as?

 

Sure, we can all debate if Fernandez spent his money wisely. Or if his team was badly run. That's what forums do best.

You can even say you don't give a toss about Lotus/Caterham.

But a blanket statement that F1 doesn't need him when he put a team on the grid for 4+ years makes me wonder what that particular poster has contributed......



#1059 ForeverF1

ForeverF1
  • RC Forum Host

  • 6,577 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:57

So just remind me again, what is the old "not allowed to have an opinion on art unless you're an expert artist" fallacy formally known as?

I would tender Ideocity.



Advertisement

#1060 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 28 October 2014 - 11:18

So just remind me again, what is the old "not allowed to have an opinion on art unless you're an expert artist" fallacy formally known as?

 

The Dibdin Effect.  After the driving instructor on Fist Of Fun.  "What do you know about the Highway Code?  You can't even drive!"


Edited by ensign14, 28 October 2014 - 11:19.


#1061 GhostR

GhostR
  • Member

  • 2,704 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 28 October 2014 - 11:21

No, he found a buyer.

 

He found a "buyer" but he didn't do due diligence on that buyer, and it looks like he sold off pieces of "Caterham F1" piecemeal which has no doubt contributed to the mess. He never relinquished the shares for 1MRT as he claims the buyer of 1MRT had not fulfilled the terms of the sale (which is now backed up in court by the buyer of the supply half of the team). Nevertheless, he allowed the buyers of 1MRT to take over full running of the team and for those buyers to operate it in such a way that the entire chain of businesses has collapsed. All while still being a share holder.

 

In my mind, Fernandes is at least as culpable for this mess as the new buyers are. His failing being running up the debts in the first place, and then abandoning the team completely to a new buyer who failed to complete the purchase. He shirked his responsibilities as a major share holder.



#1062 DamonHillOfBeans

DamonHillOfBeans
  • New Member

  • 8 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 28 October 2014 - 11:30

My impression of Fernandes is that he was a rich man playing at F1. Sure it may have been a genuine passion at one time, but he treated the sport with contempt. He, or someone working for him, apparently set up all manner of Byzantine company structures, then got bored. Once the going got tough and Marussia scored that point, he simply walked away caring little for the mess he left behind. 



#1063 ForeverF1

ForeverF1
  • RC Forum Host

  • 6,577 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 28 October 2014 - 11:38

The Dibdin Effect.  After the driving instructor on Fist Of Fun.  "What do you know about the Highway Code?  You can't even drive!"

Thanks for that, brightened up an otherwise dull Tuesday morning. :)



#1064 Mohican

Mohican
  • Member

  • 837 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 28 October 2014 - 12:19

How anybody here can defend Fernandes is strange.

 

It was never his money, it was funds provided by sponsors - or possibly by shareholders in Air Asia, if it is true that the Airbus/GE sponsorship was dependent on deals made by the airline.

The ironic thing  is that Fernandes was probably never as wealthy as he liked to appear. I have seen rumours on the internet that he is a front man for a larger group of Malaysian investors, who may or may not have called time on things.

Either way, he probably accepted financial support from his drivers as well as his team sponsors - and then just walked away from everything. Kobayashi & Ericsson must be furious.

 

Kolles & co tried to keep going; and the team was in fact much more efficiently run with them in charge. Whether they ever had the resources to keep going next year is doubtful, but secondary to the fact that Fernandes was incompetent and probably dishonest.



#1065 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 1,180 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 28 October 2014 - 12:22

He found a "buyer" but he didn't do due diligence on that buyer, and it looks like he sold off pieces of "Caterham F1" piecemeal which has no doubt contributed to the mess. He never relinquished the shares for 1MRT as he claims the buyer of 1MRT had not fulfilled the terms of the sale (which is now backed up in court by the buyer of the supply half of the team). Nevertheless, he allowed the buyers of 1MRT to take over full running of the team and for those buyers to operate it in such a way that the entire chain of businesses has collapsed. All while still being a share holder.

 

In my mind, Fernandes is at least as culpable for this mess as the new buyers are. His failing being running up the debts in the first place, and then abandoning the team completely to a new buyer who failed to complete the purchase. He shirked his responsibilities as a major share holder.

 

I disagree. He found a buyer. They turned out to be a poor shower, but the alternative would have been to close down. My take on it is that the whole sorry mess that resulted was purely down to the 'buyer' not honoring the agreement. It may well be that they didn't quite understand the terms of the agreement or it may be that they were simply trying to pull a fast one. If I owned a team that was in trouble and I wanted to get shot of it, I would not be holding onto the shares if everything I had asked for was fulfilled - that's just plain stupid.



#1066 Mohican

Mohican
  • Member

  • 837 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 28 October 2014 - 12:29

Only reason that Fernandes did not deliver the share certificates is of course that he had pledged them elsewhere as collateral for a loan; proceeds of which may have gone just about anywhere.

He may however have forgotten to mention that to the buyers.

 

I do not believe his explanations about concern for creditors and employees for a second. If that was the case, why did he not start by selling other assets such as the GP2 team ?

Do not forget that he actually STARTED his Moto2 team this year. And spent buckets of money, sourced from somewhere, at QPR.

 

The man appears incapable of managing anything at all.



#1067 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 1,590 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 28 October 2014 - 12:35

The buyer reportedly didn't want to offload all the debt from Fernandes. And he seems to have asked a lot of his investment back.



#1068 GhostR

GhostR
  • Member

  • 2,704 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 28 October 2014 - 12:51

I disagree. He found a buyer. They turned out to be a poor shower, but the alternative would have been to close down. My take on it is that the whole sorry mess that resulted was purely down to the 'buyer' not honoring the agreement. It may well be that they didn't quite understand the terms of the agreement or it may be that they were simply trying to pull a fast one. If I owned a team that was in trouble and I wanted to get shot of it, I would not be holding onto the shares if everything I had asked for was fulfilled - that's just plain stupid.

 

Your own argument indicts Fernandes. I would have more respect for him if he *had* shut down the team, rather than selling on to the first shady buyer and then divorcing himself of responsibility while still holding the shares. If he had enough concerns that he didn't release the shares, how could he justify handing the team over to the buyers and letting them run it even further into the ground? 

 

I'd also submit the woeful story of QPR, where he's running up massive debts and only got back into the Premiership after flouting the Financial Fair Play rules in the Championship. As far as I'm away, he's not paid the fines due tot he Championship and has no intention of doing so. I will not be surprised at all if QPR will also fall into a sorry state of financial mess and administration before the year is out, along with associated points penalties and rapid demotion. If the fines due for the FFP flouting last season aren't paid, and QPR gets relegated, they're most likely going to be refused entry into the Championship and be pushed down to Conference instead. Given their salary costs and the massive losses that team is facing yearly, that's a club that faces potential obliteration if it doesn't get sorted out. One thing is clear: they need to avoid relegation. And do it whilst bringing their costs down significantly.



#1069 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 1,180 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 28 October 2014 - 15:23

Your own argument indicts Fernandes. I would have more respect for him if he *had* shut down the team, rather than selling on to the first shady buyer and then divorcing himself of responsibility while still holding the shares. If he had enough concerns that he didn't release the shares, how could he justify handing the team over to the buyers and letting them run it even further into the ground? 

 

I'd also submit the woeful story of QPR, where he's running up massive debts and only got back into the Premiership after flouting the Financial Fair Play rules in the Championship. As far as I'm away, he's not paid the fines due tot he Championship and has no intention of doing so. I will not be surprised at all if QPR will also fall into a sorry state of financial mess and administration before the year is out, along with associated points penalties and rapid demotion. If the fines due for the FFP flouting last season aren't paid, and QPR gets relegated, they're most likely going to be refused entry into the Championship and be pushed down to Conference instead. Given their salary costs and the massive losses that team is facing yearly, that's a club that faces potential obliteration if it doesn't get sorted out. One thing is clear: they need to avoid relegation. And do it whilst bringing their costs down significantly.

 

Hey, I'm not trying to say that Fernandes is whiter than white or that his actions were all pure. However, I don't think the mess that occurred with Caterham, immediately before and then subsequent to Fernandes, departure can be attributed to him in any more than a small amount. If you pushed me to split the blame, I would say 5% Fernandes, 95% Engavest, Kolles and co. That's my take on it.



#1070 Nemo1965

Nemo1965
  • Member

  • 2,361 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 28 October 2014 - 16:26

Hey, I'm not trying to say that Fernandes is whiter than white or that his actions were all pure. However, I don't think the mess that occurred with Caterham, immediately before and then subsequent to Fernandes, departure can be attributed to him in any more than a small amount. If you pushed me to split the blame, I would say 5% Fernandes, 95% Engavest, Kolles and co. That's my take on it.

 

I think you or I or anyone not directly involved, do not know how Caterham worked financially, so IMHO there is no way of telling what share of the mess Fernandes is accountable for. You can say you have a gut-feeling, sure, but the situation of Caterham is so messy that even Joe Saward - who was a non-executive director of the team - between the lines admits he doesn't understand one damn of it.

 

Secondly: If you start a company, and you hire employees, from that moment on you are responsible for any promise that you make them. From all what I have gathered, from the press, from some contacts who have worked in F1 or are still connected to the sport, Fernandes has promised, in words or in actions, that he was serious about this F1 team. Either he was serious or was clueless - than he is accountable for it, in my world view, because he was putting the livelihood of 250 people on the gambling table. Or he was not serious, and was the middle man for other middle man earning millions in vague sponsorship-deals, putting the livelihood of 250 people on the gambling table.



#1071 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 798 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 28 October 2014 - 17:17

I think you or I or anyone not directly involved, do not know how Caterham worked financially, so IMHO there is no way of telling what share of the mess Fernandes is accountable for. You can say you have a gut-feeling, sure, but the situation of Caterham is so messy that even Joe Saward - who was a non-executive director of the team - between the lines admits he doesn't understand one damn of it.

 

I think Joe Saward is non-executive director of the roadcar side and isn't involved in the F1 team at all.

 

There is only one thing here that will show us which side is lying or is more at fault, that is the contract itself which should have delineated what debts existed and to whom, and who was liable for them.  I guess we will only see this if one side sues the other which it doesn't appear they will do.

My instinctive feeling is that both are at fault just about equally.  I don't buy into the Fernandes as the good-guy story and having read some of the interviews he's given both about F1 and football he seems not to understand either sport very well and its plausible he used Caterham F1 as a vehicle to raise funds through loans for his other enterprises too which the buyers were not aware of.  On the other hand Kolles can be pretty slippery when trying to keep a failing team going so...


Edited by Talisman, 28 October 2014 - 17:17.


#1072 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 1,180 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 28 October 2014 - 18:17

I think you or I or anyone not directly involved, do not know how Caterham worked financially, so IMHO there is no way of telling what share of the mess Fernandes is accountable for. You can say you have a gut-feeling, sure, but the situation of Caterham is so messy that even Joe Saward - who was a non-executive director of the team - between the lines admits he doesn't understand one damn of it.

 

Secondly: If you start a company, and you hire employees, from that moment on you are responsible for any promise that you make them. From all what I have gathered, from the press, from some contacts who have worked in F1 or are still connected to the sport, Fernandes has promised, in words or in actions, that he was serious about this F1 team. Either he was serious or was clueless - than he is accountable for it, in my world view, because he was putting the livelihood of 250 people on the gambling table. Or he was not serious, and was the middle man for other middle man earning millions in vague sponsorship-deals, putting the livelihood of 250 people on the gambling table.

 

All this may be true, but I was merely commenting on the situation at the time that Caterham was supposedly sold to Engavest and what subsequently followed. At the start of this period, I would suggest that TF had two options available - offload the operation or close it down. It may have been his actions that got them to that point, but that's not what I am commenting on. What I don't accept is the idea that the team subsequently reaching the state it is in now, from that point, is largely down to TF. My feeling is that the moment the sale deal (whatever it was) was signed then it was up to the new owners to try to make something of the team. The fact that it ended up the way it did is, in my opinion, largely down to them.



#1073 Anders Torp

Anders Torp
  • Member

  • 524 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 28 October 2014 - 18:18

... the situation of Caterham is so messy that even Joe Saward - who was a non-executive director of the team - between the lines admits he doesn't understand one damn of it.

That is not correct. Saward is (or maybe was) a non-exec director of Caterham's road car division, not the F1 team.

#1074 Mohican

Mohican
  • Member

  • 837 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 28 October 2014 - 18:31

All this may be true, but I was merely commenting on the situation at the time that Caterham was supposedly sold to Engavest and what subsequently followed. At the start of this period, I would suggest that TF had two options available - offload the operation or close it down. It may have been his actions that got them to that point, but that's not what I am commenting on. What I don't accept is the idea that the team subsequently reaching the state it is in now, from that point, is largely down to TF. My feeling is that the moment the sale deal (whatever it was) was signed then it was up to the new owners to try to make something of the team. The fact that it ended up the way it did is, in my opinion, largely down to them.


Always assuming that the sellers correctly represented assets & liabilities at the time of sale. Which may be a rather large assumption.
Do not trust Fernandes at all.

#1075 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 798 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 28 October 2014 - 18:42

Always assuming that the sellers correctly represented assets & liabilities at the time of sale. Which may be a rather large assumption.
Do not trust Fernandes at all.

 

In addition let us not forget that Fernandes announced he had absolutely nothing to do with Caterham F1 whatsoever a week after the sale whereas in reality he retained the shares all along and was therefore the defacto owner.



#1076 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 1,180 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 28 October 2014 - 20:44

Always assuming that the sellers correctly represented assets & liabilities at the time of sale. Which may be a rather large assumption.
Do not trust Fernandes at all.

 

Well, if he did then the buyers should have either spotted that at the time or soon after and either cancelled the sale (if before) or launched legal action. The fact that they did neither upholds by belief that they buyers either by their actions or by their negligence are the more responsible party.

 

Edit: Oh, and don't get me wrong, I'm sure Fernandes is just as big a crook as people think he is.


Edited by pdac, 28 October 2014 - 20:45.


#1077 frosty125

frosty125
  • Member

  • 58 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 28 October 2014 - 21:21

http://www.jamesalle...-one-team-boss/



#1078 Nemo1965

Nemo1965
  • Member

  • 2,361 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 28 October 2014 - 21:31

That is not correct. Saward is (or maybe was) a non-exec director of Caterham's road car division, not the F1 team.

 

Ah, thank you. I was misinformed. Still... he must have more chance for info than any of us...



#1079 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,919 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 28 October 2014 - 22:27

Formula needs a clean up operation urgently. Perfect choice.

 

In fact, he should be managing CVC.



Advertisement

#1080 Laura23

Laura23
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 28 October 2014 - 23:18

So out of curiosity, what have you put in the sport? If you are going to diss a guy who spent millions creating a team, hiring staff (and apparantly paying them very well until the end) and running it for multiple seasons, please tell us what your contribution is?

 

Just so we can decide if F1 needs you.

I haven't left a car company in tatters, hundreds of people to of a job and a team in millions of pounds worth of debt at least. I don't need to have worked in F1 to pass judgement on those who work in the sport. If one needed to have worked in F1 to comment on the failings of those in it then it'd be a very fanless sport. 

 

He may have been paying them well but they are said to have received late payments long before Fernandes sold them out, they also haven't been paid for Sep or Oct yet because there was no money left with which to pay them. The very fact Fernandes was paying them so much is the reason the team has collapsed today, it couldn't support it's own pay packet and research costs because Fernandes had no idea when to stop spending. You only have to take one look at QPR to understand what went wrong at Caterham. 



#1081 taran

taran
  • Member

  • 1,815 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 29 October 2014 - 10:08

I haven't left a car company in tatters, hundreds of people to of a job and a team in millions of pounds worth of debt at least. I don't need to have worked in F1 to pass judgement on those who work in the sport. If one needed to have worked in F1 to comment on the failings of those in it then it'd be a very fanless sport. 

 

He may have been paying them well but they are said to have received late payments long before Fernandes sold them out, they also haven't been paid for Sep or Oct yet because there was no money left with which to pay them. The very fact Fernandes was paying them so much is the reason the team has collapsed today, it couldn't support it's own pay packet and research costs because Fernandes had no idea when to stop spending. You only have to take one look at QPR to understand what went wrong at Caterham. 

 

Don't mean this to be a flame war or such but you haven't answered my question.

 

Just what have YOU brought to the sport? Why does F1 need you if apparently a team owner isn't required?

 

We're all commenting on F1, most of us without any personal involvement. But when you say that F1 doesn't need Fernandez, who brought a team into F1 and ran it for a couple of seasons, I'd like to know just what you bring to the table.



#1082 RA2

RA2
  • New Member

  • 25 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 29 October 2014 - 11:08

My understanding of the events from what was i the news for the last few months is;

 

 

1) Everything was sold by TF but did not transfer shares till some of the key creditors were paid off

 

2) Caterham sport held the majority of the debt

 

3) Caterham sport probably owned the cars and had close to 400 staff members

 

4) Kolles had no intention of running Caterham sport and wanted it to be liquidated

 

5) Car ownership, IP and other essentials for running the team was probably transferred from caterham sport to the another company CRF1

 

6) Kolles regretted not moving out of leafield on day one, but could not do so for some reason

 

7) TF on seeing the odd transfer of assets call on the EXIM bank which in tern go to court

 

8) as the shares were not transferred kolles had no option but to walk away



#1083 Donka

Donka
  • Member

  • 482 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 29 October 2014 - 15:20

My understanding of the events from what was i the news for the last few months is;

 

 

1) Everything was sold by TF but did not transfer shares till some of the key creditors were paid off

 

2) Caterham sport held the majority of the debt

 

3) Caterham sport probably owned the cars and had close to 400 staff members

 

4) Kolles had no intention of running Caterham sport and wanted it to be liquidated

 

5) Car ownership, IP and other essentials for running the team was probably transferred from caterham sport to the another company CRF1

 

6) Kolles regretted not moving out of leafield on day one, but could not do so for some reason

 

7) TF on seeing the odd transfer of assets call on the EXIM bank which in tern go to court

 

8) as the shares were not transferred kolles had no option but to walk away

I think that's pretty close except Caterham was already made up of separate entities, one which owned the F1 entry, and one that acted as a services company to the parent.  

 

I believe Kolles was after the entry and car IP for Forza Rossa, or to run Caterham from his own facility.  Therefore they tried to sign the Caterham staff to the parent company instead of CSL to continue running the car, and than let CSL go into foreclosure.  They were prepared to pay the suppliers and staff to continue running the team, but were not willing to pay off all the legacy debt racked up by Fernandes.  

 

The obvious question then becomes was it true or not what Kolles said more than a month ago that "they keep finding out about additional undisclosed debts".  If there is truth to that, then I can understand why they let CSL go into administration. 



#1084 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 10,372 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 29 October 2014 - 16:16

Don't mean this to be a flame war or such but you haven't answered my question.

 

Just what have YOU brought to the sport? Why does F1 need you if apparently a team owner isn't required?

 

We're all commenting on F1, most of us without any personal involvement. But when you say that F1 doesn't need Fernandez, who brought a team into F1 and ran it for a couple of seasons, I'd like to know just what you bring to the table.

 

Please take this to PM if you really must. We're not here to discuss each other.



#1085 femi

femi
  • Member

  • 6,406 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 29 October 2014 - 16:48

Finally someone sees the light but at a huge cost:

http://www.bloomberg...ng-f1-team.html

#1086 FredrikB

FredrikB
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: May 00

Posted 05 November 2014 - 16:55

Administrator expects Caterham to race in Abu Dhabi

 

http://in.reuters.co...N0SV6SW20141105



#1087 LORDBYRON

LORDBYRON
  • Member

  • 382 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 05 November 2014 - 17:06

Administrator expects Caterham to race in Abu Dhabi

 

http://in.reuters.co...N0SV6SW20141105

Them and marussia f1 have to race in Abu Dhabi as by not doing so meant there contract aka F1 licence would be void thus meaning the administrators have no assets   

 

Good chance we wont see them have more than one lap as all the reports ive read is they have no new parts for the cars 


Edited by LORDBYRON, 05 November 2014 - 17:07.


#1088 FredrikB

FredrikB
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: May 00

Posted 05 November 2014 - 17:50

Them and marussia f1 have to race in Abu Dhabi as by not doing so meant there contract aka F1 licence would be void thus meaning the administrators have no assets   

 

Good chance we wont see them have more than one lap as all the reports ive read is they have no new parts for the cars 

I guess that depends on how much the licence is really worth and the size of the debts.

As late as yesterday people close to the team did not know if they where going to race.

 

EDIT: And Ericsson himself had no idea this weekend if he was free to go to Sauber immediately or not. 


Edited by FredrikB, 05 November 2014 - 17:53.


#1089 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,892 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 05 November 2014 - 17:59

START and PARK comes to F1.

#1090 FredrikB

FredrikB
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: May 00

Posted 05 November 2014 - 18:34

START and PARK comes to F1.

Hope not.

If they do i would not be surprised to see them being punished for bringing the sport into disrepute and thrown out loosing their license.

They did get a break when they where allowed to be absent from USA and Brazil. I wouldn't push my luck if i where them...



#1091 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 1,180 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 05 November 2014 - 19:09

How much more does it cost to actually start the race - I mean do very little in the practice sessions, but ensure that you can get through the 107% rule to start be able to start the race - than just showing up? Just curious.



#1092 TF110

TF110
  • Member

  • 1,025 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 06 November 2014 - 03:16

START and PARK comes to F1.


Isnt that what they did in Russia for Kobayashi?

#1093 William Hunt

William Hunt
  • Member

  • 3,406 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 06 November 2014 - 05:19

So will we see Rubens Barrichello driving in Abu Dhabi for them? That would be funny.



#1094 LORDBYRON

LORDBYRON
  • Member

  • 382 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 06 November 2014 - 13:21

F1 entry cost $250 000 each  the fee is not due until Nov 30th

 

I wonder how much it costs to ship out to the last race and pay the bills would be about the same so unless a pay driver is found to pay most or all it wont happen 

 

but I do remember that there was a report about kolles saying that he had already paid the shipping for the last few races so he could have a ace card when in talks the the administrators 

 

after the nov 30th payment deadline  there is no licence if no payment is met they will just end up like HRT if they greedy 


Edited by LORDBYRON, 06 November 2014 - 13:39.


#1095 search

search
  • Member

  • 216 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 21 November 2014 - 17:49

good performance by Kobayashi today, not much slower than the Sauber, and he did a surprisingly big amount of laps.

 

Apparently in the recent races they took part in Ericsson's car was in way better shape than his - are there any information if he got Ericsson's car for Abu Dhabi?



#1096 danbarkerpa

danbarkerpa
  • New Member

  • 2 posts
  • Joined: November 14

Posted 21 November 2014 - 18:58

Caterham in administration seems like a better racing team than under Tony. A well sponsored car, happy drivers that are not complaining about safety, not trying to rip their best driver out of his seat, and performance that is only half a second off the midpack in fp2. Top stuff to whoever is running the show. Seems like they are actually here to race, despite the naysayers

#1097 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 10,372 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 21 November 2014 - 19:03

Quantity of stickers, or sponsors, has nothing to do with how much they're paying. In fact, the relationship is often inversely proportional. Here are some "well-sponsored" cars:

 

image186.png

3824594894_fcbc744634.jpg

image46.png



#1098 danbarkerpa

danbarkerpa
  • New Member

  • 2 posts
  • Joined: November 14

Posted 21 November 2014 - 19:12

I see your point, but I don't think I've seen Caterham being sponsored by anyone out of Tony's group. It's impressive that a uk-chinese bank even sponsored them, albeit a smaller one. Some actual legitimate businesses have put their name on it, something I did not see coming, thought it was mainly going to be jokes that would have taken the crowdfunding initiative

#1099 midgrid

midgrid
  • Member

  • 4,814 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 21 November 2014 - 19:56

Quantity of stickers, or sponsors, has nothing to do with how much they're paying. In fact, the relationship is often inversely proportional. Here are some "well-sponsored" cars:

 

Indeed - I'm reminded of March's numerous one-off deals for the 1992 Canadian GP, producing an apparently healthy portfolio.  The team didn't survive into 1993.

 

kNfTlQD.jpg

 

(I can see a pub on there as well!)


Edited by midgrid, 21 November 2014 - 19:56.