40 replies to this topic

[FullThrottleF1]

http://www.espn.co.u...ory/183485.html

 

Looks like Marussia or Manor as they are now called are looking very likely for a comeback in 2015 

[GhostR]

Assuming the can sort out a couple of what he calls "pivotal" things. That means a simple "no" decision on something and it's all gone.

 

Those quotes do, however, make it all sound like the cease trading decision was simply a step along the way towards hopefully reviving. It probably paves the way towards the cheapest way of offloading some of the heaviest debts and/or negotiating with the creditors from a stronger position (as nonsensical as that sounds). They may now be in a position to win more concessions from creditors that they were struggling to get previously, and those concessions could then pave the way for new investment to revive the team.

 

Will watch this closely ... I'd prefer Manor to race next year than Caterham, so the news that they aren't necessarily as dead as I thought just a few days ago gives me hope that any serious buyer that might be floating around will pick them instead of Caterham.

[pdac]

I think "pivotal things" means something like "all we need to do is find someone (or maybe a couple of people) who will give us $100m" and we'll be there.

[Petroltorque]

Precisely. Competing at the back is $100 millions. Unless there is a cost cap on the power train there is no hope of making an improvement on the chassis side. Even an Independent like Williams posted an operating loss this year of $19 millions.

[GwiDan]

Petroltorque, on 10 Nov 2014 - 17:54, said:

Precisely. Competing at the back is $100 millions. Unless there is a cost cap on the power train there is no hope of making an improvement on the chassis side. Even an Independent like Williams posted an operating loss this year of $19 millions.

It's lunacy to expect teams to sign up to run around at the back at a cost of over 100 million a season with insufficient prize money and effectively no hope of getting sponsorship. If McLaren doesn't have a title sponsor how will a backmarker

[pdac]

GwiDan, on 10 Nov 2014 - 17:59, said:

It's lunacy to expect teams to sign up to run around at the back at a cost of over 100 million a season with insufficient prize money and effectively no hope of getting sponsorship. If McLaren doesn't have a title sponsor how will a backmarker

 

But they don't expect them to do this. Bernie expects new entrants to have $200m or $300m at their disposal, so that they can move up towards the front. It's just the stupid team owners that think they can do something with less.

[TheFish]

Maybe they can pay their outstanding debts first.

[kimster89]

Cant shake the feeling somebody is trying to dance on the Marussias grave and get shameless selfpromo.

[fykcha]

Given enough funding anything is possible.

 

Not sure there are that many billionaires around though.

[johnmhinds]

What does Marussia/Manor have to offer any potential investors who want to get into F1?

 

They've shown they can make the most basic F1 car you've ever seen and stick a Ferrari drive train in it....and that's about it.

 

Dallara and Lola can probably do that for you for half the cost.

[Myrvold]

johnmhinds, on 11 Nov 2014 - 00:05, said:

They've shown they can make the most basic F1 car you've ever seen and stick a Ferrari drive train in it....and that's about it.

Still they've managed to get more points than Sauber (with luck, yes).

[Imperial]

Yeah, let's kick Marussia to the ground and come back as a different legal entity....

**** all the creditors who are also making all the staff redundant and closing their doors just before Christmas, thanks to us not paying them!! (And who Autosport don't run stories about).

[Dalton007]

Manor came into the sport thinking 40 mil was going to be the cap. 

[TheFish]

Other than the price of the engines, what is stopping them running to a £40m budget?

[Maustinsj]

TheFish, on 11 Nov 2014 - 08:05, said:

Other than the price of the engines, what is stopping them running to a £40m budget?

I guess nothing. That's the problem, you do need an engine.

[HammyHamiltonFan]

if they can't afford to run a car that does anything they are better off not bothering tbh, no point having a team for the sake of it that just loses money for everyone involved and only has pay drivers.

[Kraken]

pdac, on 10 Nov 2014 - 20:50, said:

But they don't expect them to do this. Bernie expects new entrants to have $200m or $300m at their disposal, so that they can move up towards the front. It's just the stupid team owners that think they can do something with less.

Bernie is the stupid one if he thinks teams can come up with that sort of money. Take away all the income that the current teams get from the F1 pot and let them stand on their own and we'd be down to three or four teams within two years.

[GhostR]

HammyHamiltonFan, on 11 Nov 2014 - 08:23, said:

if they can't afford to run a car that does anything they are better off not bothering tbh, no point having a team for the sake of it that just loses money for everyone involved and only has pay drivers.

 

So you'll say the same when Sauber folds? And then closely followed by Lotus and Force India? 12 car grid sounds good to you?

 

Marussia were actually running one pay driver and one talent (who brought a little financial help to the team, sure, but so do the likes of Grosjean and Perez at their respective teams).

 

That team was doing a great job with the budget they had. And, I'm sure, would still be doing a great job if the engine formula had remained the same instead of being changed and ramping up the costs substantially.

 

(Now ... Caterham I will not defend. It's become blatantly clear that team was mismanaged from the top down from the very start, and as soon as Fernandes lost interest was allowed to run up massive debts due to the mismanagement.)

Edited by GhostR, 11 November 2014 - 10:30.

[pdac]

Kraken, on 11 Nov 2014 - 08:52, said:

Bernie is the stupid one if he thinks teams can come up with that sort of money. Take away all the income that the current teams get from the F1 pot and let them stand on their own and we'd be down to three or four teams within two years.

 

This is the logical conclusion to the path they are currently on. I can see more teams folding next year.

 

The only one to buck the trend may be Haas. If he's sensible, he will demand that he gets a slice of the pie from the outset (given that Bernie needs to have a certain number of cars).

 

One problem is that it appears Bernie/CVC have already signed contracts with the big teams that guarantees them a good chunk before they even hit the track. If Haas can get something similar then a level of diversity might prevail until such time as all of those contracts expire and a more sensible distribution method can be worked out.

[pdac]

GhostR, on 11 Nov 2014 - 10:29, said:

So you'll say the same when Sauber folds? And then closely followed by Lotus and Force India? 12 car grid sounds good to you?

 

 

I would say that. I would love that. Once we have 12 cars on the grid F1 will collapse. So this prospect will, hopefully, force the hands of the greedy ones.

[Jon83]

Was he not suggesting they may even make Abu-Dhabi?

[F1matt]

Hypothetical situation, now that Marussia are liquidated does this stop any potential law suits from the Bianchi family if the stories of Suzuka in regard of Jules being told to push by his engineers are true??

[Petroltorque]

Dude, you need to shut down these comments that Marussia were complicit in the Bianchi accident. That remains unfounded speculation that could be deemed libellous. In any event the team's insurance will cover the costs of Bianchi's treatment.

[pdac]

Petroltorque, on 11 Nov 2014 - 15:19, said:

Dude, you need to shut down these comments that Marussia were complicit in the Bianchi accident. That remains unfounded speculation that could be deemed libellous. In any event the team's insurance will cover the costs of Bianchi's treatment.

 

It still doesn't discount the possibility of somone launching a lawsuit against the team. Any potential buyer would have to think about that.

[Petroltorque]

pdac, on 11 Nov 2014 - 16:01, said:

It still doesn't discount the possibility of somone launching a lawsuit against the team. Any potential buyer would have to think about that.

That may be true. But then the evidence would be tested in a court of law to a criminal or civil standard. Personally I find the comments placing unfounded blame on the team distasteful.

[shonguiz]

TheFish, on 11 Nov 2014 - 08:05, said:

Other than the price of the engines, what is stopping them running to a £40m budget?

Engine alone is nearly 40 m$, how would they compete in that case ? Even if they dramatically reduced aero & chassis developpement like Ecclestone is suggesting, they would not be able to race with the 107% rule.

[Wingcommander]

shonguiz, on 11 Nov 2014 - 17:36, said:

Engine alone is nearly 40 m$, how would they compete in that case ? Even if they dramatically reduced aero & chassis developpement like Ecclestone is suggesting, they would not be able to race with the 107% rule.

Pat Symonds said a couple fo years ago that you need 60M€ just to complete the season. And that was with V8s and no in season development.

[Myrvold]

F1matt, on 11 Nov 2014 - 15:04, said:

Hypothetical situation, now that Marussia are liquidated does this stop any potential law suits from the Bianchi family if the stories of Suzuka in regard of Jules being told to push by his engineers are true??

Doesn't matter what he is told to do. He had to make that decision himself.

[pdac]

Petroltorque, on 11 Nov 2014 - 16:28, said:

That may be true. But then the evidence would be tested in a court of law to a criminal or civil standard. Personally I find the comments placing unfounded blame on the team distasteful.

 

That's fair enough - in fact I'm in total agreement with you there. I do think, though, the cost of any possible litigation might worry potential investors.

[pdac]

TheFish, on 11 Nov 2014 - 08:05, said:

Other than the price of the engines, what is stopping them running to a £40m budget?

 

Slightly changed now, but recently we had 11 teams and a system that only paid 10. If a team spent only $40m, they would surely come last. So they would spend $40m and get nothing from F1. They would therefore have to raise that $40m through sponsors, advertisers and pay drivers. That might not be possible.

[Fastcake]

Anything is possible. They're a good, well run team, that only collapsed because the Russian owner stopped the cash the second the flag fell in Sochi. I don't want Caterham to disappear either, but that team turned into a farce by the end, and Marussia or Manor seemed to have a stronger technical base for the future.

[BRG]

Myrvold, on 11 Nov 2014 - 20:12, said:

Doesn't matter what he is told to do. He had to make that decision himself.

No, you don't understand.  This is the 21st century when it is always someone else's fault and no-one is ever held to be responsible for their own mistakes.

Edited by BRG, 11 November 2014 - 22:09.

[pdac]

BRG, on 11 Nov 2014 - 22:08, said:

No, you don't understand.  This is the 21st century when it is always someone else's fault and no-one is ever held to be responsible for their own mistakes.

 

Yep, any half-decent lawyer will tell you that for nothing

[FullThrottleF1]

Lowdon told Adam Cooper this morning that they are still working on 2015. Stating that they are very close.

[pdac]

FullThrottleF1, on 21 Nov 2014 - 13:05, said:

Lowdon told Adam Cooper this morning that they are still working on 2015. Stating that they are very close.

 

Yes, apparently the cheque is in the post

[LuckyStrike1]

It's 90 % done. We just need a contract and fix the financing. 

[Petroltorque]

Well they are going to need to find at least $50 millions and that's assuming the keep their prize fund money. Unlike Caterham, who were poorly run, Marussia turned turtle due to extortionate engine fees. Ferrari charging $30 millions for that pos PU, you are having a laugh. They would have been better off paying that money to Cosworth and racing their hybrid V6T.

[redreni]

Maustinsj, on 11 Nov 2014 - 08:12, said:

I guess nothing. That's the problem, you do need an engine.

 

 

TheFish, on 11 Nov 2014 - 08:05, said:

Other than the price of the engines, what is stopping them running to a £40m budget?

 

They also needed to ensure they produced a car that could pass scrutineering and go fast enough to be allowed to race.

[Mandzipop]

According to Ted Kravitz, Marussia have kept 9th which makes them a little more of an attractive prospect next year for buyers.

 

Fingers crossed.

[Richard T]

This is the car that was supposed to be the Manor MNR1-Ferrari. Courtesy of Racecar Engineering.



http://www.racecar-e...esign-revealed/

Note the flat nose thanks to clarified regulations on dropped chassis and nose tip cross section area.

If this is the norm in 2015 car design, I have high hopes some will look really good

[EthanM]

Petroltorque, on 21 Nov 2014 - 14:10, said:

Well they are going to need to find at least $50 millions and that's assuming the keep their prize fund money. Unlike Caterham, who were poorly run, Marussia turned turtle due to extortionate engine fees. Ferrari charging $30 millions for that pos PU, you are having a laugh. They would have been better off paying that money to Cosworth and racing their hybrid V6T.

 

My understanding is the Ferrari debt includes gearboxes, which are obviously charged separate to the engine)