And surely the obvious marketing tool is the Red Bull Aston Martin Mercedes team?
Aston Martin in F1 talks with Red Bull over Mercedes engine deal
#151
Posted 06 July 2015 - 20:16
Advertisement
#152
Posted 06 July 2015 - 20:19
So does this enhance the rumor or show us the smoke that people misread for another fire.
I am not sure anyone involved in the original story misread anything - the people who misread are seemingly those who failed to interpret the story correctly.
#153
Posted 06 July 2015 - 20:49
Well we had a story that had been previously run and then 'disappeared', some inconsistent-appearing comments from Merc people, and then a "why would we do F1?" from the Aston guy. So....dunno.
#154
Posted 06 July 2015 - 20:53
On paper Aston Martin and Williams seem a better or more "natural" fit.
#155
Posted 06 July 2015 - 23:24
#156
Posted 07 July 2015 - 05:21
Newey has road car project involvement with Aston, has done since earlier this year.
This would make the whole ting way more legitimate. It almost makes sense now.
Edited by Lennat, 07 July 2015 - 05:22.
#157
Posted 07 July 2015 - 05:35
#158
Posted 07 July 2015 - 06:43
Seems like a powder puff piece. Invest industrial, the private equity firm that own Aston, don't have the money to run a viable F1 program.
That's where Red Bull come in. I doubt Aston are financing the Red Bull road car similarly I doubt they would finance the move to Merc engines, there would be some kind of sponsorship and branding but Red Bull would still be the financiers if it happens.
#159
Posted 07 July 2015 - 07:58
That's where Red Bull come in. I doubt Aston are financing the Red Bull road car similarly I doubt they would finance the move to Merc engines,
Why not? 40m Euros per season would be small change for a naming rights sponsor deal.
Still Aston Martin Williams Martini Racing rolls off the tongue better!
Advertisement
#160
Posted 07 July 2015 - 15:44
Control engine! Everyone gets a Benz and calls it something else.
While we are at it control chassis, and then some of those drivers are too big or too small, replace them with 70 kilo corporate clones or maybe even better just a radio control handset.
As I and many others keep saying junk the current engines,, pu whatever and have a free 3.5 litre petrol engine with nothing more than a control ECU. To run the ENGINE functions,, ignition and fuel. Then a moderate amount of fuel [no refuelling] and go racing. The driver uses the clutch, [at least for starts and the odd pit stop] changes gear with a gear lever. Max 6 speeds in a standard form of transaxle. Eg, behind the engine,,, and 4 wheel hydraulic brakes.
Leave all the gizmos for Prius's
..And what will Historic F1 be called then?... Prehistoric?
#161
Posted 07 July 2015 - 15:45
Why not? 40m Euros per season would be small change for a naming rights sponsor deal.
If Aston have 40m euros to spare, they will be spending it on their desperately needed new car range, not throwing it away helping to promote Red Bull.
#162
Posted 07 July 2015 - 15:58
I think they need to do both if they're going to be considered a serious competitor to McLaren's and Ferrari's competing models to the Vulcan.
Edited by YoungGun, 07 July 2015 - 15:59.
#163
Posted 07 July 2015 - 16:05
Imo in that market you live and die on the reputation of the car itself, not whether there's a race team.
#164
Posted 07 July 2015 - 16:39
Imo in that market you live and die on the reputation of the car itself, not whether there's a race team.
Not strictly the same thing (as they were actually involved, just rubbish), but I remember when Lamborghini were involved in F1 they were pretty woeful (aside from a few strong runs from Larrousse in 1990). Didn't stop me having a Diablo poster on my bedroom wall and a model Lambo as well.
In the same period, first Honda and then Renault were leading the way (funny how things change over time!), but let's just say that didn't make me aspire to a Civic or 19.. Nor did the big FIAT logos down the side of the Ferraris make me pine for an Uno.
Edited by FerrariV12, 07 July 2015 - 16:39.
#165
Posted 07 July 2015 - 17:00
#166
Posted 07 July 2015 - 17:11
You make a fair point. It becomes a win only if the product is twice as good for the same price or the product is at half the price .
#167
Posted 07 July 2015 - 22:05
Whoever does whatever, they probably won't look at it as emotionally as you have.I don't see it happening with Williams, unless they get really desperate. As you say, Williams has their own brand to protect. They've also been in a position previously, where getting too close to a manufacturer did them a lot of long term damage (when BMW dumped them in favour of buying out Sauber). So in some respects I can see them being quite wary and wanting to continue to stand alone. Edit: but if it looks like they won't be able to keep Martini on board long term, then I suspect the balance on the scales would shift. Depending on how much dosh Aston are looking to spend, and how involved they want to be. If they want car name rights, I still don't see it happening with Williams.
The Lotus option, I don't know what to make of. If Aston's looking to be able to beat Ferrari and McLaren on track (ok, McLaren are easy beats currently; but that won't last) then Lotus probably isn't the right option. They've lost the top brains and not replaced them, and while they're doing better this year than last I have to say I think the majority of that is down to the engine being that much better than what they had last year. There's a little bit of improvement from being forced to ditch the tusk design as well, but beyond that I think they're not going to get back to where they were pre-V6's for a while (if ever, under the current ownership). As I don't see Aston buying them out or being able to clear the debts, I doubt this is what will happen. More likely than Renault picks up the pieces here IMO.
Force India ... again, I just don't see it. The new chassis appears to be much quicker, but I think there's still questions to be answered over it's race pace through an entire distance and their ability to develop a car. Ignoring the on-track status of the team, there's still serious questions to be answered on their financial health and how long Mallya / Sahara will be able to continue to fund the team. I don't think Force India is in a place where Aston would consider them the right fit.
Which leaves Red Bull. Again, some pretty big obstacles. Contracts to be sorted out (but if Renault go it alone via Enstone, they may be willing to entertain mutual exit from those), Mercedes to grant permission, etc etc. But Mateschitz may just be able to lay down an offer that Aston wouldn't be able to refuse, and there's history there: it's the same people looking to do this deal who did the Infiniti deal. I can imagine a scenario where this gives Mateschitz the perfect exit strategy. First year is Aston Martin Red Bull Racing Mercedes, with Aston sinking some money in. That money is considered a deposit on an option to buy the team. Over a period of a couple of years, Aston puts in some more money, and picks up a controlling stake in the team. They become Red Bull Aston Martin Racing (Mercedes), with Red Bull sponsoring. Aston then use Red Bull's sponsorship money to continue the buy out, until 2020 arrives and Red Bull exits gracefully, with Aston bringing in a new sponsor that they've been grooming for 5 years (perhaps having had them on the car already for a year or two).
Edited by oetzi, 07 July 2015 - 22:06.
#168
Posted 08 July 2015 - 02:00
If Aston have 40m euros to spare, they will be spending it on their desperately needed new car range, not throwing it away helping to promote Red Bull.
Are you saying F1 sponsorship is NOT value for money! The whole point is that the advetising value of sponsoring F1 is MORE than 40m euros else they wouldn't bother!
#169
Posted 08 July 2015 - 02:01
but let's just say that didn't make me aspire to a Civic or 19..
Speak for yourself. Most others wanted a CRX or an NSX.
#170
Posted 08 July 2015 - 06:33
If Aston have 40m euros to spare, they will be spending it on their desperately needed new car range, not throwing it away helping to promote Red Bull.
If they have 40m to spare, they would be better off spending it on new paint spraying equipment so that the paintwork on their road cars last more than a few years before 'corrosion' sets in...
Edited by DS27, 08 July 2015 - 06:35.
#171
Posted 08 July 2015 - 13:30
Nice bit of context/history:
Motor Sport Magazine @Motor_Sport 23 hrs23 hours ago
Rumour has it @AMR_Official will return to F1. 'We've been here before,' says @Andrew_Frankel: http://www.motorspor...n-return-to-f1/
#172
Posted 08 July 2015 - 14:41
I don't see it happening with Williams, unless they get really desperate. As you say, Williams has their own brand to protect. They've also been in a position previously, where getting too close to a manufacturer did them a lot of long term damage (when BMW dumped them in favour of buying out Sauber). So in some respects I can see them being quite wary and wanting to continue to stand alone. Edit: but if it looks like they won't be able to keep Martini on board long term, then I suspect the balance on the scales would shift. Depending on how much dosh Aston are looking to spend, and how involved they want to be. If they want car name rights, I still don't see it happening with Williams.
I don't think this would be a bad arrangement for Williams. Aston would pay the engines and Williams could spend the money on chassis development. That'd seem like a good sponsorship deal. The only issue I could imagine would be if the Martini deal didn't allow another title sponsor like "Aston Martin Williams Martini Racing".
Still I think this would happen with Red Bull if it's happening at all.
#173
Posted 08 July 2015 - 14:41
Are you saying F1 sponsorship is NOT value for money! The whole point is that the advetising value of sponsoring F1 is MORE than 40m euros else they wouldn't bother!
What he's saying is that Aston don't have the money for the sponsorship in the first place, it's value for money doesn't matter when you don't have the money to start with. And the only people spending anywhere remotely near 40 million on "sponsorship" in F1 are Red Bull, Mercedes, Honda and Ferrari.
#174
Posted 08 July 2015 - 14:48
I don't think this would be a bad arrangement for Williams. Aston would pay the engines and Williams could spend the money on chassis development. That'd seem like a good sponsorship deal. The only issue I could imagine would be if the Martini deal didn't allow another title sponsor like "Aston Martin Williams Martini Racing".
"Williams Aston Martini Racing"
Edited by Lennat, 08 July 2015 - 16:35.
#175
Posted 08 July 2015 - 15:00
To be honest, I find this rather difficult to understand. Aston Martin isn't exactly loaded, and very few manufacturers actually make any money out of F1...
But I bet somebody's already suggested that they should use the Gulf livery.
#176
Posted 08 July 2015 - 15:05
To be honest, I find this rather difficult to understand. Aston Martin isn't exactly loaded, and very few manufacturers actually make any money out of F1...
But I bet somebody's already suggested that they should use the Gulf livery.
Kill your Icons!
(like Williams already did)
will it be Aston Martin Enstone Mercedes.
Edited by SealTheDiffuser, 08 July 2015 - 15:07.
#177
Posted 08 July 2015 - 15:53
What he's saying is that Aston don't have the money for the sponsorship in the first place, it's value for money doesn't matter when you don't have the money to start with. And the only people spending anywhere remotely near 40 million on "sponsorship" in F1 are Red Bull, Mercedes, Honda and Ferrari.
Well Porsche nearly went bankrupt developing the 901 (911) -- Aston Martin should bet the house on building a better car, so more people will actualy want to buy it.
#178
Posted 08 July 2015 - 15:56
will it be Aston Martin Enstone Mercedes.
Since the name of the Lotus team is "for sale" this does seem more likely!
"Aston Martin Mercedes" I like the sound of it! They could paint it British Racing Green and everything
#179
Posted 08 July 2015 - 15:56
Would it be legal to rebrand Merc engine to Aston Martin under the current rules?
Also, where would Aston find the money?
Advertisement
#180
Posted 08 July 2015 - 17:47
Well Porsche nearly went bankrupt developing the 901 (911) -- Aston Martin should bet the house on building a better car, so more people will actualy want to buy it.
Point. Missing it.
#181
Posted 09 July 2015 - 05:16
Look at his sign off.
Ron Dennis didn't miss it........
#182
Posted 09 July 2015 - 08:38
Would it be legal to rebrand Merc engine to Aston Martin under the current rules?
Also, where would Aston find the money?
No need to rebrand the engine. Aston Martin would simply be the naming sponsor of the Enstone team. It's not Lotus is spending much, so Aston Martin would want a piece of that deal too!
"Aston Martin Racing - Mercedes"
#183
Posted 09 July 2015 - 08:39
Point. Missing it.
How so? To sell more cars they need to make their cars good.
Ron Dennis accepted the 12C was not good enough and came back with the improved 650S...