Jump to content


Photo

Group Lotus & Team Lotus court case


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
2554 replies to this topic

#1 Sukhoi

Sukhoi
  • Member

  • 328 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 16:02


http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/89066

Team Lotus has declared itself 'confident' that it will win its legal dispute with Group Lotus and be able to use its famous name in Formula 1 this year, in the wake of the first court skirmish between the parties.

The London High Court on Monday rejected a bid by Group Lotus for a summary judgement on issues relating to what Team Lotus claims was an early termination of a five-year licencing deal it originally put in place from 2010.

But as well as Mr. Justice Peter Smith stating that he felt the dispute could only be settled with a full-blown case, he also said that he wanted the trial to begin as early as possible.

A push to try and get the matter into court before the start of the 2011 season could not be realised, but a March 21 date has been pencilled in for the proceedings to begin.

With that date falling between the first two races of the season in Bahrain and Australia, it means that unless there is an out-of-court settlement in the next few weeks Team Lotus will definitely be starting the campaign with its current name.

A statement issued by Team Lotus after the court hearing said it was pleased with how the proceedings went and that it remained bullish the final outcome would go its way.

"Team Lotus is delighted that we were successful at the Summary Judgment Application hearing today and that the Judge threw out Group Lotus' application even before hearing the arguments of the barristers on either side," said the statement.

"Although this decision was never in doubt, it means that we start the 2011 season under the Team Lotus name. Whilst we expected that the Judge would refuse this application, it is good to have the decision in black and white.

"The Judge also felt that it was in everyone's best interests to bring the hearing date for the full trial forward and that is now fixed for 21st March rather than us having to wait until Autumn 2011 or even later. We remain confident that we will succeed at the full trial and we can now focus on the challenges ahead in the 2011 FIA Formula 1 World Championship."

Team Lotus boss Tony Fernandes wrote on his Twitter feed that he too was delighted with the current situation.

"Very, very happy over the judgment today," he wrote. "And extremely happy that full trial brought forward to March 21st.The good do always eventually win."



http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/89069

Group Lotus says it is upbeat that it will prevent Tony Fernandes from using the Lotus name in Formula 1 when their dispute hits the courts in March.

The London High Court on Monday demanded that the row over the use of the Lotus name in F1 should go to trial as soon as possible - with a March 21 court date having now been laid down.

Although Team Lotus viewed the judge's decision as a triumph, because he had failed to give Group Lotus the summary judgement it sought, the car company says it is equally positive about the development.

In a statement issued on Tuesday afternoon, the company said: "Group Lotus and Proton are delighted with the outcome of yesterday's hearing in which the Judge ordered a full trial of this matter to be heard as soon as possible given the proximity of the start of the new 2011 Formula 1 season in a few weeks. The trial has been fixed at the English High Court for 21 March 2011.

"Group Lotus and Proton have been made aware of the press release issued by 1Malaysia Racing Team (1MRT), it is completely incorrect and a misrepresentation of the Judge's decision suggesting that Group Lotus' application was "thrown out".

"No decision was made on Group Lotus' application. The Judge proposed that the better procedural route was to order a speedy trial of all the issues in dispute in the case. 1MRT initially resisted the Judge's approach to resolve all matters quickly and before the start of the 2011 Formula 1 season but the order was subsequently made and the first available date was 21 March."

Group Lotus also remained positive that it would win the case – with both sides now saying they are 'confident' of winning.

"Group Lotus and Proton have always held the view that this matter should be resolved as soon as possible in the interests of Formula 1 and the fans," added the statement. "We therefore welcome this decision and look forward to the full trial.

"We are confident that at the trial Group Lotus will succeed in preventing 1MRT, Mr Fernandes and his companies, from using the Lotus name in Formula 1 once and for all."


well , as there isn't any topic regarding this situation , i decided to start a new one.

Both sides seem to be preety confident of winning.

I have very bad feeling about possible outcomes , I wonder if Tony Fernandes got plan B for his team , it might end up badly...
as far I'm informed , there isn't any risk for Lotus Renault GP , in both outcomes they gonna stay untouched. ( still seeking for confirmation? anyone dare to say something on that case?)

Group Lotus may have lose alittle bit of thier "image" ( no doubt , that partially it is already lost ) if they are going to lose this case. But i can't imagine them leaving it as it is.

I wonder what's the Bernie and co. opinion on this matter.





Advertisement

#2 JackTorrance

JackTorrance
  • Member

  • 2,065 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 16:14

I find it very, very confusing to be honest, but if I may summarise:

- Team Lotus had a 5 year licensing deal with the owners of the brand Lotus, Proton.

- Proton decided to be involved with a different team and withdrew the license agreement.


Seems to me Proton and group Lotus dont have a leg to stand on, unless Team Lotus neglegted a (serious) part of the agreement.

As it is, im gambling on either reinstatement of the name Lotus to Team Lotus, or a huge pay out from Proton to Team Lotus.

Edited by JackTorrance, 25 January 2011 - 16:15.


#3 Minardigp

Minardigp
  • Member

  • 245 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 25 January 2011 - 16:25

I have very bad feeling about possible outcomes , I wonder if Tony Fernandes got plan B for his team , it might end up badly...
as far I'm informed , there isn't any risk for Lotus Renault GP , in both outcomes they gonna stay untouched. ( still seeking for confirmation? anyone dare to say something on that case?)


Lotus Racing raced last year without issue and no one's questioning GL 'Lotus' trademark so they'll be fine.

It's all really about 'Team Lotus' and whether 1 Malaysia can use it. If GL:

1) Rightfully terminated 1 Malaysia's licence (due to restrictions placed on 1 Malaysia in the termination clause); or
2) Are successful in revoking the rather iffy 'Team Lotus' owned by 1 Malaysia trademark.

Then we'll see 1 Malaysia as 1 Malaysia or Air Asia next year.

#4 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 9,216 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 16:29

Lotus Racing raced last year without issue and no one's questioning GL 'Lotus' trademark so they'll be fine.

It's all really about 'Team Lotus' and whether 1 Malaysia can use it. If GL:

1) Rightfully terminated 1 Malaysia's licence (due to restrictions placed on 1 Malaysia in the termination clause); or
2) Are successful in revoking the rather iffy 'Team Lotus' owned by 1 Malaysia trademark.

Then we'll see 1 Malaysia as 1 Malaysia or Air Asia next year.

That's 'and' rather than 'or'.
Neither of those appear straightforward or easy to predict - if I had to bet I'd say Team Lotus will still be Team Lotus when this is over.

#5 Minardigp

Minardigp
  • Member

  • 245 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 25 January 2011 - 16:37

That's 'and' rather than 'or'.
Neither of those appear straightforward or easy to predict - if I had to bet I'd say Team Lotus will still be Team Lotus when this is over.


Err, no.

They're two seperate matters, if 1 Malaysia loses either they're not going to be racing under the Team Lotus name...

#6 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 11,730 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 16:48

Naturally they are both giving out confident press statements. I don't believe there is any real problem if either side loses, although Fernandes is not wanting to rebrand (and nor do I want that to happen). Based on what I've read and seen, I'm of the opinion that Team Lotus holds the higher ground.

It won't matter for Team Lotus if they lose the early contract termination part, that has nothing to do with the ownership of the rights to "Team Lotus", and I believe Proton are going to be paying out for this anyway.

#7 Minardigp

Minardigp
  • Member

  • 245 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 25 January 2011 - 16:52

It won't matter for Team Lotus if they lose the early contract termination part, that has nothing to do with the ownership of the rights to "Team Lotus", and I believe Proton are going to be paying out for this anyway.


Given that if they lose that case that they would be stopped from using a brand similar to 'Lotus Racing' in F1, and well, Team Lotus is rather similar, I'd say it does matter. It was the whole reasoning behind GL trying to get a summary judgement to settle the issue...

Owning a trademark isn't much good if you're stopped from using it...

#8 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 10,065 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 16:58

I find it very, very confusing to be honest, but if I may summarise:

- Team Lotus had a 5 year licensing deal with the owners of the brand Lotus, Proton.

- Proton decided to be involved with a different team and withdrew the license agreement.


Seems to me Proton and group Lotus dont have a leg to stand on, unless Team Lotus neglegted a (serious) part of the agreement.

As it is, im gambling on either reinstatement of the name Lotus to Team Lotus, or a huge pay out from Proton to Team Lotus.


I think this is the crux of it too. Fernandes has already demonstrated that he, and David Hunt before him, owned the Team Lotus company (because it's not just a trademark, it's been a registered company for 16+ years) and everything it owned within was absolutely theirs.

It then comes down to the matter of the contract termination. If it is as Team Lotus say, unjustly done over a trivial matter, then Group Lotus are in trouble. If it was all done fairly and the termination agreement stipulated that Fernandes' company not use 'Lotus' in their name afterwards, then he will still own the Team Lotus company, but not be able to use it in F1. Judging purely by the schtick that Bahar and Proton came out with in the immediate aftermath of the break, I'd say that they found some tenuous matter to break the contract, and then walked straight into Enstone and signed on the dotted line there.

I think you also have to consider the fact that Tony Fernandes has put a lot of his own money into investing in his team, and obtaining the Team Lotus company to go racing under. I don't think he would be so careless as to go about his business in unfair manners, when there is so much at stake personally for him. Likewise Bahar's job would be at stake if this were to go wrong for him, but seeing as Proton hasn't even secured the loans needed for his big plans I don't think there's at much at stake for the other side.

#9 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 11,730 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:06

Given that if they lose that case that they would be stopped from using a brand similar to 'Lotus Racing' in F1, and well, Team Lotus is rather similar, I'd say it does matter. It was the whole reasoning behind GL trying to get a summary judgement to settle the issue...

Owning a trademark isn't much good if you're stopped from using it...

If they lose that case the court will have decided that Group Lotus terminated the contract correctly, and Fernandes won't get any compensation for any wrongdoing on GL's part. This won't stop them using the Team Lotus brand at all, that's a separate issue.

#10 Minardigp

Minardigp
  • Member

  • 245 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:09

I think this is the crux of it too. Fernandes has already demonstrated that he, and David Hunt before him, owned the Team Lotus company (because it's not just a trademark, it's been a registered company for 16+ years) and everything it owned within was absolutely theirs.


A revocation proceeding was launched in Jan 2010, which has a decent chance of success, so it's quite possible that the company hasn't owned 'Team Lotus' since 2008/2009 or whatever date the revocation gives...

#11 CaptainJackSparrow

CaptainJackSparrow
  • Member

  • 2,368 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:10

One thing worth noting is this is the Group Lotus vs 1MRT court case, calling it Group Lotus vs Team Lotus isn't really accurate, it's Team Lotus IP of 1MRT's that is at stake here.

#12 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • Member

  • 25,150 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:10

Yay, another Lotus thread.

#13 Minardigp

Minardigp
  • Member

  • 245 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:14

If they lose that case the court will have decided that Group Lotus terminated the contract correctly, and Fernandes won't get any compensation for any wrongdoing on GL's part. This won't stop them using the Team Lotus brand at all, that's a separate issue.


No, it's the same issue. The termination clause (according to the tweets/press releases) also states that if the agreement is terminated then 1 Malaysia is stopped from using the Lotus name in racing... That would almost certainly include Team Lotus...

That's standard in any licence agreement.

#14 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 10,065 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:20

A revocation proceeding was launched in Jan 2010, which has a decent chance of success, so it's quite possible that the company hasn't owned 'Team Lotus' since 2008/2009 or whatever date the revocation gives...


Why would the chances of success increase any more than in 2002, when the company demonstrated there were significant barriers to entry to F1 and they had been trying to find someone to help them return the brand to F1. We've had a ten-year period of massive manfacturer involvement, making entering a private team into F1 almost impossible. When the entries for 2010 opened in summer 09, the Team Lotus company actually filed an entry in conjunction with Litespeed, fulfilling the criteria of the companies existence. That entry wasn't successful, but they had demonstrated that at the first possible moment for the company to re-enter F1, they tried to bring it back in.

And to whom would the company's trademarks revoke to? Group Lotus has never owned them...



#15 greenblood

greenblood
  • Member

  • 153 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:23

Yay, another Lotus thread.


As long as it keeps the naming issues in one place and out of the two team's threads and the Autosport Journalistic standards thread...

#16 Minardigp

Minardigp
  • Member

  • 245 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:29

Why would the chances of success increase any more than in 2002, when the company demonstrated there were significant barriers to entry to F1 and they had been trying to find someone to help them return the brand to F1. We've had a ten-year period of massive manfacturer involvement, making entering a private team into F1 almost impossible. When the entries for 2010 opened in summer 09, the Team Lotus company actually filed an entry in conjunction with Litespeed, fulfilling the criteria of the companies existence. That entry wasn't successful, but they had demonstrated that at the first possible moment for the company to re-enter F1, they tried to bring it back in.

And to whom would the company's trademarks revoke to? Group Lotus has never owned them...


It's different as 8 more years went by, time makes all the difference. 7 years of non use is easier to explain/get away with then 15...

It ceases to be a trademark. In any case, it's so similar to the Lotus trademark that basically no one could use it other than Lotus. Indeed, GL have lodged a Trade mark application for Team Lotus.

Edited by Minardigp, 25 January 2011 - 17:30.


#17 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 10,065 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:33

It's different as 8 more years went by, time makes all the difference. 7 years of non use is easier to explain/get away with then 15...

It ceases to be a trademark. In any case, it's so similar to the Lotus trademark that basically no one could use it other than Lotus. Indeed, GL have lodged a Trade mark application for Team Lotus.


But if the barriers to entry remained the same, and they can demonstrate that the effort to return the company was made over those 8 years, then nothing changes really does it?

#18 GhostR

GhostR
  • Member

  • 3,767 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:35

No, it's the same issue. The termination clause (according to the tweets/press releases) also states that if the agreement is terminated then 1 Malaysia is stopped from using the Lotus name in racing... That would almost certainly include Team Lotus...

That's standard in any licence agreement.

That can only apply to trademarks that Lotus own and have a right to licence. Team Lotus is not one of those trademarks, so would not be covered by licence termination issued by GL.

#19 Minardigp

Minardigp
  • Member

  • 245 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:38

But if the barriers to entry remained the same, and they can demonstrate that the effort to return the company was made over those 8 years, then nothing changes really does it?


Indeed it does, it signifies that the tm is unlikely to get used, hence the reason for non use is invalid. TLV convinved the court they were on the verge of getting back in, had been trying etc etc, that argument is weaker after 15 years.

Of course it did end up being used, but the application is a year old and predates that, so that shouldn't be relevant (in theory! It's easier for a judge to revoke something when nothing is at stake)

Advertisement

#20 milestone 11

milestone 11
  • Member

  • 12,426 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:39

Can someone explain to me why the hell Fernandes wants to give free promotion to a company that screwed him. It beggars belief.

#21 Minardigp

Minardigp
  • Member

  • 245 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:42

That can only apply to trademarks that Lotus own and have a right to licence. Team Lotus is not one of those trademarks, so would not be covered by licence termination issued by GL.


Nope, any lawyer worth his salt would have made the restriction as wide as possible. It doesn't have to be restricted to trade marks as freedom of contract means the parties are free to agree what they wish.

#22 midgrid

midgrid
  • RC Forum Host

  • 8,965 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:45

Can someone explain to me why the hell Fernandes wants to give free promotion to a company that screwed him. It beggars belief.


Team Lotus and Group Lotus are different companies, and this court case will be giving GL (and TL, although Fernandes has more public support than Bahar judging by the poll in the other thread) bad publicity, in addition to raising awareness that the "Lotus" used by both teams is not the same. Using the Team Lotus brand also allows Fernandes to promote his own team more effectively than if it was called 1Malaysia or Air Asia (just as Force India is a better name than Kingfisher).


#23 midgrid

midgrid
  • RC Forum Host

  • 8,965 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:47

Nope, any lawyer worth his salt would have made the restriction as wide as possible. It doesn't have to be restricted to trade marks as freedom of contract means the parties are free to agree what they wish.


I thought it was established in one of the previous threads that it had been agreed between the parties (or their predecessors who held the licences) that the Team Lotus name would not be used outside F1, but inside F1 it was fine (unless some aspect of Fernandes' licence from Group Lotus to compete as Lotus Racing in 2010 contravenes this).


#24 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 10,065 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:48

Indeed it does, it signifies that the tm is unlikely to get used, hence the reason for non use is invalid. TLV convinved the court they were on the verge of getting back in, had been trying etc etc, that argument is weaker after 15 years.

Of course it did end up being used, but the application is a year old and predates that, so that shouldn't be relevant (in theory! It's easier for a judge to revoke something when nothing is at stake)


But surely you can't just take something off someone because they're finding it hard to use it? If they're paying each year to re-register the trademarks then why take it off them?

And if the judgment on the application has taken this long so far, surely the subsequent re-entry of the company into it's field of operation should be considered as relevant?

#25 greenblood

greenblood
  • Member

  • 153 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:50

Can someone explain to me why the hell Fernandes wants to give free promotion to a company that screwed him. It beggars belief.


Because he was a Team Lotus fan when he was young, because he doesn't want to change chassis name, because he doesn't want to let down the people who relocated to work for his team drawn by the Lotus name and because he just wants to get one over on Proton.



#26 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 5,373 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 17:55

Indeed it does, it signifies that the tm is unlikely to get used, hence the reason for non use is invalid. TLV convinved the court they were on the verge of getting back in, had been trying etc etc, that argument is weaker after 15 years.

They have? Can't remember that part. Do you have a link for that PDF, i haven't saved it back then.


#27 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 25 January 2011 - 20:32

Because he was a Team Lotus fan when he was young, because he doesn't want to change chassis name, because he doesn't want to let down the people who relocated to work for his team drawn by the Lotus name and because he just wants to get one over on Proton.


And because the Lotus name has made it a lot easier to attract talent and money ;) .

From the other end, don't understand why Group Lotus weren't content to let Team Lotus promote their car brand for free. When other car marques spend 100's of millions to achieve the same thing.

It reinforces my feeling that Bahar's whole grand plan, which involves mega bank loans they haven't actually got yet, is going to fall flat. Because it just looks like an ego trip.

And makes me think that if the court has any leeway, they'll exercise it in Team Lotus' favour.

#28 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 13,108 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 25 January 2011 - 20:46

Yay, another Lotus thread.

you can never have enough can you? And just think of the endless confusion in the commentary box when this farce hits the track in March.

#29 CaptainJackSparrow

CaptainJackSparrow
  • Member

  • 2,368 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 20:48

Because he was a Team Lotus fan when he was young, because he doesn't want to change chassis name, because he doesn't want to let down the people who relocated to work for his team drawn by the Lotus name and because he just wants to get one over on Proton.


Nope, it's about Fernandes and his associates wanting to own Group Lotus.

It's all about greed at the end of the day.

#30 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 10,065 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 20:51

And because the Lotus name has made it a lot easier to attract talent and money ;) .

From the other end, don't understand why Group Lotus weren't content to let Team Lotus promote their car brand for free. When other car marques spend 100's of millions to achieve the same thing.

It reinforces my feeling that Bahar's whole grand plan, which involves mega bank loans they haven't actually got yet, is going to fall flat. Because it just looks like an ego trip.

And makes me think that if the court has any leeway, they'll exercise it in Team Lotus' favour.


That's what the whole thing smacks of to me. Bahar is jealous that he didn't do what Tony Fernandes has done, restart Lotus in F1 and make a good crack of it. He's then found a way to break their contract (on a trivial matter according to Fernandes' team, who are that sure of it they're pursuing it in court) and then walked pretty much straight into the deal with Renault (the outcome of which was revealed in December, so the negotiations might've started around September). He's now trying to use the size of his corporation as ballast to defend his actions, trying to paint Team Lotus as chancers who don't own a jot. It's got 'personal agenda' written all over it, and I hope the judge sees that and doesn't fall for Bahar's marketing rubbish.

I'd say he's set himself up for a long, long fall...

#31 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • Admin

  • 19,094 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 25 January 2011 - 20:53

As long as it keeps the naming issues in one place and out of the two team's threads and the Autosport Journalistic standards thread...

Exactly :up: I think it's amazing this thread has not appeared before, and a worthwhile addition to the Lotus threads.

#32 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 7,447 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 25 January 2011 - 20:58

Yay, another Lotus thread.


Aye, that´s the fate of the legacy of the inventor of the twin chassis. He could have invented the whole scenario while in the bath tub - he was never afraid of entering into controversy....;)

Remember David Thieme?

As for the matter, will the court decide the outer chassis is going to be named Group Lotus and the inner chassis Team Lotus? Or the other way round? Chances are who get´s declared "the outer chassis" wins the court case. Watch my words.

Edited by aditya-now, 25 January 2011 - 21:00.


#33 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 10,065 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 21:00

Nope, it's about Fernandes and his associates wanting to own Group Lotus.

It's all about greed at the end of the day.


No proof of that whatsoever...

The only 'proof' we have of someone trying to get hold of something not theirs is Lotus Cars claiming the Team Lotus company belongs to them (remember their initial press release, stating they own the rights to everything 'Lotus' and will do everything in their power to assert that?).

It might very well be an idea of Fernandes' to one day unite the two Lotus companies under his ownership, and he's successfully revived an ailing state-run business before, but the only actions he's made so far were first under the license of a parent company, and then under his own steam to protect his large investment in his own company.

At least Fernandes would run the business with some realism like his Air Asia one, not marketing bluster and hubris.

#34 CaptainJackSparrow

CaptainJackSparrow
  • Member

  • 2,368 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 21:11

No proof of that whatsoever...


Lol, oh really...

FERNANDES WOULD BUY LOTUS TO USE NAME
http://www.f1.co.uk/...us-to-use-name/

...he has admitted it, and his associates have also had their eye on Group Lotus for a while.

But you continue to believe then that he is doing this because he had a lotus f1 toy car as a kid if you want.

This is about dollar bills and nothing else.

BTW don't believe his tweets, his lawyers did not enjoy yesterday's court outing in the slightest, they did not like that date move at all, not in the slightest.

Edited by CaptainJackSparrow, 25 January 2011 - 21:14.


#35 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 10,065 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 21:19

Lol, oh really...

FERNANDES WOULD BUY LOTUS TO USE NAME
http://www.f1.co.uk/...us-to-use-name/

...he has admitted it, and his associates have also had their eye on Group Lotus for a while.

But you continue to believe then that he is doing this because he had a lotus f1 toy car as a kid if you want.

This is about dollar bills and nothing else.

BTW don't believe his tweets, his lawyers did not enjoy yesterday's court outing in the slightest, they did not like that date move at all, not in the slightest.


Ok, thank you for that.

But I fail to see how that is about money. It'd cost him a great deal to acquire the company, bring out of the red and revive the business without trying to secure huge loans. He'd make money from it eventually, but again it'd be like the F1 team, a long-term investment.

Wouldn't it be in better hands under his ownership anyway?

#36 bigginge

bigginge
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 21:26

But I fail to see how that is about money.


It's *always* about money.....

#37 CaptainJackSparrow

CaptainJackSparrow
  • Member

  • 2,368 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 21:28

Ok, thank you for that.

But I fail to see how that is about money. It'd cost him a great deal to acquire the company, bring out of the red and revive the business without trying to secure huge loans. He'd make money from it eventually, but again it'd be like the F1 team, a long-term investment.

Wouldn't it be in better hands under his ownership anyway?


It's a business prospect/challenge he relished no doubt, I mean why do you think he was investing in Lotus Racing last year? You think he wanted to build someone else's brand if he didn't envisage owning that brand one day? He wasn't doing it out of the goodness of his own heart or just for a bit of PR. No, Fernandes always had his sights on owning Lotus one day, only problem is, now Lotus has a new direction he can't own them anymore, pretty inconvenient given he has a Lotus branded F1 team. Still, that's a risk that was always there, and that's just the way it goes sometimes. Problem is, he is a man who is used to getting what he wants, so is now trying to force the issue by attacking Group Lotus head on with the Team Lotus malarkey, for a man who didn't want to 'drag Lotus through the mud' he's doing quite the opposite, but when you understand the motivation you can see why.

His problem is, he has a weak court case and a marginal chance of succeeding at best, so the whole war with Group Lotus was a big mistake and if he had any sense he would drop the name games, let Lotus get on with it's plans and do the same.

Edited by CaptainJackSparrow, 25 January 2011 - 21:30.


#38 The Ragged Edge

The Ragged Edge
  • Member

  • 4,435 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 21:31

It's a business prospect/challenge he relished no doubt, I mean why do you think he was investing in Lotus Racing last year? You think he wanted to build someone else's brand if he didn't envisage owning that brand one day? He wasn't doing it out of the goodness of his own heart or just for a bit of PR. No, Fernandes always had his sights on owning Lotus one day, only problem is, now Lotus has a new direction he can't own them anymore, pretty inconvenient given he has a Lotus branded F1 team. Still, that's a risk that was always there, and that's just the way it goes sometimes. Problem is, he is now trying to force the issue by attacking Group Lotus head on with the Team Lotus malarkey, for a man who didn't want to 'drag Lotus through the mud' he's doing quite the opposite, but when you understand the motivation you can see why.

His problem is, he has a weak court case and a marginal chance of succeeding at best, so the whole war with Group Lotus was a big mistake and if he had any sense he would drop the name games, let Lotus get on with it's plans and do the same.


A lot of assumptions.


#39 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 5,373 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 21:41

BTW don't believe his tweets, his lawyers did not enjoy yesterday's court outing in the slightest, they did not like that date move at all, not in the slightest.

While of course every comment coming from LRGP must be the absolute and undisputable truth.

Advertisement

#40 CaptainJackSparrow

CaptainJackSparrow
  • Member

  • 2,368 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 21:44

While of course every comment coming from LRGP must be the absolute and undisputable truth.


That's just what I heard happened from people that were there, but whatever.

#41 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 5,373 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 21:45

That's just what I heard happened from people that were there, but whatever.

Any links?

#42 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • Member

  • 25,150 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 21:55

It's a business prospect/challenge he relished no doubt, I mean why do you think he was investing in Lotus Racing last year?


The "Lotus" name will have attracted sponsors last year as well as Malaysian backing with the only drawback of Fauzy being the third driver.

You think he wanted to build someone else's brand if he didn't envisage owning that brand one day? He wasn't doing it out of the goodness of his own heart or just for a bit of PR.


Edit: No. It's called licensing. Look it up.

No, Fernandes always had his sights on owning Lotus one day...


Proof? That article only suggests he'd buy it to save brand value as a result of Group Lotus being involved in F1. Had they had not, he wouldn't have to do such a thing.

Problem is, he is a man who is used to getting what he wants...


BTW don't believe his tweets, his lawyers did not enjoy yesterday's court outing in the slightest, they did not like that date move at all, not in the slightest.


That's just what I heard happened from people that were there, but whatever.


Any more libelous claims to make? Who are your mates on the inside giving you the high ground?

Edited by Disgrace, 25 January 2011 - 22:15.


#43 Saturnus

Saturnus
  • Member

  • 333 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 25 January 2011 - 22:06

If Group Lotus hadn't tried to give the impression that they might enter F1, then everyone would be on Team Lotus side on this board.

Putting some Lada stickers on the car in 2010 didn't make it a Lada.
Putting some Lotus stickers on the car in 2011 won't make it a Lotus.

Lotus are doing what they usually do, pay to have someone else car painted in their colours.
This whole mess is because they backstabbed Fernandez over a minor issue and Fernandez' got back at them by purchasing the Team Lotus trademark.
The court will decide who's legally correct.
Good thing that it will be decided quickly no matter what the outcome will be.

#44 Saturnus

Saturnus
  • Member

  • 333 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 25 January 2011 - 22:13

Who really cares if Fernandez has ambitions to buy Group Lotus or not?
Not the owners (shareholders) as they would get well paid for their shares.
The only ones that would care are the management (read:Bahar) as they are often replaced when ownership changes hands.

#45 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 25 January 2011 - 22:29

Who really cares if Fernandez has ambitions to buy Group Lotus or not?
Not the owners (shareholders) as they would get well paid for their shares.
The only ones that would care are the management (read:Bahar) as they are often replaced when ownership changes hands.


Well from our point of view it would legitimise his F1 team wouldn't it?

Though it would be a bit careless to try and buy it after he's helped build up its value through F1...


#46 CaptainJackSparrow

CaptainJackSparrow
  • Member

  • 2,368 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 23:00

The "Lotus" name will have attracted sponsors last year as well as Malaysian backing with the only drawback of Fauzy being the third driver.

No idea what you are getting at.

Edit: No. It's called licensing. Look it up.

You missed the point, if you take out a license then you are licensing IP and not owning it, always a risky move.

Proof? That article only suggests he'd buy it to save brand value as a result of Group Lotus being involved in F1. Had they had not, he wouldn't have to do such a thing.

And you know this how?

Any more libelous claims to make? Who are your mates on the inside giving you the high ground?

Err, you do realise this has been reported in the telegraph don't you? It's common knowledge if you spent I don't know 5 seconds googling the court case.

Edited by CaptainJackSparrow, 25 January 2011 - 23:02.


#47 CaptainJackSparrow

CaptainJackSparrow
  • Member

  • 2,368 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 23:03

Any links?


Here's a link to a Telegraph reporter that was there:
http://blogs.telegra...us-twitterings/

Interesting musing on Hunt, felt Group was taken back as well, this judge means business.

Edited by CaptainJackSparrow, 25 January 2011 - 23:04.


#48 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • Admin

  • 19,094 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 25 January 2011 - 23:05

Can posters please be careful to avoid making any defamatory remarks. This is a difficult issue as it is.

#49 CaptainJackSparrow

CaptainJackSparrow
  • Member

  • 2,368 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 25 January 2011 - 23:07

If Group Lotus hadn't tried to give the impression that they might enter F1, then everyone would be on Team Lotus side on this board.

Putting some Lada stickers on the car in 2010 didn't make it a Lada.
Putting some Lotus stickers on the car in 2011 won't make it a Lotus.

Lotus are doing what they usually do, pay to have someone else car painted in their colours.
This whole mess is because they backstabbed Fernandez over a minor issue and Fernandez' got back at them by purchasing the Team Lotus trademark.
The court will decide who's legally correct.
Good thing that it will be decided quickly no matter what the outcome will be.


I'll agree on this much, it's a good thing it wil be decided quickly or quickly-ish because who needs this saga dragging over the season. Cool heads will probably prevail at some point.

#50 Sukhoi

Sukhoi
  • Member

  • 328 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 25 January 2011 - 23:12

While of course every comment coming from LRGP must be the absolute and undisputable truth.



is LRGP even involved into this ? i haven't seen any twit , message on blog , or any other news comming from them regarding that case.
it's a problem between Group Lotus and Team Lotus , i don't think that LRGP even care about it.

Eric indeed said something regarding that case sometime ago , i don't remember exactly what he said . But i think they were keeping rather low altitude , and wanted to stay away from it , hence i don't understand amount of hate directed into Enstone based Team.

Ofcourse there are fans which seem to be "tough" at this topic , but to be honest with you , i admire amount of work done by Fernandes and his crew , in my opinion both sides should have work out a deal out of this , but i'm afraid that it's too late.