26 replies to this topic

[Peter Perfect]

I mentioned this in another thread a few people responded so it sounds like it's not just me who's confused.

Can anyone clarify the relationship between Red Bull and Toro Rosso?

They used to be very close, Toro Rosso taking Red Bulls old car and lots of technology/staff sharing. Currently I know staff do migrate between the two (the current Chief Designer, Ben Butler is leaving the team next April to return to Red Bull Technology) meaning there's obviously still technology transfer (in peoples heads if not documents) and it's a training ground for future Red Bull drivers, does it extend any further than that?

From what I understand of the relationship it makes me very uneasy and topically the opportunity for Red Bull to use Toro Rosso as an extra testing resource seems ripe for exploitation outside of the RRA.

[Jejking]

You've got a good point and Toro Rosso since 2007 was seen as the B-team of RB. To the outside world news has been that Toro Rosso is on its own feet since the start of 2010, before that point they were practically a copy of the Red Bull and now the team says/looks to take its own route more.

[TeamSideways]

since you mentioned it, the owner of toro rosso is the same owner of redbull racing ? i mean is TR owned by Dietrich Mateschitz ?

[Peter Perfect]

since you mentioned it, the owner of toro rosso is the same owner of redbull racing ? i mean is TR owned by Dietrich Mateschitz ?

Yep, that's my understanding.

[Clatter]

You've got a good point and Toro Rosso since 2007 was seen as the B-team of RB. To the outside world news has been that Toro Rosso is on its own feet since the start of 2010, before that point they were practically a copy of the Red Bull and now the team says/looks to take its own route more.

It had to, the rules changed.

[Fastcake]

They were meant to have separated technically, but I would imagine Red Bull provide enough to Toro Rosso to keep them competitive with the midfield. Just because they no longer get the same parts doesn't mean Newey isn't sending something there way.

Of course, they wouldn't want a repeat of 2008 when the junior team was actually better...

Edited by Fastcake, 06 December 2011 - 16:56.

[nimbus111]

i still think its pointless to have 2 teams owned by the same person. call the team whatever you want but having the same owner means both teams have the same intentions. seems like a loophole that gives 1 owner 4 cars.

[Clatter]

i still think its pointless to have 2 teams owned by the same person. call the team whatever you want but having the same owner means both teams have the same intentions. seems like a loophole that gives 1 owner 4 cars.

If TR were getting in the way or interfering in the races in some I'd agree, but from what I can see they have raced in exactly the same way as any other team. And if there is any info going between the teams then I see that as no different to the technical partnerships that Mac has set up.

[TeamSideways]

what assures the fia that redbull racing isnot sending parts and new designs etc to toro rosso

[nimbus111]

If TR were getting in the way or interfering in the races in some I'd agree, but from what I can see they have raced in exactly the same way as any other team. And if there is any info going between the teams then I see that as no different to the technical partnerships that Mac has set up.

true but i still cant see the point from an owner stand point.

Edited by nimbus111, 06 December 2011 - 17:08.

[Atreiu]

Greater exposure and a possible test bed for development.
It makes sense if you have the money and the will.

I don't mind it at all and would actually like there to be full customer cars allowed.

[Clatter]

true but i still cant see the point from an owner stand point.

RB's main reason for involvement is marketing. 2 teams twice the exposure. Not hard to understand really.

[nimbus111]

RB's main reason for involvement is marketing. 2 teams twice the exposure. Not hard to understand really.

at twice the cost. i understand the marketing aspect but both teams(same brands) are battling each other. i guess ill buy the marketing thing then. whatever. just seems like alot of money spent for 2 extra cars that run mid to back of the field just for more exposure. oh well im not business oriented so i guess it makes sense.

Edited by nimbus111, 06 December 2011 - 17:59.

[Clatter]

at twice the cost. i understand the marketing aspect but both teams(same brands) are battling each other. i guess ill buy the marketing thing then. whatever. just seems like alot of money spent for 2 extra cars that run mid to back of the field just for more exposure. oh well im not business oriented so i guess it makes sense.

Even better for exposure and column inches.

[nimbus111]

Even better for exposure and column inches.

[Rabbit123]

Interesting how Red Bull also seem to refer to 2008 Monza as being their first win.

[Sakae]

I mentioned this in another thread a few people responded so it sounds like it's not just me who's confused.

Can anyone clarify the relationship between Red Bull and Toro Rosso?

They used to be very close, Toro Rosso taking Red Bulls old car and lots of technology/staff sharing. Currently I know staff do migrate between the two (the current Chief Designer, Ben Butler is leaving the team next April to return to Red Bull Technology) meaning there's obviously still technology transfer (in peoples heads if not documents) and it's a training ground for future Red Bull drivers, does it extend any further than that?

From what I understand of the relationship it makes me very uneasy and topically the opportunity for Red Bull to use Toro Rosso as an extra testing resource seems ripe for exploitation outside of the RRA.

From inception of this "arangement", I had been complaining about such potentiallity, only to be chased around that I am siding with big teams, as opposed to "little guy". Potential conflict of interest and breach of RRA is real risk that the others seems to tolerate for some inexplicable reasons.

[Nustang70]

RB's main reason for involvement is marketing. 2 teams twice the exposure. Not hard to understand really.

Not really. If Red Bull aren't getting enough exposure with a class-of-the-field team, they aren't going to get much more with a midfield team.

[Clatter]

Not really. If Red Bull aren't getting enough exposure with a class-of-the-field team, they aren't going to get much more with a midfield team.

The evidence suggests the opposite.

[Supersleeper]

RB's main reason for involvement is marketing.

No - Red Bulls reason to be in the sport is to win.

[Clatter]

No - Red Bulls reason to be in the sport is to win.

No, that's a goal, not the reason.

[Madras]

Red Bull's reason for charging 4 times more for a can of pop than it's worth is so they can win.

[Clatter]

Red Bull's reason for charging 4 times more for a can of pop than it's worth is so they can win.

Nope, it's because some people are mug enough to pay the price.

[Madras]

Well that's true as well.

[nimbus111]

Nope, it's because some people are mug enough to pay the price.

most of those go to jager bombs anyways.

[Nustang70]

The evidence suggests the opposite.

What evidence?

[karne]

Interesting how Red Bull also seem to refer to 2008 Monza as being their first win.

That's because it was - the RB4 and the STR3 were the same car with different engines. I think that was the last year that was allowed. The Ferrari engine was far superior to the Renault in the RB, so STR was much faster for most of the season. The STR was really an upper-midfield/lower-top car that year, more than capable of high points finishes and a win if the holes in the Swiss cheese lined up. And that's what happened.