The Manor-Marussia Saga

  • Thread starter Thread starter TenEightyOne
  • 601 comments
  • 36,666 views
The fact is that the big teams want three car team to happen. Because it gives them more TV time which gives them more sponsor money. They won't do anything to help low-budget teams.
 
TenEightyOne
What? Not to anyone who knows what the FIA is, they're a regulatory body for many series. F1 is a business that buys in governance from the FIA, as do many other sports.
Click to expand...

And how effective have they been? Survival of the small teams have been in the talk for years and yet 2 teams have entered administration... Who are next?
 
Soundtrack
And how effective have they been? Survival of the small teams have been in the talk for years and yet 2 teams have entered administration... Who are next?
Click to expand...
You don't get it, they have no control over the financial and commerical side. That is the responsability of the Commercial rights holder (CVC who Eccelstone reports to).
 
Soundtrack
And how effective have they been? Survival of the small teams have been in the talk for years and yet 2 teams have entered administration... Who are next?
Click to expand...

No, the FIA are a rule-making body. They have nothing to do with ownership or control of any part of the F1 business.

The FIA approve tracks for competitions, set and scrutinise technical and sporting regulation and conduct and so on. If the FIA wanted to stop F1 doing something regulatory or technical then they have those powers as long as F1 apply to FIA for regulatory oversight.

The FIA have no part on the F1 business outside that... and certainly not in the scope of team finances.
 
TenEightyOne
The FIA have no part on the F1 business outside that... and certainly not in the scope of team finances.
Click to expand...
Lots of sports have competitors' finances regulated by the governing body. Look at the National Rugby League, who enforce a salary cap on teams to prevent teams with bigger budgets from taking all of the best players.
 
prisonermonkeys
Lots of sports have competitors' finances regulated by the governing body. Look at the National Rugby League, who enforce a salary cap on teams to prevent teams with bigger budgets from taking all of the best players.
Click to expand...

True, but in the case of FIA-regulated sports I can't think of any disciplines where a similar arrangement is in place?
 
TenEightyOne
True, but in the case of FIA-regulated sports I can't think of any disciplines where a similar arrangement is in place?
Click to expand...
Perhaps not, but that doesn't mean that it can't happen. The FIA did actually have a plan in place called the Global Cost Cap, which was going to apply to every major championship, but the Formula 1 teams shot it down.

Why do you think the Strategy Working Group only represents the big teams? The FIA wanted equal representation between themselves, the teams, and the commercial rights holder. But the big teams wanted to limit the ability of FOM or the FIA to undermine them by getting the smaller teams on-side.
 
Soundtrack
Wouldn't cost caps be under FIA's line?
Click to expand...
No. Jean Todt suggested it a while ago, but... Well, we all know what happened...

It falls more to the FOM, who will need a unanimous verdict from teams, then this will be given to the FIA to look over before it becomes a rule. But even then, it'll be more likely to be 2016 because how many teams have already started their 2015 car? Lots.
 
prisonermonkeys
Marussia could compete in Abu Dhabi, and have reportedly filed a 2015 entry under their original name, Manor Grand Prix:

http://m.skysports.com/article/formula1//9547228
Click to expand...

Good news, confidence in the rumour seems high, at least according to that report.

It highlights the weirdness of the Caterham debacle though; in the case of Manorussia they've been able to find a buyer, transfer ownership and continue the operation before splitting/seizing assets and arguing about who pays the staff.

Why couldn't Kolles/Fernandes (both successful business growers with a lot of motorsport experience) manage Caterham's demise/sale the same way?
 
Because Caterham are saddled with debt.

Marussia are entitled to a better payment for finishing in the top ten, and it has been rumoured that Andrey Cheglakov stopped funding the team after Sochi and moved to put the team into administration. In a sense, the move to administration is simply trimming out the fat, clearing out any existing debt and preventing the team from accruing any more.

Caterham, on the other hand, are riddled with debt, and mired in a complex web of multi-entity ownership. He might be Kolles' man to a tee, but Manfredi Ravetto has pointed out that Caterham was structured as a front-running team on a shoestring budget, which, given Fernandes' comments in the past, is consistent.
 
prisonermonkeys
Because Caterham are saddled with debt.

Marussia are entitled to a better payment for finishing in the top ten, and it has been rumoured that Andrey Cheglakov stopped funding the team after Sochi and moved to put the team into administration. In a sense, the move to administration is simply trimming out the fat, clearing out any existing debt and preventing the team from accruing any more.

Caterham, on the other hand, are riddled with debt, and mired in a complex web of multi-entity ownership. He might be Kolles' man to a tee, but Manfredi Ravetto has pointed out that Caterham was structured as a front-running team on a shoestring budget, which, given Fernandes' comments in the past, is consistent.
Click to expand...

??? You sure you've got that the right way around?

Midweek Motorsport; s9 - episode 41

8:30 into this podcast is the financial state of Marussia according to tax records. Marussia are riddled with debt, Caterham are not in anything like that condition.
 
prisonermonkeys
Gerard Lopez reckons a solution could be in place before Interlagos, possibly in the form of a base payment for the season guaranteed to every team (I assume the big teams would have this base payment included in their prize money):

http://m.speedcafe.com/2014/11/04/f1-talks-resolution-financial-crisis/
Click to expand...

Interesting politics going on; Bernie's boss has said he's going to solve this with the teams "whatever Bernie's stance on the issue" (to paraphrase). We've had flashed of "F1 after Bernie" on several occasions in the last year-or-so, this is a pretty bid one in my opinion.

Mackenzie and Bernie are playing good-cop-bad-cop with the teams in order to find a deal that they can all agree to. Well, they already had one of those... so I mean a deal they can agree on which is survivable for everybody. The big teams, of course, aren't going to want to share money with teams that turn up, grab a share of the pot and run (see Colin Kolles as a possible example) so that's going to be tough. Still, with Mackenzie finally wading in (which has taken far too long, imo) I think we're likely to get somewhere.

@Tired Tyres , from a business point of view it makes no sense that Caterham and Marussia are in the respective positions they are. That shows (to me) that the Fernandes/Kolles doings have been pretty effed-up.
 
"USA could support three F1 races"

Where, other than COTA?
 
GTPorsche
"USA could support three F1 races"

Where, other than COTA?
Click to expand...
I assume one on the east coast and another on the west to service the major population centres. Possibly somewhere near Chicago as well. Permanent venues could be built as a long-term plan.
 
prisonermonkeys
Mattiaci talks sense - don't just redistribute the income, generate more income to go around:

http://adamcooperf1.com/2014/11/03/usa-could-support-three-f1-races-says-ferrari-boss/

Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to realise that that will take time or acknowledge that redistributing income both works as a short-term solution and is necessary.
Click to expand...

Mattiachi was the head of Ferrari in the US before being parachuted into the F1 team, he's bound to see that market more clearly than I daresay other F1 "seniors".

I think the smaller teams will see that as a blind; the answer to not having enough of a massive share isn't to make the pot larger... the inference is that the small teams could continue to lose out by the same percentage.
 
GTPorsche
"USA could support three F1 races"

Where, other than COTA?
Click to expand...

prisonermonkeys
I assume one on the east coast and another on the west to service the major population centres. Possibly somewhere near Chicago as well. Permanent venues could be built as a long-term plan.
Click to expand...

Sears Point?

Purely as an exhibition / non-championship race, I'd actually love to see one F1 race on an oval.
 
Basically every permanent Road course in the US is Grade 2 so honestly it wouldn't be hard to get 2 sorted.

Sonoma, Road America would be the easiest to make grade 1 as they would only need run off improvements.

Watkins glen needs major barrier replacing done, as the final sector is not even close to grade 1 standard.

Edit: on further look Barber Motorsports Park is approved for Grade 1 testing(like Jerez etc) so currently that would be the highest Level track outside COTA (a Grade 1T track means the track is fine just the Spectator and or Media facilities are not at the required Level).
 
Last edited:
There isn't much around Chicago as far as permanent circuits that would work. A few hours' drive north is Road America and a few hours east is Mid-Ohio. Maybe an Atlantic Grand Prix at Virginia International Raceway and a Pacific Grand Prix at Sonoma or somewhere around there?
 
Back