[Team] Marussia - what next?

[bella]

the only way i can imagine is as a line of credit with strict terms, like a bank of bernie if you will. getting a business overdraft with banks is becoming increasingly ridiculous.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by bella

the only way i can imagine is as a line of credit with strict terms, like a bank of bernie if you will. getting a business overdraft with banks is becoming increasingly ridiculous.

If Mr E is a fan of the project, its not impossible that monies could be loaned in advance of the due date of prizemoney. Although I bet there would need to be a bloody big caveat over everything and anything.

Even though Mr E has said in the past that there is no provision in the rules to do so.

The risk over Force India, from all kinds of media reports, has to be considered a very real one. Could be a salvage process

[Moneyseeker]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

If Mr E is a fan of the project, its not impossible that monies could be loaned in advance of the due date of prizemoney. Although I bet there would need to be a bloody big caveat over everything and anything.

Even though Mr E has said in the past that there is no provision in the rules to do so.

The risk over Force India, from all kinds of media reports, has to be considered a very real one. Could be a salvage process

I am thinking along the same lines, I don't think F1 can afford to go to 8 teams and 16 cars without losing all credibility with the FIA, circuits, promoters, TV companies and fans - regardless of what any contracts on minimum numbers say. This may be part of BE's thinking and he knows they have a certain income from FOM and JK is a very credibile and highly experienced and connected businessman and well known in F1 circles.

The only person in F1 who can have sufficient words in sufficient ears to waft this along and placate the creditors - the likes of Ferrari and Pirelli to get them on side is BE. I maybe completely wrong but I feel the hand of BE here somewhere - allegedly!

[el_cat]

2014 car denied

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/117609

Disappointing news

[Nikki Katz]

Predictable though. I wonder which teams used their veto, or if it was a unanimous no.

[Mekola]

Selfishness in F1 should be objected.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Nikki Katz

Predictable though. I wonder which teams used their veto, or if it was a unanimous no.

At the least, I believe that it would have been Red Bull, Toro Rosso, Williams, Sauber, Force India and probably Lotus who would have objected if it was possible. However, out of those, only Red Bull, Force India and Williams were at the meeting.

Rather than Mekola's view expressed above, I would think that those teams would argue that they have had to have gone to the expense of designing, building and crash testing their 2015 chargers which they may well have rather not have had to do, so it would be financially unfair if another team were excused that massive cost.

If this news report is accurate, then that would with regret seem to ring the death knell for both Marussia and Caterham.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by el_cat

2014 car denied

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/117609

Disappointing news

Story Here Too

How quickly can Marussia/Manor have their 2015 design made?

[bella]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

If this news report is accurate, then that would with regret seem to ring the death knell for both Marussia and Caterham.

that's being a bit presumptuous. assuming that they bought the team specifically to run in the 2015 could be wide of the mark. i don't see why manor wouldn't spend the year developing and working on 2016's car.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by bella

that's being a bit presumptuous. assuming that they bought the team specifically to run in the 2015 could be wide of the mark. i don't see why manor wouldn't spend the year developing and working on 2016's car.

MR Saward seems to think some of the conclusions being drawn about running or not running 2014 cars this year may be incorrect..

Story Here

[ECW Dan Selby]

What a mess.

I'm just thinking back to Minardi in 2005 (?). Couldn't a similar thing be done? Just modify the car to roughly meet 2015 demands?

Selby

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by ECW Dan Selby

What a mess.

I'm just thinking back to Minardi in 2005 (?). Couldn't a similar thing be done? Just modify the car to roughly meet 2015 demands?

Selby

The rework of the nose area in the '15 regulations is said to mean that the '14 cars do not comply with those rules, needing a new tub (and accompanying body work) to be made..

[Tucky]

Bbc have confirmed it's force India who have vetoed marussia. From a business perspective I wouldn't expect anything else, but as a fan my liking for force India has dropped a ton. Just goes to show that force India are early struggling.

[knighty]

Just thinking out loud......... it does sound like Justin King will be able to save Marussia, and then I guess it will rise from the ashes as Manor-GP, but it sounds like Force India are not helping, which is another story.......anyway.......but where will Manor run an F1 team from now they have sold the Marussia factory to Gene Haas?........I have a funny feeling Manor will end up in Caterhams/Super-Aguri/Arrows-Leafield base at some point in the near future........or am I missing something........Manor will need significant design testing and Composites manufacturing expertise on-site, and I'm struggling to believe they could do it from an F3 or GP2 grade industrial unit???....

[el_cat]

But if Joe Saward's view is correct, if only one team actively voted against Marussia there is a chance that the FIA could still allow it?

I personally don't see the argument against - sure, the other teams can say if they'd known a 2014 car would have been OK they wouldn't have built a new one. But it looks as if the 2015 cars are going to be in the region of 3s per lap faster, so if anyone had taken that decision out of choice rather than necessity they'd have been left behind.

It seems a mass hypocrisy that the teams say they want to spice up the show, encourage entrants etc. And the first chance they have, they block it.

[Flavio Galtieri]

Originally Posted by Tucky

Bbc have confirmed it's force India who have vetoed marussia. From a business perspective I wouldn't expect anything else, but as a fan my liking for force India has dropped a ton. Just goes to show that force India are early struggling.

I think you'll find there's politics at play here not just financial concerns.

The reason we are at this point, with two teams bust and another three struggling is largely down to the inequity in the way FOM/CVC distribute the prize money. Hopefully the EU Commission will investigate this soon if nothing is done.

Having said that, if Bernie won't play fair with the prize fund and Force India were to be for sale as some rumours suggest, then having a couple of last year's cars running around at the back would dilute the prize fund further and hence also the team's market value.

I suspect if Force India hadn't voted against either Lotus or Sauber would have. It only needs one dissenter.

[bella]

Originally Posted by knighty

Manor will need significant design testing and Composites manufacturing expertise on-site, and I'm struggling to believe they could do it from an F3 or GP2 grade industrial unit???....

why would they? they didn't before, and it worked fine. lower overheads too. just because that's how the big teams work doesn't mean it's sustainable (or worth the monster initial investment for the little guys....

[wolfhound]

FI have confirmed they voted against allowing Marussia/Manor back as there was no supporting info like who the owners would be or information on its new structures.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/117612
However FI would also loose some of the 30 million although after the top four teams grab their share there would not be much left for the others as the proportions are heavily weighed towards Bernie's favourite teams.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Flavio Galtieri

I think you'll find there's politics at play here not just financial concerns.........

............I suspect if Force India hadn't voted against either Lotus or Sauber would have. It only needs one dissenter.

Neither Lotus or Sauber had a voice or a vote at the Strategy Group meeting, which comprises of representation from the FIA, FOM (I.e. Bernie Ecclestone's lot) and the 5 "grandee" teams, Ferrari, McLaren, Red Bull, Williams and Mercedes, plus the highest point scorer amongst the rest of the grid from the previous season which in this instance would have been Force India.

Unfortunately, as Saward's blog makes clear, the rules surrounding how these meetings are conducted, like a lot of the financial arrangements in F1, are closely guarded secrets, but it is believed that decisions are passed on a majority vote basis. However, the voting system is skewed with the FIA having a block vote of 6, likewise the FOM, whilst the teams have 1 vote each.

So it would seem logical that either the FIA or FOM must have also voted against allowing any team running a 2014 chassis, otherwise the vote would have been 12 (min) to 6 (max) in favour of granting permission.

From some of his past statements, my guess is that Mr Ecclestone voted against.

[Flavio Galtieri]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Neither Lotus or Sauber had a voice or a vote at the Strategy Group meeting, which comprises of representation from the FIA, FOM (I.e. Bernie Ecclestone's lot) and the 5 "grandee" teams, Ferrari, McLaren, Red Bull, Williams and Mercedes, plus the highest point scorer amongst the rest of the grid from the previous season which in this instance would have been Force India

I stand corrected.

Blimey, this is more complicated than trying to understand the UN....

[Tucky]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

So it would seem logical that either the FIA or FOM must have also voted against allowing any team running a 2014 chassis, otherwise the vote would have been 12 (min) to 6 (max) in favour of granting permission.
.

In this case a unanimous agreement was needed so force India could have done it by theme selves.

[steve_r]

Now is the time for BE, Jean Todt etc to earn their millions, step in and sort this horrible mess out.

Of course the struggling smaller teams are going to vote against this, if it means that they get a chance for more money. They are already unhappy at the distribution of wealth, and maybe in a finacial hole themselves.

[Formulahistory]

Originally Posted by knighty

Just thinking out loud......... it does sound like Justin King will be able to save Marussia, and then I guess it will rise from the ashes as Manor-GP,

Jordan Kind and Lawrence Stroll often are rumoured to buy F1 teams but it had never happened until now.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Tucky

In this case a unanimous agreement was needed so force India could have done it by theme selves.

Well, that's what they are reporting. However, from memory, when the Strategy Group was set set up the press releases at the time stated that all votes would be decided on by a majority, which was a change from previous Steering Group which had to pass these matters with a unanimous vote.

However, I may be wrong; there have been the odd occasion in the past where that has happened.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Force India think Marussia should re-apply to join the grid.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/117617