Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Racing' started by g®eg, Nov 27, 2012.
These days, that's Red Bull. Might be Mercedes in second.
that will never get old!
if they didn't have alonso hustling that pig around they'd be in deep shit.
and don't discount ross brawn during the successful ferrari era.
German magazine Bild reports that Ferrari has made an offer to Kimi. According to them Ferrari's offer is bigger than what Red Bull offered (around 15 million a year, plus bonus and also funding to Kimi's Ice1Racing motocross team).
Summer break - not for journalists
I bet that's been true since Fangio was racing. Their problem has always been return on investment.
They probably told Kimi to take it out of the last contract
the amount of abuse Seb gets.. you'd think he has no fans....
Stefano is a knuckle head, he pushed out Schumi, that was a bad idea ruined a great drive who could have won more WCD's IMHO that dude is hurting Ferrarai
5 drivers who may not be in F1 in 2014....
not really "news" but it does seem a shame... they are doing pretty well considering.
I was surprised to hear the comms saying during Hungary that Kimi hadn't been paid. It is a shame that such a promising team is struggling just when it appeared to be breaking through. Halting all development dooms them.
i used to be torn between technological free-for-all, race-what-you-brung, and a more regulated series that offered more opportunity for small team success.
hell, f1 now has a reasonably well-defined set of regulations and cost controls and it's still not looking sustainable for several teams.
i have no idea what the answer is. i'd still like to see indycar execute its plan for modular aero parts, but open wheel racing in the us is probably going to require a much tighter spec than something as globally popular as f1. these teams just flash in and out of existence, and unless you have a huge red bull-like sponsor your odds of success are limited.
Red Bull isn't a sponsor, they own two teams.
In one respect, they are the way forward. Unlike car manufacturer teams, Red Bull's core business doesn't suffer when their cars fail to perform. Even when its mentioned that a Red Bull or Torro Rosso has expired beside the circuit, their product gets a mention and it doesn't harm the product.
At first glance, F1 seems like the perfect place for car manufacturers but as Honda, BMW, Renault, Jaguar (to mention the most recent) have found, success on the track is elusive and extremely costly to both reputation and profits.
We will never see a return to the days of the "garagistas" - John Cooper, Bruce McLaren, Colin Chapman, John Surtees, Ken Tyrell, Jack Brabham, Peter Sauber and Frank Williams wouldn't be able to create new teams today.
The future lies with unconnected companies like Red Bull that are prepared to do more than sponsor a team, global brands that want their products splashed over TV screens world-wide and their brand name mentioned each time that the team or a car is. Naming a team "Vodaphone McLaren Mercedes" doesn't work, people just call it McLaren.
Mercedes F1 were/are under pressure from their board. Rightly or wrongly the lack of results (until very recently) has been seen as damaging the brand. If the team were owned by a brand unconnected with the car industry it wouldn't matter as much that they are under-performing.
The problem for F1 is that the brands that might have most wanted to do what Red Bull have so successfully done are prohibited from doing so - tobacco and booze brands.
Thinking of brands that might buy teams can be fun. Team Tampax F1 anyone?
Old racing saying: "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday."
That hasn't been true for a long, long time. And the reverse isn't true either. Failure to win races doesn't cost Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Renault, or before them Toyota and BMW, any sales.
What it does do is cost them horrendous amounts of money which they find difficult to justify, especially when the world economy goes into the tank. The reason they find it difficult to justify is because there is no relationship between car sales, and success or failure on the track.
It's a branding exercise, and a very expensive one.
Red Bull doesn't just sell a drink. It has very successfully marketed its high caffeine content, and the concomitant rise in blood pressure and alertness, as an adventure. Red Bull slaps its logo on F1 cars, aerobatic airplanes, all manner of youth extreme sports and even parachutists diving from the edge of space.
It's a fantastically successful, holistic brand sell intended to appeal to youth and young adults. One reason Red Bull left NASCAR may well have been its aging demographics.
So you're never going to see Team Tampax in F1. The brand doesn't fit.
I agree but then I never said it cost them sales.
time to bring back refueling!!!
<iframe width="640" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/tJUBtmCbrjo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Apparently Ferrari isn't the only team to be befuddled by its wind tunnel. Last year's McLaren outperformed the wind the tunnel and this year's McLaren underperforms it. I wonder if someday they'll be able to mimic the dynamic conditions of a real track?
"pull the string and watch them go!"
phrases they couldn't use:
"yeah, we've hit a rough patch but we think we've staunched the bleeding."
"there was a lot of traffic out there today so we just went with the flow."
(good points in your post, btw)
"They've made a right bloody mess of this year's car."
"this car's a real bitch!"
i'm just gonna apologize for the inappropriate thread jack right now, but it's been too long since the last race and i've had too much time to think.
The car is really fast but for some reason we have a real bad race every four weeks.
1999 BMW Funduro