F1 2018
24 July 2018, 11:20 AM
#121
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Have to say , none of them really enthral me at the moment, I remember watching Senna of course who was in a class of his own , and watching Schumacher racing Hakkinnen these guys were braking 5 or more meters later at the Ring Pit straight and still not spinning off in the rain, the rest were simply not in it. And for me none of the present crowd has that level of talent.
25 July 2018, 12:37 PM
#122
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44949996
The former chief executive of carmaker Fiat-Chrysler, Sergio Marchionne, has died in hospital in Zurich aged 66.
He was replaced four days ago when his health worsened following complications from surgery on his right shoulder.
Mr Marchionne, who was also Ferrari's chairman, had led the combined company for more than a decade and planned to step down next year.
The former chief executive of carmaker Fiat-Chrysler, Sergio Marchionne, has died in hospital in Zurich aged 66.
He was replaced four days ago when his health worsened following complications from surgery on his right shoulder.
Mr Marchionne, who was also Ferrari's chairman, had led the combined company for more than a decade and planned to step down next year.
27 July 2018, 10:28 AM
#124
Renault & Redbull fall out
Red Bull was left frustrated by Renault's decision not to provide all the new power unit elements it could for Daniel Ricciardo in Germany – even before the Australian suffered a failure in the race.
Renault only allowed Red Bull to introduce new examples of three of the possible six elements on Ricciardo's car.
As a consequence, the team was not able to benefit from the extra safety net provided by adding extra examples to the pool without further penalty when he was already destined for the back of the grid.
Inevitably, there is still some tension between the two parties as they approach the end of their relationship, exacerbated by Red Bull ongoing contractual hold on Carlos Sainz, which has complicated Renault's driver plans for 2019, and the Hockenheim scenario will only have ramped things up.
The Milton Keynes team had pinpointed Germany for a power unit change as it was felt to be a good compromise for grid penalties, especially with the obvious opportunity provided Budapest coming up.
On Friday, Ricciardo duly took a new MGU-K, energy store and control electronics, which guaranteed him a back of the grid start.
Most observers expected him to follow the normal protocol and then change everything, taking a new V6, turbo and MGU-H for Saturday. He would be getting a "free pass" with no further penalties, and the new examples could be added to the pool for upcoming races.
Renault had already decided that Ricciardo should not take any of those elements for Germany, which meant that the free pass went to waste.
Before the race, it was apparent that the team's management was frustrated by the decision, with Christian Horner telling Motorsport.com: "That's a question for Renault. The normal strategy is to change everything you can."
Red Bull was left frustrated by Renault's decision not to provide all the new power unit elements it could for Daniel Ricciardo in Germany – even before the Australian suffered a failure in the race.
Renault only allowed Red Bull to introduce new examples of three of the possible six elements on Ricciardo's car.
As a consequence, the team was not able to benefit from the extra safety net provided by adding extra examples to the pool without further penalty when he was already destined for the back of the grid.
Inevitably, there is still some tension between the two parties as they approach the end of their relationship, exacerbated by Red Bull ongoing contractual hold on Carlos Sainz, which has complicated Renault's driver plans for 2019, and the Hockenheim scenario will only have ramped things up.
The Milton Keynes team had pinpointed Germany for a power unit change as it was felt to be a good compromise for grid penalties, especially with the obvious opportunity provided Budapest coming up.
On Friday, Ricciardo duly took a new MGU-K, energy store and control electronics, which guaranteed him a back of the grid start.
Most observers expected him to follow the normal protocol and then change everything, taking a new V6, turbo and MGU-H for Saturday. He would be getting a "free pass" with no further penalties, and the new examples could be added to the pool for upcoming races.
Renault had already decided that Ricciardo should not take any of those elements for Germany, which meant that the free pass went to waste.
Before the race, it was apparent that the team's management was frustrated by the decision, with Christian Horner telling Motorsport.com: "That's a question for Renault. The normal strategy is to change everything you can."
31 July 2018, 10:10 AM
#132
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
01 August 2018, 11:52 AM
#135
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/45026461
The story of the collapse of Force India into administration and the search for a rescuer to take over the team just got a lot more complicated.
It's already difficult enough to find a buyer for a Formula 1 team, especially if - as in Force India's case - they have debts of many millions of pounds. But now it has become political.
In a nutshell, three of Formula 1's biggest names - McLaren, Renault and Williams - are asking for reassurances before they agree to conditions that would help a sale.
They are not against the team being bought by new owners - indeed they want it to survive. But they have concerns that by doing so it may become a satellite of a manufacturer - in this case Mercedes - in all but name.
That, they feel, threatens not only their businesses on an existential level, but also the healthy future of the sport itself.
McLaren, Renault and Williams feel this would be a further step towards entrenching F1 as a two-tier sport, and make it impossible for independent teams such as McLaren and Williams to compete, and possibly even to exist.
Even Renault, a manufacturer team themselves, are worried the model by which they run their team would become unsustainable.
Mercedes say they share these concerns. Team boss Toto Wolff told BBC Sport: "We don't like the concept of B teams in Formula 1. We'd rather not have this structure because it provides advantages to both teams - and competitive advantages, you could argue. We are not buying Force India and we would rather not have the concept of a B team."
But the stand-off remains.
Haas are the smallest team on the grid, and yet they consistently have the fourth fastest car. Sauber were two seconds off the back of the grid last year, but this year their promising new driver Charles Leclerc has regularly qualified in the top 10, and even journeyman Marcus Ericsson is regularly threatening a McLaren driven by two-time world champion Fernando Alonso.
McLaren and Williams have their own problems, and freely admit they need to fix them. But they perceive the rise of Haas and Sauber to be the result of the close links and shared resources between both teams and Ferrari - and believe Ferrari are benefiting as well.
McLaren and Williams are worried that, if the model is allowed to perpetuate itself, independent teams will effectively no longer be able to compete. Renault say it could even make them reconsider their involvement in F1.
Renault Sport F1 boss Cyril Abiteboul told BBC Sport he was "not criticising" Haas, who he says are simply making the most of what is allowed under the F1 rules, but added: "That's not the type of F1 we like. We are a little bit afraid that such a construction would make it impossible for anyone who is not enjoying the benefit of a master team or slave team to be competitive at their own level.
"We start to see some glimpses of that today in certain aspects of the grid or the development of the chassis or engine. We need to make sure it does not become a necessity, otherwise our model does not work and our involvement can't be sustainable."
Wolff says: "I understand there are questions from Cyril and others over what is the future of F1 if big teams buy smaller teams, which I completely respect. I completely share those thoughts and I don't think it is the right way forward.
"I hope we can find a discussion so the scope of co-operation is narrowed down between teams. There are commercial arrangements that make sense, but there are downsides to it. And that is the competitive order can change.
"So we need to find a solution to how the small teams can benefit from shared infrastructure but at the same time not gain an advantage that is currently possible."
McLaren and Williams declined to comment.
F1 is engaged in discussions over the future shape of the sport post-2020. The car manufacturers already appear to have won a battle over the engine regulations, fighting off an attempt to make significant changes to the current turbo hybrid engines.
The privateers are concerned that if the 'wrong' people - in their eyes - get their hands on Force India, it would enhance Mercedes' power.
This would be not only when it comes to debate over issues such as rule changes, because it would be another team guaranteed to vote in Mercedes' direction. It could also influence aspects of the driver market.
And even the racing could be affected. If, for example, a Mercedes found itself up behind a car from a Mercedes B team in a race - would the 'B' fight, or simply wave the Mercedes through? Some believe this already happened in Monaco this year, with Lewis Hamilton and Mercedes-contracted Esteban Ocon.
But it's not just about Mercedes. Ferrari, Haas and Sauber have been a similar concern for some time, as have Red Bull and junior team Toro Rosso.
This is the bid McLaren/Renault/Williams are most concerned about in terms of the "slave team" scenario.
Other interested parties are
Mercedes are Force India's largest external creditor. But Wolff says he can have no influence over who buys the team.
"We have held discussions with every potential buyer to my knowledge and the most important (thing) is someone with the right funds buys the team," he says. "But we are not orchestrating it. It is in the hands of the administrator.
"It needs to be the best outcome for the creditors of the team and that is to sell for the best financial outcome."
But, as such, they are also entitled to large amounts of prize money and powerful voting rights - both of which are attractive to a new owner.
However, a buyer will only get these if the transfer of ownership is approved by all the other teams. If not, they are effectively starting from scratch without the benefits, and buying only Force India's 400 staff and assets.
Abiteboul says his concerns do not centre on Mercedes per se, or Force India in isolation; indeed, he says he understands Wolff's position.
"I am not sure Toto is convinced that it is a good thing for F1 to go in this direction," says the Frenchman, who has an alliance with Mercedes on engines and other political issues in F1. "I think it is something he is pushed into looking at.
"I am not saying he is doing it, because I don't know what is in his mind, and I am not privy to the discussions he is having with the Force India administrators and buyers.
"But I am pretty sure that the way he is looking into it, he is seeing it is probably working for Ferrari and therefore (Mercedes) probably needs to mimic what they are doing. So I understand his position."
Abiteboul says his question is a big-picture one to Liberty Media, the US company that took over F1 last year, and governing body the FIA; it's just that the "Force India situation is linked in a certain way".
"We will make sure that no job is under any threat," Abiteboul says. "That is very certain. But we just want to understand the vision of the commercial rights holder in that respect.
"The only thing where we want to have a little bit of clarity is we understand that there are right now a number of incentives for large and smaller teams to get together and take advantage either of the current regulations or future regulations."
Would Renault veto the transfer of rights, naming and prize money in any sale of Force India if they had concerns about the new ownership effectively trying to form a partnership with Mercedes?
"The answer is no, because we want to save the jobs," Abiteboul says. "But we want to have the reassurance required before we have to vote that this will not be the case."
The story of the collapse of Force India into administration and the search for a rescuer to take over the team just got a lot more complicated.
It's already difficult enough to find a buyer for a Formula 1 team, especially if - as in Force India's case - they have debts of many millions of pounds. But now it has become political.
In a nutshell, three of Formula 1's biggest names - McLaren, Renault and Williams - are asking for reassurances before they agree to conditions that would help a sale.
They are not against the team being bought by new owners - indeed they want it to survive. But they have concerns that by doing so it may become a satellite of a manufacturer - in this case Mercedes - in all but name.
That, they feel, threatens not only their businesses on an existential level, but also the healthy future of the sport itself.
What is their problem?
These teams - some of the most successful and well-known competitors in the history of F1 - fear that there is an effort to create a Mercedes B team - and that that would mean not only further strengthening the political and sporting power of the German giant and their off-track ally Ferrari, but also that it has serious ramifications on a much wider level.McLaren, Renault and Williams feel this would be a further step towards entrenching F1 as a two-tier sport, and make it impossible for independent teams such as McLaren and Williams to compete, and possibly even to exist.
Even Renault, a manufacturer team themselves, are worried the model by which they run their team would become unsustainable.
Mercedes say they share these concerns. Team boss Toto Wolff told BBC Sport: "We don't like the concept of B teams in Formula 1. We'd rather not have this structure because it provides advantages to both teams - and competitive advantages, you could argue. We are not buying Force India and we would rather not have the concept of a B team."
But the stand-off remains.
Why the concerns?
Many viewers of F1 will have noticed the leap in competitiveness this year of Haas and Sauber.Haas are the smallest team on the grid, and yet they consistently have the fourth fastest car. Sauber were two seconds off the back of the grid last year, but this year their promising new driver Charles Leclerc has regularly qualified in the top 10, and even journeyman Marcus Ericsson is regularly threatening a McLaren driven by two-time world champion Fernando Alonso.
McLaren and Williams have their own problems, and freely admit they need to fix them. But they perceive the rise of Haas and Sauber to be the result of the close links and shared resources between both teams and Ferrari - and believe Ferrari are benefiting as well.
McLaren and Williams are worried that, if the model is allowed to perpetuate itself, independent teams will effectively no longer be able to compete. Renault say it could even make them reconsider their involvement in F1.
Renault Sport F1 boss Cyril Abiteboul told BBC Sport he was "not criticising" Haas, who he says are simply making the most of what is allowed under the F1 rules, but added: "That's not the type of F1 we like. We are a little bit afraid that such a construction would make it impossible for anyone who is not enjoying the benefit of a master team or slave team to be competitive at their own level.
"We start to see some glimpses of that today in certain aspects of the grid or the development of the chassis or engine. We need to make sure it does not become a necessity, otherwise our model does not work and our involvement can't be sustainable."
Wolff says: "I understand there are questions from Cyril and others over what is the future of F1 if big teams buy smaller teams, which I completely respect. I completely share those thoughts and I don't think it is the right way forward.
"I hope we can find a discussion so the scope of co-operation is narrowed down between teams. There are commercial arrangements that make sense, but there are downsides to it. And that is the competitive order can change.
"So we need to find a solution to how the small teams can benefit from shared infrastructure but at the same time not gain an advantage that is currently possible."
McLaren and Williams declined to comment.
It's about power and politics as well as sport
The background to this is political as much as it is sporting.F1 is engaged in discussions over the future shape of the sport post-2020. The car manufacturers already appear to have won a battle over the engine regulations, fighting off an attempt to make significant changes to the current turbo hybrid engines.
The privateers are concerned that if the 'wrong' people - in their eyes - get their hands on Force India, it would enhance Mercedes' power.
This would be not only when it comes to debate over issues such as rule changes, because it would be another team guaranteed to vote in Mercedes' direction. It could also influence aspects of the driver market.
And even the racing could be affected. If, for example, a Mercedes found itself up behind a car from a Mercedes B team in a race - would the 'B' fight, or simply wave the Mercedes through? Some believe this already happened in Monaco this year, with Lewis Hamilton and Mercedes-contracted Esteban Ocon.
But it's not just about Mercedes. Ferrari, Haas and Sauber have been a similar concern for some time, as have Red Bull and junior team Toro Rosso.
Who and what are they concerned about most?
There are believed to be five potential buyers for Force India, with the leading contender said to be Canadian billionaire Lawrence Stroll, whose son Lance drives for Williams.This is the bid McLaren/Renault/Williams are most concerned about in terms of the "slave team" scenario.
Other interested parties are
- An American consortium involving Indycar team owner Michael Andretti and Pieter Rossi, the father of former F1 driver Alexander Rossi, who now races for Andretti
- A second US consortium involving Jeff Moorad, the former boss of the Arizona Diamondbacks and San Diego Padres baseball teams, who now runs a sports investment-management company
- Russian billionaire Dmitry Mazepin, whose son Nikita races in GP3 and is Force India's development driver
- Soft drink company Rich Energy, said to have West Ham owners David Sullivan and David Gold behind it. Rich Energy had a bid to save the team from administration with a £30m sponsorship deal rejected by the judge on Friday on the basis that it did not provide enough finance for the team going forward
Mercedes are Force India's largest external creditor. But Wolff says he can have no influence over who buys the team.
"We have held discussions with every potential buyer to my knowledge and the most important (thing) is someone with the right funds buys the team," he says. "But we are not orchestrating it. It is in the hands of the administrator.
"It needs to be the best outcome for the creditors of the team and that is to sell for the best financial outcome."
What are the three doing about it?
Force India are appealing to a potential buyer because they finished fourth in the championship last year and are arguably the best pound-for-pound team in F1, on the basis of what they have achieved considering their resources.But, as such, they are also entitled to large amounts of prize money and powerful voting rights - both of which are attractive to a new owner.
However, a buyer will only get these if the transfer of ownership is approved by all the other teams. If not, they are effectively starting from scratch without the benefits, and buying only Force India's 400 staff and assets.
Abiteboul says his concerns do not centre on Mercedes per se, or Force India in isolation; indeed, he says he understands Wolff's position.
"I am not sure Toto is convinced that it is a good thing for F1 to go in this direction," says the Frenchman, who has an alliance with Mercedes on engines and other political issues in F1. "I think it is something he is pushed into looking at.
"I am not saying he is doing it, because I don't know what is in his mind, and I am not privy to the discussions he is having with the Force India administrators and buyers.
"But I am pretty sure that the way he is looking into it, he is seeing it is probably working for Ferrari and therefore (Mercedes) probably needs to mimic what they are doing. So I understand his position."
Abiteboul says his question is a big-picture one to Liberty Media, the US company that took over F1 last year, and governing body the FIA; it's just that the "Force India situation is linked in a certain way".
"We will make sure that no job is under any threat," Abiteboul says. "That is very certain. But we just want to understand the vision of the commercial rights holder in that respect.
"The only thing where we want to have a little bit of clarity is we understand that there are right now a number of incentives for large and smaller teams to get together and take advantage either of the current regulations or future regulations."
Would Renault veto the transfer of rights, naming and prize money in any sale of Force India if they had concerns about the new ownership effectively trying to form a partnership with Mercedes?
"The answer is no, because we want to save the jobs," Abiteboul says. "But we want to have the reassurance required before we have to vote that this will not be the case."
01 August 2018, 12:05 PM
#136
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
'An American consortium involving Indycar team owner Michael Andretti and Pieter Rossi, the father of former F1 driver Alexander Rossi, who now races for Andretti'
Has mclaren got andretti contact with indy car? so thats a bit pot calling kettle black in my view. Also why have they singled out mercedes, ferrari has two team's who are there minions and red bull has one.
But that said, i can see the team going belly up because of the politics of it, not because there isnt a proper offer on the table.
18 car grid next year there, it's getting a bit silly and showing the sports flawed from a high level, dropping from 24 cars to 18 is a real kick int eh ***** and i don't think it's sustainable with that small number.
Has mclaren got andretti contact with indy car? so thats a bit pot calling kettle black in my view. Also why have they singled out mercedes, ferrari has two team's who are there minions and red bull has one.
But that said, i can see the team going belly up because of the politics of it, not because there isnt a proper offer on the table.
18 car grid next year there, it's getting a bit silly and showing the sports flawed from a high level, dropping from 24 cars to 18 is a real kick int eh ***** and i don't think it's sustainable with that small number.
01 August 2018, 12:28 PM
#137
'An American consortium involving Indycar team owner Michael Andretti and Pieter Rossi, the father of former F1 driver Alexander Rossi, who now races for Andretti'
Has mclaren got andretti contact with indy car? so thats a bit pot calling kettle black in my view. Also why have they singled out mercedes, ferrari has two team's who are there minions and red bull has one.
But that said, i can see the team going belly up because of the politics of it, not because there isnt a proper offer on the table.
18 car grid next year there, it's getting a bit silly and showing the sports flawed from a high level, dropping from 24 cars to 18 is a real kick int eh ***** and i don't think it's sustainable with that small number.
Has mclaren got andretti contact with indy car? so thats a bit pot calling kettle black in my view. Also why have they singled out mercedes, ferrari has two team's who are there minions and red bull has one.
But that said, i can see the team going belly up because of the politics of it, not because there isnt a proper offer on the table.
18 car grid next year there, it's getting a bit silly and showing the sports flawed from a high level, dropping from 24 cars to 18 is a real kick int eh ***** and i don't think it's sustainable with that small number.
Stinks, especially if Force India do fold, I dont think it will come to that, I really dont get why Merc cant have a junior team.
03 August 2018, 10:53 AM
#138
Three-time champion Lauda has lung transplant
Lauda is non-executive chairman of Mercedes and won the Formula 1 drivers’ championship in 1975 and 1977 with Ferrari and again in 1984 with McLaren.
In 1976, he was badly burned when he crashed during the German Grand Prix, but returned to racing just six weeks later.
Three-time Formula 1 world champion Niki Lauda is in hospital following a lung transplant.
Vienna General Hospital in Austria said in a statement that 69-year-old Lauda had been suffering from “severe lung condition”. It added “the transplant was carried out successfully”.Lauda is non-executive chairman of Mercedes and won the Formula 1 drivers’ championship in 1975 and 1977 with Ferrari and again in 1984 with McLaren.
In 1976, he was badly burned when he crashed during the German Grand Prix, but returned to racing just six weeks later.
03 August 2018, 12:14 PM
#140
Three-time champion Lauda has lung transplant
Lauda is non-executive chairman of Mercedes and won the Formula 1 drivers’ championship in 1975 and 1977 with Ferrari and again in 1984 with McLaren.
In 1976, he was badly burned when he crashed during the German Grand Prix, but returned to racing just six weeks later.
Three-time Formula 1 world champion Niki Lauda is in hospital following a lung transplant.
Vienna General Hospital in Austria said in a statement that 69-year-old Lauda had been suffering from “severe lung condition”. It added “the transplant was carried out successfully”.Lauda is non-executive chairman of Mercedes and won the Formula 1 drivers’ championship in 1975 and 1977 with Ferrari and again in 1984 with McLaren.
In 1976, he was badly burned when he crashed during the German Grand Prix, but returned to racing just six weeks later.
Also, shame about Sergio Marchionne. He did a great job turning around Fiat Group and Chrysler; two former basket-case companies.
03 August 2018, 12:15 PM
#141
Daniel Ricciardo has advised us that he is to leave the Team at the end of the 2018 season.
Daniel Ricciardo has advised us that he is to leave the Team at the end of the 2018 season.
Having joined the Red Bull family in 2008 as a member of the Red Bull Junior Team, with whom he won numerous junior titles, Daniel made his F1 debut in 2011 at the British Grand Prix. After two seasons with Scuderia Toro Rosso, Daniel joined us in 2014 and to date has brought the team seven victories, 29 podium finishes, two pole positions and 904 championship points.
Commenting on Daniel’s decision, Aston Martin Red Bull Racing Team Principal Christian Horner said: “We fully respect Daniel’s decision to leave Aston Martin Red Bull Racing and we wish him all the best in his future. We would like to thank him for his dedication and the role he has played since joining the Team in 2014, the highlights of course being the seven wins and the 29 podiums he has achieved so far with us.
“We will now continue to evaluate the numerous options available to us before deciding on which driver partners Max Verstappen for the 2019 season. In the meantime, there are still nine races left in 2018 and we are fully focused on maximising every opportunity for Max and Daniel for the remainder of the season.”
Daniel Ricciardo has advised us that he is to leave the Team at the end of the 2018 season.
Having joined the Red Bull family in 2008 as a member of the Red Bull Junior Team, with whom he won numerous junior titles, Daniel made his F1 debut in 2011 at the British Grand Prix. After two seasons with Scuderia Toro Rosso, Daniel joined us in 2014 and to date has brought the team seven victories, 29 podium finishes, two pole positions and 904 championship points.
Commenting on Daniel’s decision, Aston Martin Red Bull Racing Team Principal Christian Horner said: “We fully respect Daniel’s decision to leave Aston Martin Red Bull Racing and we wish him all the best in his future. We would like to thank him for his dedication and the role he has played since joining the Team in 2014, the highlights of course being the seven wins and the 29 podiums he has achieved so far with us.
“We will now continue to evaluate the numerous options available to us before deciding on which driver partners Max Verstappen for the 2019 season. In the meantime, there are still nine races left in 2018 and we are fully focused on maximising every opportunity for Max and Daniel for the remainder of the season.”
03 August 2018, 01:56 PM
#145
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
so who does that leave where next year?
Merc - ham -Bot
Fer - Vet-raik
RB - vestapen - seinz??
Ren - Hulk? and recardo
Will - stro? - Sir?
ForI - Perez? - Ocon?
Mcl - Alonso?? - Van?
Hass - Gros?? - Mag?
Torro - Gas?? - Hart??
Saub - Eric? - Lecl?
with 1 ? = prob and 2 ? = 50/50
Merc - ham -Bot
Fer - Vet-raik
RB - vestapen - seinz??
Ren - Hulk? and recardo
Will - stro? - Sir?
ForI - Perez? - Ocon?
Mcl - Alonso?? - Van?
Hass - Gros?? - Mag?
Torro - Gas?? - Hart??
Saub - Eric? - Lecl?
with 1 ? = prob and 2 ? = 50/50
03 August 2018, 03:44 PM
#146
so who does that leave where next year?
Merc - ham -Bot
Fer - Vet-raik
RB - vestapen - seinz??
Ren - Hulk? and recardo
Will - stro? - Sir?
ForI - Perez? - Ocon?
Mcl - Alonso?? - Van?
Hass - Gros?? - Mag?
Torro - Gas?? - Hart??
Saub - Eric? - Lecl?
with 1 ? = prob and 2 ? = 50/50
Merc - ham -Bot
Fer - Vet-raik
RB - vestapen - seinz??
Ren - Hulk? and recardo
Will - stro? - Sir?
ForI - Perez? - Ocon?
Mcl - Alonso?? - Van?
Hass - Gros?? - Mag?
Torro - Gas?? - Hart??
Saub - Eric? - Lecl?
with 1 ? = prob and 2 ? = 50/50
06 August 2018, 12:05 PM
#148
Slightly unfair comment.
Daniel himself was only saying in his interview with david coulthard few weeks back how he is happy at RB and intends on remaining there for many yrs !
Daniel himself was only saying in his interview with david coulthard few weeks back how he is happy at RB and intends on remaining there for many yrs !
07 August 2018, 01:38 PM
#149
According to company documents, Mansour Ojjeh resigned on 26 July from the board of the team as well as its marketing division and McLaren Applied Technologiesl
Mansour Ojjeh, one of the duo in charge of McLaren’s Formula One outfit, has resigned from the team after more than 30 years on its board.
According to company documents, on 26 July Ojjeh resigned from the board of the team as well as its marketing division and McLaren Applied Technologies which uses developments from F1 in other industries.
Ojjeh remains on the board of McLaren’s parent company and its supercar manufacturing division. McLaren insists that his resignation from the board of the team is simply part of simplifying its corporate structure and nothing in practice has changed other than a decision that makes for a more efficient and practical process.
It brings the chequered flag down on Ojjeh’s three-decade tenure as a director of the team which began in 1984 when his Swiss-based TAG Group acquired a majority stake in it. This has been reduced to 15.9 per cent since then with 62.6 per cent owned by Bahrain’s Mumtalakat sovereign wealth fund and the remainder split between a number of investors including Canadian tycoon Michael Latifi who bought a 10 per cent stake for £203m in May.
McLaren is F1’s second-most successful team and has won a total of 20 titles with legendary drivers like Alain Prost and Ayrton Senna. However, its performance has reversed in recent years and it finished second from last in 2017, the team’s worst result since it was founded in 1963.
It was driven by a disastrous partnership with engine manufacturer Honda and although McLaren has switched to Renault this year it is still languishing in seventh place. Crucially, the team is more than a second slower than rival Red Bull which also uses Renault engines.
The spluttering performance claimed the scalp of McLaren’s racing director Eric Boullier, who left last month, and there have now been further changes.
Mansour Ojjeh, one of the duo in charge of McLaren’s Formula One outfit, has resigned from the team after more than 30 years on its board.
According to company documents, on 26 July Ojjeh resigned from the board of the team as well as its marketing division and McLaren Applied Technologies which uses developments from F1 in other industries.
Ojjeh remains on the board of McLaren’s parent company and its supercar manufacturing division. McLaren insists that his resignation from the board of the team is simply part of simplifying its corporate structure and nothing in practice has changed other than a decision that makes for a more efficient and practical process.
It brings the chequered flag down on Ojjeh’s three-decade tenure as a director of the team which began in 1984 when his Swiss-based TAG Group acquired a majority stake in it. This has been reduced to 15.9 per cent since then with 62.6 per cent owned by Bahrain’s Mumtalakat sovereign wealth fund and the remainder split between a number of investors including Canadian tycoon Michael Latifi who bought a 10 per cent stake for £203m in May.
McLaren is F1’s second-most successful team and has won a total of 20 titles with legendary drivers like Alain Prost and Ayrton Senna. However, its performance has reversed in recent years and it finished second from last in 2017, the team’s worst result since it was founded in 1963.
It was driven by a disastrous partnership with engine manufacturer Honda and although McLaren has switched to Renault this year it is still languishing in seventh place. Crucially, the team is more than a second slower than rival Red Bull which also uses Renault engines.
The spluttering performance claimed the scalp of McLaren’s racing director Eric Boullier, who left last month, and there have now been further changes.