Ahem.. I think you will find Sato's aggressive driving style was much more responsible for their success than Button's smooth driving style. :p :Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
Ahem.. I think you will find Sato's aggressive driving style was much more responsible for their success than Button's smooth driving style. :p :Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
I expect someone to pop in soon to say that Villeneuve's testing skills were responsible for the rise of BAR!
OK, you're right, I should have formulated it otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
IMO the one who did most for BAR Honda's success was Willis followed by Button.
But if we have to give credit to the management than I think it was Richards and prove for that is that as soon as he left the team started their downfall.
Agreed....Fry isn't cut out for team management and Richards love him or hate him knows how to run a team.
Subaru might disagree with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by I am evil Homer
Apparently this deal has to be done by the end of the month or Honda close the factory for good. So it looks to me like this could be the 'last chance'.
http://planetf1.com/story/0,18954,3213_4942791,00.html
Of course the assumption there being that Richards did all the hands on management reshuffling work at BAR which he didn't, as anyone who knows his style would understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by I am evil Homer
Richards gives his underlings a lot of freedom to do things their own way. Although he is the figurehead at BAR, Fry was left to do things the way he wanted from 2002 onwards, the same is true at Subaru. Richards merely turned up on weekends and for major decision making meetings or crises like Buttongate.
It may be inconvenient to give Fry credit for turning BAR around but I'm afraid the truth has a habit of not being so.
What because someone in Japan built a rubbish roadcar with the centre of gravity all off for rallying? You can't polish a turd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
I agree that Richards was a good principal for BAR and I think the team, directed by Richards with Fry driving development was very successful.
How much is down to individual people is a matter of opinion but similarly, the recent Honda years have not allowed Fry to really do his job.
I'm not saying he's the Mutts nuts but fair to say that there is no evidence he's not a good designer either.
All I am saying is that I would like to see what he can do without having a ex Motorcycle designer directing his efforts.
I'm not sure about that. The C4 as a roadcar is hardly fantastic. Plus the Impreza was successful in the past and suddenly now it isn't? Gimme a break!Quote:
Originally Posted by I am evil Homer
What, like 50p or something ;) If that's the case I'll top them with an offer of 75p, no way I'm paying the full quid though :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Dylan H
One major difference is that Citroen dont make a 4 wd / turbo engine version of the C4, so there is absolutely no constraints on Citroen engineers - they gave a clean sheet, basically C4 silhouette to work from. Subaru make a 4wd turbo engined roadcar, that the wrcar was based on. Slight difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Within the regulations of WRCars there is a lot of freedom for design and innovation. I somehow doubt the formula which was successful even back in 2003 is somehow not right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by MJW
are you serious, Of course its not.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
the impreza wrs s11,s12, s12b, s14 are all much quicker tha the 2003 car
just not as quick as the 04, 05, 06, 07 and 08 focus and Xsara/C4's
Talk to people who have driven themQuote:
Originally Posted by speedsnake74
absolutely,Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
not only is he an unapologetic opportunist who was trying to steer the honda sale into his own benefit, but i will never forgive him for orchestrating Super Aguri's exit from F1. A team that was on a clear upward slope before Fry got jealous and vindictive.
He has no business in an F1 paddock any more and has no legitimacy in my book. And Richards should follow close behind him, He butchered the whole prodrive situation and now wants another bite of the apple. No thanks.
How long would you want another team leeching off your resources without getting a return on it?Quote:
Originally Posted by truefan72
Those were not Honda F1 Team's resources and certainly not Fry's resources!Quote:
Originally Posted by theugsquirrel
Honda Japan was paying Super Aguri in order to give Sato a ride and thus have a Japanese F1 driver on the grid.
What Fry did is equivalent with destroying your little brother because he get's pocket money from your parents and he manages it better. (this was just an example and all characters involved are fictious! :D )
Could you please back this up with any facts leading to your conclusions?Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
I don't have enough hard and fast data to base a conclusive opinion about Nick Fry on but there seems a lot of slander floating about based on peoples opinions and preferences and very little actual proof or facts.
According to some people here, he is akin to the anti-Christ who destroyed the work Reynard did and was a woefully ineffective manager hanging at the coat tails of Dave Richards.
Then in the same breath, he has the power and control to sabotage his Japaneese masters efforts in another semi-independant team!!
It makes no sense :confused:
Errrrrrr, ummmmmmm, errrrrrr, was it not Honda that hung Sato out to dry in the first place? All of a sudden it is Fry that has done this. All he has done, in fact it seems to me all he has ever done, is look after the interests of HIS team.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Suppose there were rumours that Honda was thinking of running away a few seasons ago. Would you happily allow another team - haemmoraging all YOUR money and BEATING you, allow the nails be hammered into the coffin even quicker.
Sheesh, you lot would lay the fault of America's war in Iraq/Afganistan at Fry's door too. In fact, didn't Fry design, build and skipper the Titanic.......?
No, but he designed the Iceburg and lewis steered it into the Titanic :DQuote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Woah, stop giving Fry superhero powers.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Super Aguri owed Honda $100 million on the promise that they would be repaid by sponsors that never materialised. Guess what? Honda lost patience and pulled the plug. Fry had nothing to do with it.
As for funding a team just to keep a Japanese driver on the grid, this is Honda, a company that finds it nice if there is one on the grid but has never given much of a toss if there wasn't either. Autosport which is the source of much of this nonsense about Sato, Super Aguri and Honda is showing its ignorance of the Japanese market I'm afraid, Sato never was that big over there outside the hardcore F1 fan market. Certainly not worth spending $100 million on to keep in F1. If Honda was that desperate to keep him they wouldn't have sacked him in the first place would they.
No, but if you eat enough yoghurt it puts a nice gloss on it....... :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by I am evil Homer
Anyway, back to the thread :D
Bernie is now involved and seems to be pushing the Branson bid. No surprise there :rolleyes:
Look like the only 2 deals are a management buyout or the Virgin / Prodrive inititive.
Honda have mooted that disbanding the team is still an option which is worrying unless it's a strong arm tactic.
Hmmmmm
I think we need to accept that Honda are potentially not the only team to 'pull the plug' and more will follow as the global crisis deepens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
Talking to one of my work colleagues who has explained to me how Lehman's got so in the sh!t, I can see how there is a lot more poopoo to come in terms of severe toxic debt.
Toxic debt is a nasty problem that will quickly get written off by the banks, underwritten by the government, allowing the banks to concentrate on nice profitable business while the tax payer picks up the bill.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
We are already seeing banks bounce back after taking Billions of taxpayers money to put aside against toxic debt and then posting huge profits.
Exactly WHAt share have we got in the banks? I'll bet it composes of nice gilt edged bonds wrapped up in the stinking s**t they want to offload.
I think you'll find that the banks that have made large profits are the ones with the least toxic debt. Also, the banks still haven't gone halfway through the task of sorting out which of their debts are rubbish and which aren't so there's plenty of room left for nasty surprises.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
It won't get quickly written off, and lets not forget that the car makers are getting in worse and worse trouble. If GM or Chrysler folds that will knock out a few suppliers in the US which will drag Honda, Toyota, Beemer and Merc and anyone else building cars there down with them.
We've still got a long way to fall...
I'm not sure about Bernie's comments, they add nothing new and may simply be adding pressure to Branson from whom we've heard nothing. I won't believe anything until we see the two ex-Hondas on the grid in Melbourne.
I'm not sure this is how it would be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylan H
If GM and Chrysler folds than the others, who are producing cheaper and better cars will surely have a better market than before.
Sure suppliers will have to cut back or some of them will close, but as long as one car manufacturer stays also their suppliers will stay alive. And I doubt that people are suddenly thinking about walking hundreds of miles instead of uying a car.
IMO we should not exaggerate things.
Sure this crisis is nasty, but we still need plenty of products in order to live our lives, and those who produce the products with the best price/quality will survive, which is the right thing IMO.
Come on Branson! Make with the cash so we can get on with this season.
:?:Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
I'm assuming this thread has been derailed a bit.
To get the thread back on track....
Sir Richard Branson was a studio guest on BBC News this morning, mainly to talk about 25 years of Virgin Atlantic Airways but he was asked about the Honda team and he said said very little, only that if "F1 were to use greener fuels and be more cost effective for the likes of the Virgin brand he might be interested".....?!
As ever, a businessman keeping his cards close to his chest but the clock is ticking surely..?
I'd guess it depends on the extra money....does anyone know if Branson's "green fuel" idea is being developed with anyone? After all, if Petrobras came in on that or were already the partner it would smooth the way for extra money and place Senna in a prime position for a seat.
Nothing is being exaggerated I'm afraid.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
I accept your point about good products surviving, but that logic only applies in the long term once everything has died down.
Your point about a bigger market for the surviving car makers isn't quite valid as there are huge stocks of unsold cars from GM, Ford and Chrysler. If one of them goes bust the liquidators will release that stock onto the market at hugely discounted prices to get cash.
Thats why Honda and Toyota stocks plummeted through the floor when the big Three went to the US government for a bailout. If one of them folds, the Japanese stand to suffer. Why buy a Camry or Accord for 20% off if a GM or Chrysler is yours for 60% off?
Regarding the suppliers approximately 60% of the suppliers to Japanese and German makers in the US also rely on GM and Chrysler. How do you think those suppliers will do when they lose 40% of their custom, and thats after the already reduced demand there is for car parts?
The car makers haven't seen the worst of it yet, 80% of BMWs are sold in the US and UK on credit and a lot of them are returning to BMW worth a considerable lot less than promised. Thats a timebomb waiting to happen.
Don't get me wrong, the best will still be around after all the dust settles but there's a lot of pain on the way. Spending millions of F1 really isn't going to be a priority for anyone in the next few years.
And today I hear Branson comment that F1 as it is isn't quite right for him. Its probably posturing before his bid but I don't think we should assume he's that interested in Honda.
Are you sure that people are willing to buy old-fashioned, gasoline-eating cars whose manufacturer has collapsed, no matter what the prices are? Spare parts and maintenance issues will come into picture here. Maybe Americans are different, but on a global scale a good example is Swedish Saab, part of GM. I read a story in a Swedish newspaper which suggested that Saab retailers haven't managed to sell ANY cars at all in the last weeks because the future of the brand is so uncertain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylan H
The fuel is key to the bid , it seems .Quote:
Originally Posted by acescribe
Is Branson clever or what ?
He'll run his entry , and sell green fuel to the lot of them before long .
He's also a guy who could negotiate the FOTA money distribution issue , before even being a member , and that may be the "cost effective" aspect to which he was referring .
Fry had everything to do with it, even before the "convenient" situation of owed money came up (which could have been remedied) Fry was instigating actions detrimental to the Super Aguri Team.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylan H
1. Limiting parts that were scheduled to come to them
2. Making overtures to the Honda bosses to drop SA
3. Undermining their in-season testing
4. severely limiting their options in resolving their debt
He effectively strangled the team, then turned around and made his case to Honda to dismiss them. As I recall, he was also in charge of making decisions regarding their future, potential sponsors and buyers, and if I remember well, he set up obstacles in each case to drive away sponsors and/or buyers.
The man is a class-A jerk who must have some photos of Honda execs somewhere to keep his employment. He has done absolutely nothing for them the last couple of years and will go down in history as bringing down 2 F1 teams in a span 1 calendar year, out of sheer incomptence, conniving and obtuse jealousy.
How about keeping a team with a winning formula, strong public support, cult like following, fan favorite, clear example of operating successfully on a budget, and popular drivers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylan H
No, sounds too reasonable. Instead we will drop $300 million on a car and team that's a dud. With unmotivated drivers, shoddy management and lackluster performance.
Sounds reasonable to me. LOL
IMO funding super Aguri was the best F1 investment Honda made, and clearly going down the road they did has proven to be a monumental error. Most decisions like this indicate useless political machinations and have very little to do with achievement and common sense.
He must be one powerful capable man to keep Honda in his thrall for so long, manipulating their decisions regarding Super Aguri his way, filtering sponsors and potential buyers (Don't you think blue chip companies would simply contact Honda directly and blow the whistle if they thought Fry was doing something dodgy).Quote:
Originally Posted by truefan72
Why also disregard his earlier success turning BAR around, signing Rubens (ok debatable as to whether that was good) and Ross Brawn? Are they a little inconvenient to fit in?
If you also honestly believe he is behind Honda pulling out of F1 then really there's no helping you either.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think he's God's gift to F1 either but this simpleminded and one dimensional demonisation is something I find rather infantile.
Really? So where did the Super Aguri car come from? Did they design it themselves? No. Were they going to be able to carry on using copied cars? No. Were they paying their own way? No. Why carry on paying for a team with no future according to the regulations at the time?Quote:
Originally Posted by truefan72
Why fund a team that also takes the glory away from your named team? Why not restructure the team that actually designs the cars so it does a better job? Why not recruit someone like Ross Brawn and other designers and focus all the effort into one team?
Sorry missed your post. I don't know to be honest, but I suspect any liquidator will do whatever it takes to convert the unsold stock into cash, even if it takes shipping the cars elsewhere (ie to Oz or the Middle East that like US cars) and dump them there.Quote:
Originally Posted by DexDexter
In the UK I believe that all the MG-Rovers were finally sold when the company went bust and the suppliers are quite happy to keep making parts, after all they still get paid from the customers, probably a more reliable source of income than any soon-to-be-bankrupt maker.
I don't agree, if everything died as you say than nothing would have survived.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylan H
I doubt everything will come to a full stop as no one would get anything out of that.
The system needs a heavy revision but it can continue to go forward.
The European and Japanese constructors have a market of their own, free of any american counterparts and will survive just fine when the GM and Chrysler go down.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylan H
That seems to much to me. There are plenty of BMW's in Europe and Rusia too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylan H
EU is half a billion people even without the UK, that is almost double of the USA, and if you count Russia it well over it.
If 20% of the BMW only are sold in EU and Rusia + Asia, and I still see plenty of them everywhere, than 80% in a much smaller market would mean that the density of BMW's in the US and UK is 10 times higher than in Europe, which I can't believe.
Maybe they sold in the US 70-80% of the Z8 or some other very expensive roadster that European's won't buy for practical reasons. But 80% of their production is difficult to believe.
Try actually reading my original post. I've explained why the Japanese and European makers will be hit if GM or Chrysler go down. Its to do with suppliers falling and the market being awash with cheap GM/Chrysler stock being liquidated. I haven't read anything in your posts to explain why industry forecasters have got it wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
No you misquoted me. 80% of BMWs sold in the UK and the US are sold on credit. I didn't say 80% of BMWs are sold to the UK and US. The rest of my post explains why that is a problem. I forgot to add that now credit is more expensive it means that far fewer people can afford to buy on credit too, further cutting sales.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan