Williams blues

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koz

This reminds me of a lot of failed businesses who always try to cut costs at the cost of cutting quality. It rarely works.

---

Whether or not this actually applies to Williams, you're certainly right about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

History has proved Max's instinct on Flavio to be correct in respect of honesty......

---

It's a bit like Tony Blair saying that Saddam Hussein was bad. Correct sentiment, but wrong person expressing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koz

I disagree with this very, very much.
Two world championships with Mika, and very nearly two more with Kimi. The fact that they did not dominate does not mean much when you consider how badly Ferrari dominated.

Look at 1999, aside from bad luck, the McLaren dominated. It was (or at least should have been) no less a whitewash than 2011 season. The car was on podium or retired. The fact that they didn't get results that they deserved doesn't mean it wasn't within a whisker.

---

I see your point and in 1998-2000 McLaren was certainly very good. But IMO the subsequent period shows that Newey can't guarantee you success if the rest of the team is not up to it. And it is not merely about Ferrari's dominance, because in 2002-04 McLaren didn't even finish second in WCC. And in 2005 were beaten by Renault.

However, I must admit that Mercedes' engine deficiency was also strongly rumoured at the time, so I may be harsh on the McLaren design team and it may have been the Ilmor-designer engines, which didn't allow McLaren to win or even dominate F1 at the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koz

There is something inherently wrong with Williams' business model.
Did the dollars they save by going to Cosworth benefit them?
And last year they had a decent car let down by drivers...

They could have been on the podium consistently in 2010 if they had a decent engine.

If they need so much money from drivers to stay in F1, then I don't know what else I can say. You aren't going to attract the big sponsor by consistently being the weakest team on the grid, regardless of why they are the weakest.

---

There is clearly something inherently right about Williams' business model if they can turn a profit year in year out. One cannot say the same about Sauber in particular but also FI which depends on two Indian businesses that are in massive trouble.

Despite the troubles of recent years they have diversified and built up businesses supplying KERS devices to car and train makers, this also turns a profit which is ploughed back into the company.

While it appears that Williams have taken a step back this season (their qualifying time at Barcelona was for instance slower in 2013 than 2012) I suspect this has something to do with the change in tyre specification and a failure to react to this rather than the 2013 car being inherently worse than the previous season's. As a team in the longterm I think Williams are in a better position than their midfield rivals and possibly Lotus too.

Speaking of Lotus's losses:

The Lotus Formula One team last year recorded the biggest loss of any outfit in motorsport history


This doesn't sound very good. I guess their Genii Capital sponsors provide some kind of financial cushion.

It is also well known that Lotus never paid wages on time.