Almost official: USF1 wouldn't race in 2010

Employee walks past Anderson in corridor at USF1

Anderson: "Hello ****** how's it going?
Employee: "well, I just missed my first ever mortgage payment"
Anderson: "but apart from that, how's it going?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

Windsor asked "Who doesn't think we will make Bahrain?" and was SHOCKED at the hands shown? THAT is a man who is swimming in the wrong water.

---

He is quite out of his depth, but from what I've read I hold him in higher regard than I do Anderson.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theugsquirrel

He is quite out of his depth, but from what I've read I hold him in higher regard than I do Anderson.

---

watch what you say he might be inline for more time on oneHD / 10

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thunderbolt

watch what you say he might be inline for more time on oneHD / 10

---

Yikes!

Question is how can the FIA determine that it is okay for both USF1 and Campos to miss requirements and yet in the future rule?

Missing all the tests ought to be a significant penalty and for teams that will have drivers that are as novice as can be.

And the FIA says nothing?

Ferrari have every right to be annoyed at the amateur approach of these teams and the incompetance of the FIA.

Its good to have teams that will likely be many seconds behaind the rest of the grid? The "mobile chicane" division.

i think it is time to rename this thread
http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpa...s_art_id=39994

Quote:

---

The Locstein Group, which was said to be one of the primary sponsors of the beleaguered US F1 team has officially confirmed that it has chosen to withdraw

---

because it is pitpass i have looked for other links

Quote:

---

Gerucht: USF1 verliest hoofdsponsor

Formule 1 nieuws - ‎17 hours ago‎
Volgens Autoevolution.com heeft hoofdsponsor Locstein Group zich teruggetrokken uit het Amerikaanse F1 project. Het Zwitserse bedrijf zou 10 miljoen dollar ...



Où en est USF1?

F1-instinct.com - ‎17 hours ago‎
Cette nouvelle rumeur indiquerait que Locstein Group AG, société de services financiers basée à Genève aurait pu injecter une forte somme en sponsoring dans ...

---

http://www.microsofttranslator.com/B...toryid%3D31847

Quote:

---

What can go wrong, USF1 error. The American formula one team must incorporate a new setback. Locstein Group officially confirmed no longer has to be part of the USF1 project. The Swiss company would like to donate $ 10 million, money that could use USF1 well.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Question is how can the FIA determine that it is okay for both USF1 and Campos to miss requirements and yet in the future rule?

Missing all the tests ought to be a significant penalty and for teams that will have drivers that are as novice as can be.

And the FIA says nothing?

Ferrari have every right to be annoyed at the amateur approach of these teams and the incompetance of the FIA.

Its good to have teams that will likely be many seconds behaind the rest of the grid? The "mobile chicane" division.

---

FIA - WTF1 international assistance... ;)

FIA grew some.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/81677

Well if the situation is as dire as it has been suggested then this inspection will have only one outcome - the end of USF1.

I feel so sorry for the workers and fans of USF1 who clearly so wanted this to work but they have been screwed over by Windsor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Question is how can the FIA determine that it is okay for both USF1 and Campos to miss requirements and yet in the future rule?

Missing all the tests ought to be a significant penalty and for teams that will have drivers that are as novice as can be.

And the FIA says nothing?

Ferrari have every right to be annoyed at the amateur approach of these teams and the incompetance of the FIA.

Its good to have teams that will likely be many seconds behaind the rest of the grid? The "mobile chicane" division.

---

A similar division to that occupied by Ferrari at certain points of their not always glorious F1 history, let's not forget. A bit of historical perspective wouldn't go amiss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sonic

Well if the situation is as dire as it has been suggested then this inspection will have only one outcome - the end of USF1.

I feel so sorry for the workers and fans of USF1 who clearly so wanted this to work but they have been screwed over by Windsor.

---

Why only one person screwing them over? By all accounts, blame can't be apportioned that easily.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Why only one person screwing them over? By all accounts, blame can't be apportioned that easily.

---

Well I could've gone on (and did for a while before I deleted it) but the fact remains that this project - whilst a brilliant idea - was doomed by terrible mismanagement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sonic

Well I could've gone on (and did for a while before I deleted it) but the fact remains that this project - whilst a brilliant idea - was doomed by terrible mismanagement.

---

Agreed, but certainly not just by Windsor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Agreed, but certainly not just by Windsor.

---

True. I just can't understand how, with such a unclear business plan, they made it through the FIA's vetting system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

FIA grew some.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/81677

---

Must be a significant time delay between the US and the rest of the world. USF1's plans have been highly questionable for some time, along with Campos, and the FIA really should've been more pro-active in looking into how the preparations are going along.

The FIA are going to come out of this looking just as bad as the USF1 management.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

Windsor asked "Who doesn't think we will make Bahrain?" and was SHOCKED at the hands shown? THAT is a man who is swimming in the wrong water.

---

lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sonic

True. I just can't understand how, with such a unclear business plan, they made it through the FIA's vetting system.

---

Well, thank Max Mosley for that.
Add to that blackmailing teams to use cosworth, and refusing entry tot hose that didn't want to, add to that a hasty decision to try and undermine FOTA, lack of a serous vetting process, etc, etc, etc.

Now Campos and USF1 can claim that they thought the economic climate would be different and at the time, Mosley was pushing for a ridiculously low budget cap on all teams, but what these two groups failed to understand ( and that's a pretty amateurish mistake to make) is that starting up a team, along with required cost is far more of daunting an expensive task, than running a team wiht a set budget. Seems to me that never took into account the immense startup costs required to get a team operational. There is blame to go all the way around 40% Mad Max and 60% the teams, who should have known (as many other did a long time ago) that they were far, far from qualified to be a proper F1 team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by christophulus

Must be a significant time delay between the US and the rest of the world. USF1's plans have been highly questionable for some time, along with Campos, and the FIA really should've been more pro-active in looking into how the preparations are going along.

The FIA are going to come out of this looking just as bad as the USF1 management.

---

yep, pretty much. But they can put away their embarrassment by allowing Stefan GP in an nixing USF1's entry for 2010, whilst placing them on a reserve list for 2011. People, media,fans will soon forget about the USF1 debacle and focus on Stefan GP. If the fIA do the right thing people will be more forgiving. and Jean Todt has a great excuse to blame the misgiving on, namely the former president.

the sooner they do this the better for the integrity of the sport and the sooner we will forget about the mess and focus on 26 cars in 2010

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sonic

True. I just can't understand how, with such a unclear business plan, they made it through the FIA's vetting system.

---

I find the whole thing, as described in the 'insider' account linked to earlier in the thread, quite astonishing to be honest. Even leaving aside completely the FIA's vetting process, and to some extent the USF1 business plan, it is clear that certain senior people in the team just didn't do their work anything like on time, and as a result the car simply didn't materialise. How on earth was this allowed to go unchecked? That is where the FIA then comes in. I am loathe to be too critical of the FIA at present, as I see nothing so far in Todt's presidency to object to and reckon there's quite a bit in his approach to be pleased about, but in the USF1 case it has fallen down on the job, and badly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

Well, thank Max Mosley for that.
Add to that blackmailing teams to use cosworth, and refusing entry tot hose that didn't want to, add to that a hasty decision to try and undermine FOTA, lack of a serous vetting process, etc, etc, etc.

Now Campos and USF1 can claim that they thought the economic climate would be different and at the time, Mosley was pushing for a ridiculously low budget cap on all teams, but what these two groups failed to understand ( and that's a pretty amateurish mistake to make) is that starting up a team, along with required cost is far more of daunting an expensive task, than running a team wiht a set budget. Seems to me that never took into account the immense startup costs required to get a team operational. There is blame to go all the way around 40% Mad Max and 60% the teams, who should have known (as many other did a long time ago) that they were far, far from qualified to be a proper F1 team.

---

That about sums it up.

Actually two out of four new ventures in such a difficult arena is not a bad strike rate at all in business terms. Quite good actually.

And those succeeding have clearly in common, stuctures that the other two do not.

As usual Bernie was correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Actually two out of four new ventures in such a difficult arena is not a bad strike rate at all in business terms. Quite good actually.

---

not really,

the process is supposed to be set up to have a 100% success rate in terms of participation and having cars on the grid. If the teams turn out to be perennial loser or disorganized so be it. But the vetting process and process should have ensured that all teams approved for entry would be at the first GP with cars and such.

So I'm not satisfied with a 50% success rate with 2 teams struggling to make the grid. Especially when you know they denied other teams that surely would have been better prepared and ready to go. It is a failure by those involved in the fIA at that time and their decisions reflect poorly on F1.

It wasn't like these were the only 2 option they had left and we should be thankful that 2 out of 4 made it. They chose those particular teams and they surely knew what they where doing ...or did they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

not really,

the process is supposed to be set up to have a 100% success rate in terms of participation and having cars on the grid. If the teams turn out to be perennial loser or disorganized so be it. But the vetting process and process should have ensured that all teams approved for entry would be at the first GP with cars and such.

So I'm not satisfied with a 50% success rate with 2 teams struggling to make the grid. Especially when you know they denied other teams that surely would have been better prepared and ready to go. It is a failure by those involved in the fIA at that time and their decisions reflect poorly on F1.

It wasn't like these were the only 2 option they had left and we should be thankful that 2 out of 4 made it. They chose those particular teams and they surely knew what they where doing ...or did they?

---

Nobody is privy to the reasons why the FIA chose the way they did and no system can achieve 100%.

Its not that important really - two new teams this year in good nick are great. Maybe for next season two better selections or even one will arise.

Good things, sometimes, take time :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Its not that important really - two new teams this year in good nick are great.

---

I wouldn't be so quick to say Virgin and Lotus are in great shape. Lotus don't appear to have much sponsorship aside from government backing and I find that concerning. Public funding can be fickle as it only takes a change government attitiude and the money's gone.

Virgin have solid backing from Branson and hopefully he'll play it similar to Mateschitz and they'll be around for a long time. What makes me worry is that Branson opted out of Brawn title sponsorship because it got too pricey for him. Is he really in this for the long haul?

Yes Virgin and Lotus should be applauded for getting a new car onto the test track in 2010. I think the proof of the pudding will be whether they get a car onto the test track in 2011.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkmoon

I wouldn't be so quick to say Virgin and Lotus are in great shape. Lotus don't appear to have much sponsorship aside from government backing and I find that concerning. Public funding can be fickle as it only takes a change government attitiude and the money's gone.

Virgin have solid backing from Branson and hopefully he'll play it similar to Mateschitz and they'll be around for a long time. What makes me worry is that Branson opted out of Brawn title sponsorship because it got too pricey for him. Is he really in this for the long haul?

Yes Virgin and Lotus should be applauded for getting a new car onto the test track in 2010. I think the proof of the pudding will be whether they get a car onto the test track in 2011.

---

Government backing of F1 from the East is pretty solid. Generally these nations do not have a squeamish population worrying that the sky will fall as does Europe and the Unoted States.

Those ruling tend to do so for quite a while and consider something like F1 to be a great way to promote the country.

Branson said that he is in it to succeed and he understands well given his ventures. I dont see the point of worrying what may not happen in three years time.

Well he opted out of Brawn because he likes new ventures and this is one that he owns. He is like Mallyah and Mateschitsz, the new F1 independent.

The proof is that they have presented cars and will be on the grid at Sakhir.

Why do you keep worrying about next year and what may not happen?

The future is now - take good care of it and the rest will take care of itself.

From Twitter:

5LiveF1 We are hearing a rumour that USF1 may merge with a team, but not Stefan GP like everyone expects...

Nothing more that that right now, but could be interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

From Twitter:

5LiveF1 We are hearing a rumour that USF1 may merge with a team, but not Stefan GP like everyone expects...

Nothing more that that right now, but could be interesting.

---

Well Lopez has been linked to Campos, so maybe Hurley and co are taking their money over there. Or Sauber? Their long term future isn't exactly set in stone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I find the whole thing, as described in the 'insider' account linked to earlier in the thread, quite astonishing to be honest. Even leaving aside completely the FIA's vetting process, and to some extent the USF1 business plan, it is clear that certain senior people in the team just didn't do their work anything like on time, and as a result the car simply didn't materialise. How on earth was this allowed to go unchecked? That is where the FIA then comes in. I am loathe to be too critical of the FIA at present, as I see nothing so far in Todt's presidency to object to and reckon there's quite a bit in his approach to be pleased about, but in the USF1 case it has fallen down on the job, and badly.

---

If the FIA deemed it appropriate to have an observer in McLaren because of Alonso's crying, why did they not consider an observer for all new teams to monitor progress?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

If the FIA deemed it appropriate to have an observer in McLaren because of Alonso's crying, why did they not consider an observer for all new teams to monitor progress?

---

Because the FIA are a capricious body that shows favor and rules through the power of its "court" like a modern day Star Council.

It is high time that the people who actually participate in racing stand-up and stop being docile gormless individuals, to create another governing body that has motor racing in its interests.

USF1 "on the verge of collapse" according to the BBC:

Quote:

---

The new US F1 team will almost certainly not race this season as doubts increase about their future.

They will not make any of the first four races, are two months away from having a car and have insufficient funds, BBC Sport has learned.

---

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/8536567.stm

Meanwhile the few remaining staff are whiling away the time making a toaster:

Quote:

---

A source close to US F1 tells me that the factory staff in Charlotte are in the process of making the toaster immortalised by a series of satirical cartoons on YouTube in recent months. And yes, I am serious…

Short of anything else to do related to their F1 car some team members are said to be working on the composite moulds for the prototype toaster, which if true at least demonstrates that the guys on the shop floor have a sense of humour.

---

Source: http://adamcooperf1.com/2010/02/25/u...g-the-toaster/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Government backing of F1 from the East is pretty solid. Generally these nations do not have a squeamish population worrying that the sky will fall as does Europe and the Unoted States.

Those ruling tend to do so for quite a while and consider something like F1 to be a great way to promote the country.

---

But, your enthusiasm for these countries notwithstanding, their economic sky can very easily fall in, as demonstrated on several occasions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Branson said that he is in it to succeed and he understands well given his ventures. I dont see the point of worrying what may not happen in three years time.

Well he opted out of Brawn because he likes new ventures and this is one that he owns. He is like Mallyah and Mateschitsz, the new F1 independent.

---

And, again, not everything Branson touches turns to gold. He is well known for enjoying short bursts of big publicity. I hope the Manor F1 tie-up turns out to be one of his longer-term ventures. It deserves to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

USF1 "on the verge of collapse" according to the BBC:



Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/8536567.stm

Meanwhile the few remaining staff are whiling away the time making a toaster:


Source: http://adamcooperf1.com/2010/02/25/u...g-the-toaster/

---

It´s only a confirmation.

It's D Day today. Big staff meeting after CW's visit on Wednesday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riley

It's D Day today. Big staff meeting after CW's visit on Wednesday.

---

I think we will get an announcement Monday stating that Stefan GP is in, which of course will be tough for them as they will miss official testing. I hope the fIA allows them to do their own necessary testing in Portugal as planned

It's not over yet, it would seem. Details for others to fill in, if you know what I mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riley

It's not over yet, it would seem. Details for others to fill in, if you know what I mean.

---

Dang - I don't know what you mean!

Sounds like the FIA wants to save face and allow USF1 to continue on in some form. Dallara anyone? :rolleyes:

The biggest weaknesses in the F1 projects of USF1 and Campos has been the management - and the incompetence of team principals Campos and Windsor. There has been one major flaw in their pursue of F1 dream. Nowadays if you want to start an F1 team from scratch, a strong partnership with a big-name sponsor must exist right from the getgo (Stewart - Ford, Super Aguri - Honda, Lotus - AirAsia/Malaysia, Manor - Virgin, even that disastrous Lola - MasterCard effort). Talks like "don't worry, we will find some money soon", counts for nothing and will scare all potential backers further away due to lack of seriousness of the project. An F1 project must have some guarantees already from the planning-phase.

To be honest, USF1 has looked like a "project of hopeless dreamers" from day one, when Windsor and Anderson introduced the team in February '09 - "We have wanted to have an F1 team for ages, so let's see, what we can do. We claim to have some money, but we don't say, from who it is. We will prove that Americans can do it on their own. Blah-blah-blah." If I was a potential sponsor looking F1 exposure, I would have avoided them like plague from then on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

The biggest weaknesses in the F1 projects of USF1 and Campos has been the management - and the incompetence of team principals Campos and Windsor. There has been one major flaw in their pursue of F1 dream. Nowadays if you want to start an F1 team from scratch, a strong partnership with a big-name sponsor must exist right from the getgo (Stewart - Ford, Super Aguri - Honda, Lotus - AirAsia/Malaysia, Manor - Virgin, even that disastrous Lola - MasterCard effort). Talks like "don't worry, we will find some money soon", counts for nothing and will scare all potential backers further away due to lack of seriousness of the project. An F1 project must have some guarantees already from the planning-phase.

To be honest, USF1 has looked like a "project of hopeless dreamers" from day one, when Windsor and Anderson introduced the team in February '09 - "We have wanted to have an F1 team for ages, so let's see, what we can do. We claim to have some money, but we don't say, from who it is. We will prove that Americans can do it on their own. Blah-blah-blah." If I was a potential sponsor looking F1 exposure, I would have avoided them like plague from then on.

---

Agreed!

8th October 2009:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

Call me an old cynic, but I'll be amazed if they're present for more than a couple of races. Actually I'll be amazed if the turn out to be any better than 1997-stylee Lola.

---

I hate to say "I told you so" :uhoh: