BMW to leave Formula One at end of 2009

[WhiteBlue]

+1

[timbo]

IS it natural for a company to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to buy an F1 team and build up its infrastructure and to abandon it just 4 years into the project? Just as the madman himself MAx said, it is absurd to try and justify the costs of F1 to the board of directors when the companies are losing money hand over foot. I truly doubt that with the budget cap in place next year that the BMW board would have taken this drastic step.

What about BMW ownership of Land Rover or Rover?
They abandoned it as soon as the wind changed direction, just like with F1.

And with budget cap they would have to cut their stuff and the value of their investment would shrink anyway because they would have not enough people to operate it to full extent.

[ISLAMATRON]

What about BMW ownership of Land Rover or Rover?
They abandoned it as soon as the wind changed direction, just like with F1.

And with budget cap they would have to cut their stuff and the value of their investment would shrink anyway because they would have not enough people to operate it to full extent.

I cant comment on the Land Rover situation as I dont have enough info.

The value of an F1 team is mainly how much you can bring in sponsorship, and for the manufacturers, they also get some R&D value out of it, although road relevance in minimal, especially with KERS out. The budget cap does not effect the sponsorship money, and the FIA had every intention of increasing road relevance. Under the FOTA cost cutting proposals they have cut down to 1 shift in the windtunnel and restrictions on CFD already... but without any true technical innovation.

So with FOTA you get pseudo cost cutting with no technical innovations...
or with the cap you get cost cutting with much more open technical regs?

[SZ]

What about BMW ownership of Land Rover or Rover?
They abandoned it as soon as the wind changed direction, just like with F1.

Dude. Two totally different things.

Making production cars is BMW's core business. A lot of capital went into getting LR and Rover up, running, and ultimately sellable. Far, far more was lost than was ever sunk into F1. And damn straight it was killed when it didn't suit. It's called a business decision. BMW has shareholders to answer to and they don't get a return on their investment when running charities.

F1 is a marketing exercise for the manufacturers and the small teams. It never used to be, as it used to cost a lot less to go racing. You're not a cashed up entrepreneur if you want to start up, or even buy and run your own team at the moment. You're a multi-billionaire with every intention of becoming a millionaire if you enjoy running at the back of the grid. It never used to be just marketing for the manufacturers, either. But there's zero technology transfer these days, and with FOTA trying to nuke KERS there isn't going to be for a while either.

Of all the manufacturers, BMW more than any has a great idea of what motorsports can do for production cars and what it should cost and give as a return as a marketing investment - they're involved in more categories of racing than any other manufacturer in F1. By a considerable margin. To doubt or question BMW's commitment to motorsport is plain naive.

It's very hard to make a business case for involvement in a category where the one team that has their entire racing operation paid for by sponsors, other teams, FIA and TV revenues - as in, the one team that pays nothing to go racing and has something looking far more like an 'endless' budget than any other team - also has the technical veto, and co chairs the voting bloc trying to steer the next Concorde agreement. It's laughable. It's Texas Holdem' with an impossibly high buy-in and where the dealer can see your cards. McLaren for now can spend with them. Toyota is stupid enough to, though it cant go on forever as outside of the F1 vacuum and some internet fanboi's rantings, F1 isn't helping sell Priuses. Everywhere else... shareholders or those acting on their interests rationalise it.

BMW simply did as much and you'd better believe if F1 cost less, or had something to offer road car development - or better still, both - they'd still be in it.

FOTA has done bugger all. Dieter Rencken's article today (Autosport) citing the 'significant cost savings' FOTA has bought to F1 is laughable... try naming them. If you can get a definitive list going, try comparing it to one listing the cost savings blocked.

If you can't work out it's a select list of interests trying to retain their right to outspend their opposition whilst the rest play chess to stay alive... look closer.

And with budget cap they would have to cut their stuff and the value of their investment would shrink anyway because they would have not enough people to operate it to full extent.

That's a sh*t excuse. Just because F1 teams have grown to ridiculous levels in favourable economic conditions, now everything's got to be done to keep them that way? Use that logic and you'll never reorganise F1. It'll just get bigger and bigger.

'Full extent' needs to come down in a big way. No one cares whether F1 teams use the same gearbox or employ teams of people to develop their own, or whether everyone's testing 24/7 or 8/5 in one wind tunnel at a set scale. None of that takes away from F1 or seriously under-utilises resources. Under what premise did you think the new teams were planning on coming in on? Unlimited spending? Pffft. Free spending doesn't drive innovation. In not forcing it, it stifles it.

$40m opens a lot of doors to new competitors, and gives shareholders/investors/sponsors a lot less to worry about. The amusing thing about the proposal is that Max well knows it'd have been impossible for 2010. Different laws in different countries, tax rates, varying abilities to get rid of employees in time etc...

...what was being said was basically "the state of financial affairs in F1 is going to get very serious, and you people (the teams) need to get your heads together and work out ways of bringing costs down considerably in a very short space of time. We know this $40m thing isn't workable, so come up with something that you guys can live with"...

...and so FOTA got together and said "we hear you, there's a global recession, there's no relevance to road cars, there are new comes coming in that won't be able to spend what we do, one manufacturer has already left... but get stuffed, we'll be right"...

...and unsurprisingly we've found a team cashing out of this madness.

Don't think they'll be the last if this continues.

[mep]

The way BMW is acting is absolute shameful.
They bought Sauber a few years ago a well running company.
And then after a short period of time they shut it down with no response to all the people working there.

[timbo]

Of all the manufacturers, BMW more than any has a great idea of what motorsports can do for production cars and what it should cost and give as a return as a marketing investment - they're involved in more categories of racing than any other manufacturer in F1. By a considerable margin. To doubt or question BMW's commitment to motorsport is plain naive.

Name a few? GT3 started this year, WTCC and Formula BMW. What else?

FOTA has done bugger all. Dieter Rencken's article today (Autosport) citing the 'significant cost savings' FOTA has bought to F1 is laughable... try naming them. If you can get a definitive list going, try comparing it to one listing the cost savings blocked.

Engine cost went down by three times since 2006.

The amusing thing about the proposal is that Max well knows it'd have been impossible for 2010. Different laws in different countries, tax rates, varying abilities to get rid of employees in time etc...

...what was being said was basically "the state of financial affairs in F1 is going to get very serious, and you people (the teams) need to get your heads together and work out ways of bringing costs down considerably in a very short space of time. We know this $40m thing isn't workable, so come up with something that you guys can live with"...

Ah...
Yeah, that was Max's "strategy"... You know what? It sucked.
You don't get people whom you want to talk into something loonies. You MUST prove you are cooperative. Something that Max never thought of.

[i70q7m7ghw]

Williams have been losing money by the buckets and have nothing to show for it. Williams can not compete, not on the track nor in the battle for sponsorship money.

What a load of complete trash. I think I'm going to stop reading your posts because they are a waste of space, I mean come on! Ferrari Toyota = F-OTA?!? Go back to trying to debunk the landing on the moon.

Williams have been having a brilliant season, they just don't have a leading driver, Rosberg just seems to have settled down in to a midfielder.

Williams are indeed having a good season, but watch as FErrari & McLaren join the fight they will be lucky to score points, but my point is that it has been well reported that Williams has lost in excess of $50M US from their once solid bank accounts, and that is with big Toyota subsidies to run Kazoo, and their points tallies the last 2 seasons have been miniscule. Williams have always been at the head of F1 racing technology, and when KERS was announced they went out a purchased a company on the leading edge of flywheel technology only to have FOTA ban it.

From what I understand, KERS is not banned, no where in the 2010 regulations does it say it's banned. FOTA have agreed amongst themselves not to use it as they believe it costs too much money to develop especially during a recession. Any team is welcome to use KERS next season, including Williams.

[SZ]

Look historically timbo. There's been more. Their current involvement's a damn sight more than other manufacturers. (You left out SBK). Are you seriously going to question BMW's commitment to motorsport? (More importantly) are you really going to suggest an ill-defined operating budget for competitiveness makes a solid business case for return on investment?

Engine costs went down? Ha! Compared to what - what they could have, what they should have, what FIA asked for, what FOTA delivered? Try asking Renault if the cost savings worked for them, or ask Merc-McLaren what their engine development/'reliability upgrade' program's been costing them (some guys at Brawn are very happy... imagine if they were running a Honda engine this year). So what else has FOTA really done?

Cooperative my ass. Max doesn't need to be cooperative, and even so there's nothing inflexible about asking teams to get their act together and sort it out... how much more leeway should the teams have according to you?

It's a lot to risk running F1 without Ferrari, much of the brand goes right there, sure, but the day the FIA signed away a technical veto to Ferrari Max was basically rendered ineffective. Rushing KERS didn't win anyone any friends (ironically BMW was the happiest team about this), but he's generally been spot on with his predictions and suggestions surrounding road relevance and the excessive cost of F1.

No racing series have ever had any success when you let the manufacturers decide the rules!

From what I understand, KERS is not banned, no where in the 2010 regulations does it say it's banned. FOTA have agreed amongst themselves not to use it as they believe it costs too much money to develop especially during a recession.

Read into it... that's effectively a ban unless Williams starts kicking goals with it. Then it will be formally banned. Probably let by a Ferrari appeal to the FIA on basis of excessive costs!

Anyone consider the FOTA stance on KERS (or anything road relevant) as a contributing reason to BMW leaving?

[timbo]

Look historically timbo. There's been more. Their current involvement's a damn sight more than other manufacturers. (You left out SBK). Are you seriously going to question BMW's commitment to motorsport? (More importantly) are you really going to suggest an ill-defined operating budget for competitiveness makes a solid business case for return on investment?

Historically? Well... Nothing exceptional, on par or even less than, say, history of Renault.

Engine costs went down? Ha! Compared to what - what they could have, what they should have, what FIA asked for, what FOTA delivered? Try asking Renault if the cost savings worked for them, or ask Merc-McLaren what their engine development/'reliability upgrade' program's been costing them (some guys at Brawn are very happy... imagine if they were running a Honda engine this year). So what else has FOTA really done?

Until this summer it was ONLY FOTA members that created and raced actual cars.
And what Max have done?
If he has such a bright perspective of F1 without manufacturers why he settled for compromise? Why he excluded Epsilon, Lola and Prodrive from the list of new teams?
He continually denied any proposals from FOTA, remember his "winner takes all" system in spite of 12-9-6 proposed by FOTA?

No racing series have ever had any success when you let the manufacturers decide the rules!

But can racing series enjoy success if the rules are changed 180 degrees each year?

Anyone consider the FOTA stance on KERS (or anything road relevant) as a contributing reason to BMW leaving?

If they are so hard on KERS why they not run it?

[i70q7m7ghw]

From what I understand, KERS is not banned, no where in the 2010 regulations does it say it's banned. FOTA have agreed amongst themselves not to use it as they believe it costs too much money to develop especially during a recession.

Read into it... that's effectively a ban unless Williams starts kicking goals with it. Then it will be formally banned. Probably let by a Ferrari appeal to the FIA on basis of excessive costs!

Anyone consider the FOTA stance on KERS (or anything road relevant) as a contributing reason to BMW leaving?

Rules are rules. It's not banned until it's there in black and white.

[sticky667]

BMW was the major proponent for KERS until Mercedes developed a better system and made theirs look like child's play.

They are the ones who ditched the idea after pouring millions into it.

[timbo]

BMW was the major proponent for KERS until Mercedes developed a better system and made theirs look like child's play.

To be fair it was mostly Bosch.

[xpensive]

The song remains the same, it takes an engineer to realize how pathetically little 400 kJ is in the context of things.

Simply a total waste of valuable development money.

[Giblet]

For me, the best thing BMW ever did for motorsport was the Procar challenge.

It shows there are other ways to get in the face of the F1 audience, without having to field and destroy a grassroots racing team like Sauber.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVkY8oA3RlE[/youtube]

The sound of this car is the only thing that makes me like BMW right now.

[SZ]

The song remains the same, it takes an engineer to realize how pathetically little 400 kJ is in the context of things.

Simply a total waste of valuable development money.

If they are so hard on KERS why they not run it?

The point of 400kJ was that this was supposed to be the 'start', and the limit was to be raised in successive years. The idea behind keeping it low was to discourage teams from over-spending on it.

We all know how successful this wasn't, and, in rushing it a year early... even worse.

KERS is a good idea and very necessary for F1. The way it was implemented has been very, very poor. Max needs to take the fall for it as he does the credit for pushing the idea initially. It's up to FOTA teams to be big enough to come up with an equitable solution, whether it's a common KERS they develop electronics on, a standardised unit, subsidised units for other teams... having let some run it and some not has been the death knell. KERS weighs more than what cars carried in ballast and it's in the wrong areas. The FIA should have studied it more before pushing for it how they did.

It takes a narrow minded engineer to not see beyond his immediate responsibilities and not see that F1 needs KERS.

It takes a narrow minded fan to realise that if a certain red team didn't want it either they had the power to veto it. They didn't. They thought they'd be competing up the front with it too.

BMW was the major proponent for KERS until Mercedes developed a better system and made theirs look like child's play.

They are the ones who ditched the idea after pouring millions into it.

Would they be ditching it if (or F1 - that's the point) everyone had to run it?

Would they be performing as poorly relative to everyone else if it was standardised for 09? (I'm a believer in leaving it for 2010 and everyone having to run it).

Rules are rules. It's not banned until it's there in black and white.

Ha! Then you have a poor understanding of the FIA and the technical veto + political swing Ferrari has.

Look historically timbo...

Historically? Well... Nothing exceptional, on par or even less than, say, history of Renault.

You're flat out wrong there and like a stubborn kid, you're deliberately missing the point. BMW has a really solid understanding of what motorsport should give a company by way of return (as - interestingly - did Honda). It is a company with a strong motorsports history. It's board of directors have a very solid idea of what the project should cost for what it should give by way of returns.

If they're basically telling you that FOTA's version of F1 is a sh*t deal, stand up and take notice.

Engine costs went down? Ha! Compared to what...

Until this summer it was ONLY FOTA members that created and raced actual cars.
And what Max have done?
If he has such a bright perspective of F1 without manufacturers why he settled for compromise? Why he excluded Epsilon, Lola and Prodrive from the list of new teams?
He continually denied any proposals from FOTA, remember his "winner takes all" system in spite of 12-9-6 proposed by FOTA?

So what if the FOTA members create the cars? The point is they're doing a crap job about getting together and cutting the cost of doing so, even when giving the chance after having resisted any external pressure to do so.

Max has done plenty. He's pushed for changes that would have seen Honda and BMW remain in the sport, and would have made it equitable for new teams to come in (let's see how long the new boys last... now that there's effectively no budget cap for 2010 and they're competing against free-spending bigger teams). That's his job. Beyond that - after giving Ferrari the tech veto - he can't do much.

Max wasn't solely responsible for picking new teams. You'll find other people were involved (and at any rate... what's wrong with the three that were picked?)

Winner takes all was Bernie and at any rate isn't cost saving or otherwise.

But can racing series enjoy success if the rules are changed 180 degrees each year?

Nope. And they're not. 2009 was an exceptional year, and you've got to admit that many of the changes were fan-driven.

We've also got to admit that they've not been successful changes. Overtaking hasn't changed markedly. DF is not significantly down on where it was this time last year. It's a shame... as a TWG of team interests shaped the rules.

The way BMW is acting is absolute shameful.
They bought Sauber a few years ago a well running company.
And then after a short period of time they shut it down with no response to all the people working there.

You don't know that. It's far from over and they'll likely be looking for a buyer, as it's cheaper for them to keep more people employed. At any rate most employees will have a gardening leave clause, so at worst they probably go home far from empty handed. Like Honda's pullout, it will cost BMW a lot to leave.

As for the sudden change, well, that's motorsport. You work and get send home on your sponsor dollar. If you want a long, enduring career with the one company... go work in another industry!