About the F1 Resource Restriction Agreement

[FoxHound]

@ Gato

I don't have the full account schedule for the year. So if you want, have it your way which is:

Red Bull technology have a turnover of 350 million from supplying Caterham and STR( ) And a few bits and bobs to Red Bull racing. Thats a third party supplier with a higher turnover than any current F1 team....If you think that's kosher then may the force be with you.

You see, Mercedes Benz HPE employ around 450-500 people and supply KERS and Engines which are far more expensive than hydraulics and gearboxes, or nuts and bolts, and their turnover comes in at £97,559,000.
http://www.coreindex.co.uk/company-prof ... stryid=226

You mentioned I erred on Mercedes budget of 180 million, you call it 193 million or whatever, fair enough, have it your way mate. 13 million quid is a lot of cash.

But there is an elephant in the room, not a blue cat. And this elephant is called Red Bull technologies, it's dubious purpose and the smallish matter of it's 350 million turnover.
Now if you excuse me for saying, why do you think it is plausible for a 250 million dollar team to have a 350 million dollar supplier?

Let's just all call a spade a spade and congratulate Red Bull on bending the rules once again, Red Bull technologies is a cover for Red Bull racing and supplies it with Extra-RRA developments covered by the RRA.
It's clever.

[Cam]

It's quite humorous reading all these posts when none of you can prove anything either way - and there-in-lies the kicker.

Red Bull Technologies 'seems' to be a company formed to exploit a loophole to 'supply' Red Bull Racing with parts and services outside the RRA - this much most seem to accept is a possibility. The reality - there is NO evidence to prove this beyond reasonable doubt. Nor would you expect to find any.

Anyone can look at whole figures and read into them any which way with as many compelling arguments as one can muster. It doesn't change the fact that Red Bull Racing complies with the RRA.

Unless someone can front up with hard evidence, then perhaps it's best to let this go, as although it's been fun reading all the opinions, they're all just that, opinions, and the objectivity is starting to wane and become tiresome.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

It's quite humorous reading all these posts when none of you can prove anything either way - and there-in-lies the kicker.

Red Bull Technologies 'seems' to be a company formed to exploit a loophole to 'supply' Red Bull Racing with parts and services outside the RRA - this much most seem to accept is a possibility. The reality - there is NO evidence to prove this beyond reasonable doubt. Nor would you expect to find any.

Anyone can look at whole figures and read into them any which way with as many compelling arguments as one can muster. It doesn't change the fact that Red Bull Racing complies with the RRA.

Unless someone can front up with hard evidence, then perhaps it's best to let this go, as although it's been fun reading all the opinions, they're all just that, opinions, and the objectivity is starting to wane and become tiresome.

When you speak about the money, you're right, nobody really knows but said companies themselves. But it is obvious Red Bull Technology is there(not originally but is now) to help Red Bull Racing get around certain RRA restrictions.

Aside from the money, the most worrying thing, possibly even more so is about the car performance aspect. Newey for instance, the designer of the cars, isn't even employed by the team he's making & developing the car for. Neither are the others that are working on the car. Which means they're not subject to the same restrictions that other teams are. They could do constant CFD analysis or wind tunnel testing that otherwise would be restricted to a certain number of hours or GB. I think for sure Red Bull have an advantage here and is part of the reason why Horner is so against the monitoring of hours, etc. it's a huge advantage.

[WhiteBlue]

Red Bull and Ferrari pretty much have the same strategy and methods when dealing with cost control. They are both so rich and have so much financial muscle that they will avoid every form of cost control like the devil holy water. The manoeuvres they will do and their means will be quite similar as their simultaneous exit from FOTA demonstrated. I'm constantly amazed how Red Bull is always scrutinized and Ferrari are allowed to do whatever they want away from British company house style economic control in Italy in their cosy Maranello estate.

[FoxHound]

I'm constantly amazed how Red Bull is always scrutinized and Ferrari are allowed to do whatever they want away from British company house style economic control in Italy in their cosy Maranello estate.

That's because Ferrari don't have an RB technology style centre supplying the team with whatever it is they desire.

I liken it to a 350 million dollar genie.

"Problem with Coanda?" Poof!!! 8 exhaust iterations later problem solved.... If it blew hot gas out of a pipe Red Bull tried it.....that sort of development costs cash, 350 million dollars worth of cash in my opinion.

[WhiteBlue]

That's because Ferrari don't have an RB technology style centre supplying the team with whatever it is they desire.

How do you arrive at that opinion against all leads to the contrary that are obvious to those who want to see?
Ferrari have a $1.5bn performance automotive division on site with their team. Where do you think the surplus 500 F1 engineers went that they had to shed to reach the RRA requirements in one year? I reckon just on the other side of the wall and they have not forgotten their job skills. Ferrari can do all they want away from scrutiny and company house reporting in house and nobody cares one iota.

[FoxHound]

That's pure speculation on your part. Hocus pocus WB.

Red bull have a technical centre with 600 staff and 350 million turnover ... Fact.

[CHT]

@CHT

To be clear, Red Bull racing has a budget of 250 million. Red Bull Technologies has 350 million.
The total of the 2 combined is 600 million plus per annum. .

Perhaps that is where the misunderstanding starts.

RBR has a 250m budget from prize money, Redbull, sponsorship etc. RBT on the other hand is a self financing and profitable company and they doesn't relies on handout from RB or sponsors to run their operation. Their main revenue are from profitable sales transaction between them and RBR, STR and other F1 teams.

The only time which we need to get really suspicious is when RBT is making huge loses by selling cars and component to RBR below cost and their company continues to requires cash injections from Redbull.

For RB, it make sense to run RBT, as it will help cut the cost of running 2 teams because facilities can be shared and utilize more effectively. What RB is doing is no different to other F1 team, there are always bound to have accounting loophole to exploit to their advantage, be it spending more or to be more efficient and effective.

[WhiteBlue]

So what? Ferrari have an automotive design and manufacturing plant with 3,000 employees and $1.5m sales. What would you prefer to have if you want to use $400m free cash to win an F1 championship? There is all evidence that they produce just as many upgrades as Red Bull. So if you think Red Bull cheats why do you think Ferrari does not cheat? After all they are using two wind tunnels in Maranello and Cologne. They are not exactly known to generate their updates with less resources or budget than Red Bull. Their strategy for the last 20 years was spending more than anybody else and getting more money from Bernie. I'm not so confident that they have become highly efficient over night.

[bhall]

Btw. I do not at all deny that RBT probably do provide services in excess of the allowed amount of services of the RRA to Red Bull. It would be strange if they would not. But how much that is can nobody tell. It could be $0, $60m or $200m. You are the self styled king of quotations - at least you always demand sources for everything people post around here - so please give us robust figures for the alleged violations that can be traced to a public source.

[...]

We're getting lazy, huh? (It also seems we're walking further and further away from the definition of "robust" every time it's used. Are "robust figures" numbers expressed in BIG and BOLD characters?)

The latest financial abstracts from all public limited companies listed with Companies House can be obtained here. More detailed reports can be purchased here for, I think, £1 apiece. I don't care enough to do either. But, since they're so easy to find and have been referenced endlessly, I assumed someone would.

It should be said that no one has referred to this or anything else as "alleged violations" of anything. Everything Red Bull has done appears to be quite legitimate. So, I don't understand all the über-defensiveness on display here.

My whole point was to show you that budget caps will never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever work, because of the myriad ways around them. If that point hasn't been driven home by the last few pages of bickering about definitions of entities, reasoning behind sums, and general hysterical confusion, all regarding information that no one has even attempted to hide, well, then you're just incorrigible, and nothing will ever make that clear.

This conversation wasn't meant for this thread, however, and for that, I apologize to everyone else.

[FoxHound]

So what? Ferrari have an automotive design and manufacturing plant with 3,000 employees and $1.5m sales.

What makes you think that building a 458 is the same as designing and building an F2012?

Please I would love to hear it. Manufacturers set up factories for their team to operate within F1 because these are highly specialised fields that require specialised staff and equipment. Yes some suppliers can do a very good job, but these suppliers are few and far between and their contribution can be measure in thousandths and hundredths of seconds, not tenths.

Not only that, but for anything to work in tandem like Red Bull technology and Red Bull racing, you would need a systematic procedural operation. Not stop the automotive factory one day, and ask them to work on a solution for the F1 team.
to put forward this idea is extremely flawed as it shows no workable understanding of the complexities of running an F1 team the design processes, the update turnaround or the relationship between the designers who create the car.

They are closely linked, and it would require a very visible operation like Red Bull technologies with an accompanying mammoth budget to make it work.
Please can you provide hard evidence of this with sources please, or we will all treat it as BAWS....Baseless assumption and wild speculation.

[WhiteBlue]

What makes you think that building a 458 is the same as designing and building an F2012?

Who is making baseless speculations. I'm not following your bait.

Manufacturers set up factories for their team to operate within F1 because these are highly specialised fields that require specialised staff and equipment. Yes some suppliers can do a very good job, but these suppliers are few and far between and their contribution can be measure in thousandths and hundredths of seconds, not tenths.

Not only that, but for anything to work in tandem like Red Bull technology and Red Bull racing, you would need a systematic procedural operation. Not stop the automotive factory one day, and ask them to work on a solution for the F1 team.

Good that we had the opportunity to learn such an important lecture. I'm impressed. I always thought you would regularly stop your automotive factory for some leisurely side jobs.

to put forward this idea is extremely flawed as it shows no workable understanding of the complexities of running an F1 team the design processes, the update turnaround or the relationship between the designers who create the car.

They are closely linked, and it would require a very visible operation like Red Bull technologies with an accompanying mammoth budget to make it work.

Spoken like the expert you apparently are on those things. Allow me to differ somewhat on Ferrari's ability to hide F1 work outside the Gestione Sportiva and take it as opinion.

Please can you provide hard evidence of this with sources please, or we will all treat it as BAWS....Baseless assumption and wild speculation.

You do not seem to read opposing posts in this thread. Otherwise you had taken notice of the sources that confirm Ferrari's F1 teams huge richness. They certainly have more surplus cash than Red Bull Racing. Regarding Ferrari somewhat miraculous vanishing act of 500 employees from the pay list in a few months time I recommend to read the thread about the RRA. It is all there.

[Raptor22]

That's because Ferrari don't have an RB technology style centre supplying the team with whatever it is they desire.

How do you arrive at that opinion against all leads to the contrary that are obvious to those who want to see?
Ferrari have a $1.5bn performance automotive division on site with their team. Where do you think the surplus 500 F1 engineers went that they had to shed to reach the RRA requirements in one year? I reckon just on the other side of the wall and they have not forgotten their job skills. Ferrari can do all they want away from scrutiny and company house reporting in house and nobody cares one iota.

bang on the money!

[CHT]

Ferrari road car DNA has always been about transferring their F1 technology into road cars, same as what Mclaren are doing with the MP4-12C etc. How they transfer or share their overhead and operating cost between road car and motor racing division is something which the company have to decide which is best for their bottom line.

[FoxHound]

It's baseless WB, you cannot prove the link of Gestione Sportive to providing anything to Ferrari's F1 team.

It is baseless. Admit it, you are clutching at straws in an attempt to normalize what Red Bull are doing.
We have companies house figures if you want to pay a pound (I will when I get back from xmas shopping), We have Red Bull technologies who publicly supply Red Bull, and we have Horner himself saying as much.

You have what, exactly WB? Some figures?

What is your understanding of Gestione Sportiva ?