Phil wrote:While that may be true, it doesn't make their case and complaints directed at the sport and the situation any less valid. We can criticize them all day long about how they seem to go around their business or we can actually weigh their actions against the situation they are in. I guess this is where we get to decide if we simply continue to flog the issue like some random glamour site fixating on what Helmut and Mateschitz say to the press, or perhaps look at this from a more technical point-of-view as one would expect from a site like F1T and think of RedBull as an entity, a race team with 600+ employees and their place in a sport that no longer caters to them...
I think the above question is easily answered: Even if RedBull had handled their supplier with the utmost respect despite all their failings and inability to make improvements as one would expect from a competent supplier, would not change the fact that Renault have been fiddling around with the idea of pursuing their own factory-team for 2016 (or leaving the sport) and that in itself would put them into the same situation as Mercedes, Ferrari and even McLaren as a partner of Honda are finding themselves in; The dilemma of supplying a team with the strength of RedBull with the same engines as your own factory-team and see them as a direct competitor, possibly doing a better job than your own team.
In other words, no amount of respect and good behavior towards Renault would have solved the problem for them; They'd still likely find themselves in a position where as a team with no ability to build engines (as are 5 other teams), they'd be forced to take what the mighty suppliers, even Renault, want to offer them. Hence it's logical to assume that their issues with the predicament they are in are a little more complex than simply them crucifying their supplier over their inadequate engines.
First, your answers here are decidedly non-technical; rather, they seem to be based upon a narrative that reflects your personal views on how this situation should/will play out. While there's absolute nothing at all wrong with that, let's not make it out to be something else.
Second, though I don't claim to have expert insight, I've tried on numerous occasions to explain the technical origins that form the basis of my opinions, and it doesn't seem to have done much good. For instance, we're somehow still talking about this ordeal as if anyone on either side can possibly benefit from the outcome, even though such a premise has always been invalid.
When I earlier referred to the latest solution under discussion as a "win-win," it's because neither side stands to benefit from it more than the other. In actuality, both parties will lose, and it's gonna take a while for either to see signs of recovery.
Red Bull's chassis are a hell of a lot closer to winning a World Championship than anything that's gonna roll out of Enstone over the next few years, and Renault's ERS is all sorts of closer to winning a World Championship than anything Red Bull can devise over the same period.
Me on October 26 wrote:In fact, it would still behoove both parties to somehow revitalize the partnership. Making something else work, in whatever form(s) that might take, would represent yet another setback by default.
They're both ---. Royally.
