USF1 -- F1's All-American Challenger

[xpensive]

I rather think they will accept USF1's petition and leave their slot empty for 2010. Having two more teams on the grid that can develop and one more next year is a success. Unless there is a failure this year there will be no more controversial team selections to do.

There is no law of nature that says F1 need 13-14 teams, that was just MrM's idea when he was losing the grandees.

Besides, why should the FIA help with Laurel & Hardy's new attempt to con the whizz-kid with ----for-judgement?

[Pandamasque]

PS: off the top of my head I can think of at least 4 organisations that are more likely to be prepared for 2011 than USF1.

People tend to remember only Prodrive and Lola when talking about 2010 applicants who would've made much better sense than disastrous USF1 and Campos entries. But lets not forget about this other reject who would've probably done an equal (if not better) job than Virgin and Lotus.

Yes. The 4 I meant were Lola, Prodrive, EE and ex-Toyota.

[Fil]

Adam Cooper's blog entry today..

The team announced on January 25 that it had signed Jose Maria Lopez, but it never officially confirmed that in December it had also agreed a deal with former Honda test driver James Rossiter.

..Both drivers were committed to bringing $8m..

Certainly the fact that US F1 failed to build a car on time – despite having contracts with two drivers with F1 testing experience with a combined value of $16m – would suggest that something about the project was deeply flawed.

The great thing about time, is it slowly unravels all secrets.


Anderson & Windsor promised funding was secured for 3yrs..

- $16m from drivers (per season)
- $10m from Locstein ($30m for 3yrs)
- plus whatever Hurley brought to the table..
- FOM annual dividends

its becoming increasingly obvious that funding was not the biggest issue at the team..
it is after sponsors signed on, that funding was pulled & became an issue. USF1 did not hold to their side of the deals.. how did that happen, and who's to blame..?

[ESPImperium]

It would make sence for the FIA to retract the 2010 entry for USF1 and announce that there will be a new tender process for the remaining place for the start of 2011. BUT for the team will have to be totally open with its financial posistion, and submit to the FIA statements etc, ot the FIA place a person on the management structure that reports back to Jean Todt every week on the progress of the team to make Race 1 of 2011.

It would also be wise for the FIA to allow the team to source its power plant from any one they (the team) choose for the 2011 season. Basically putting Cosworth out of the picture. What they (the FIA) should be looking at is at is a buisness model simmilar to the one used successfuly by Virgin and used a little less successfuly by Campos. Basically meaning a Lola/Prodrive entry with non Cosworth power. As Lola were to be using either Renault ot Toyota power and Prodrive were to be using BMW power (That attributed to the BMW pull out of F1 from rumors i heard).

I think for 2010, 24 cars will be more than enough.

[flynfrog]

It would make sence for the FIA to retract the 2010 entry for USF1 and announce that there will be a new tender process for the remaining place for the start of 2011. BUT for the team will have to be totally open with its financial posistion, and submit to the FIA statements etc, ot the FIA place a person on the management structure that reports back to Jean Todt every week on the progress of the team to make Race 1 of 2011.

It would also be wise for the FIA to allow the team to source its power plant from any one they (the team) choose for the 2011 season. Basically putting Cosworth out of the picture. What they (the FIA) should be looking at is at is a buisness model simmilar to the one used successfuly by Virgin and used a little less successfuly by Campos. Basically meaning a Lola/Prodrive entry with non Cosworth power. As Lola were to be using either Renault ot Toyota power and Prodrive were to be using BMW power (That attributed to the BMW pull out of F1 from rumors i heard).

I think for 2010, 24 cars will be more than enough.

why not set a grid size and let anyone who dares bring a car try to qualify to race.

no more of the guaranteed race spot stuff

[The FOZ]

why not set a grid size and let anyone who dares bring a car try to qualify to race.

no more of the guaranteed race spot stuff

Because they need a way to compel every team to go to every race.

[xpensive]

why not set a grid size and let anyone who dares bring a car try to qualify to race.

no more of the guaranteed race spot stuff

Because they need a way to compel every team to go to every race.

Why?

[flynfrog]

why not set a grid size and let anyone who dares bring a car try to qualify to race.

no more of the guaranteed race spot stuff

Because they need a way to compel every team to go to every race.

Why?

Yeah Why?

prize money and points isnt enough. It might also allow a local team to try to throw a car together and try to qualify for a race. That alone would draw a pretty good local crowd

[The FOZ]

why not set a grid size and let anyone who dares bring a car try to qualify to race.

no more of the guaranteed race spot stuff

Because they need a way to compel every team to go to every race.

Why?

If there existed no rule stating all teams must go to every event - you could conceivably have fewer than the promised number of teams racing at a given venue. That would be a commercial reason.

In addition, how do you deal with stuff like engine consumption rules? 8 engines per season, or whatever it is, means nothing if you're only going to try and do a race or two.

Ferrari could field an A squad AND a B squad under another name, in theory.

What you'd lose is consistency and control over the teams and cars entered. It would be more difficult to control, say, testing, when a team pops up out of the woodwork halfway through a season and wants to qualify - they could have been living in the wind tunnel for the first half of the season, be completely undeclared, and then show up with a competitive advantage that the rest don't have.

What's the point of a homologated engine or tub when teams could chose to only race once or twice? Or once, rename themselves, and show up with an entirely different car later on.

If there are only 2 customers per engine manufacturer, what do we do now?

How would this control costs? It's bad enough you get Stefan throwing money at and F1 slot they don't and may not ever have. What if all kinds of teams threw money at a car that isn't guaranteed a race slot.

Bottom line - the way rules, sponsorships, and the entire fabric of F1 is oriented, opening up the field to anyone makes little, if any sense. F1 is to be the pinnacle of motor racing, making it the F1 Open and letting conceivably anyone in does something that I feel would tarnish the sport somewhat.

[WhiteBlue]

its becoming increasingly obvious that funding was not the biggest issue at the team..

Nothing is obvious! Quite contrary the list of funds shows that there was a liquidity crisis which may have started in November or December. Money that is owed to you doesn't mean you can spend it. If the mentioned funds were all secure then it is even more dubious why Hurley did not give them a short time loan or safety and why Bernie exposed the cash flow problem. They certainly did not have cash to pay their Cosworth contract and by 15th January they failed the salary list which must have caused them huge technical set backs due to internal unrest. What people call a management problem could well have been a simple cash flow crisis which is typical in a start up. Hurley with his start up experience should have advised them to avoid that. There are still many questions and few answers.

[marcush.]

no they just have to be honks the two ...otherwise there was nothing loughable to this..
in this saga we can be sure we have not yet heard the full story ,things just do not
fit .wh yshould hurley be no in the leading position wheras he was not able to push the deal with stefanovic throu the other week ?
if you got all that sponsormoney in place but have to wait for the installments ,I don´t see why Bernie or hurley could poosibly not forward the needed cash.

Maybe it was a bit of everything Windsor ,is his issues with ecclestone concerning the demise of Brabham a resolved issue -I honestly don´t know but if it was some sting still hurting bernie I know that this old man would not bother ....
more questions than answers even when the patient is already dead .

[WhiteBlue]

why not set a grid size and let anyone who dares bring a car try to qualify to race.
no more of the guaranteed race spot stuff

Historically there is a junctim between an FiA license for a year and the payment of FOM money. It is one pillar of the Concord agreement. It was necessary at the time for Bernie to promote the series to television. It protects those who managed to grab a slot and made sure Bernie had a product to sell.

Prior we had pre qualifying which was a big mess and isn't really practical if you have fly away races. The real world championship as we know it is based on FOM paying the air lift and all traveling cost.

Nowadays there is a need to have fresh blood in F1 if and when teams fail. There is a provision in the new Concord for the F1 commission to select new teams. That way FOTA will have the upper hand when it comes to the filling of empty slots. They can again stall the whole process. The FiA will be best positioned not to rely on the F1 commission to fill the USF1 slot. Their best option is simply to postpone the entry to 2011. That way they remain in control of the process which started before the new Concord was signed.

[Pup]

its becoming increasingly obvious that funding was not the biggest issue at the team..

Nothing is obvious! Quite contrary the list of funds shows that there was a liquidity crisis which may have started in November or December. Money that is owed to you doesn't mean you can spend it. If the mentioned funds were all secure then it is even more dubious why Hurley did not give them a short time loan or safety and why Bernie exposed the cash flow problem. They certainly did not have cash to pay their Cosworth contract and by 15th January they failed the salary list which must have caused them huge technical set backs due to internal unrest. What people call a management problem could well have been a simple cash flow crisis which is typical in a start up. Hurley with his start up experience should have advised them to avoid that. There are still many questions and few answers.

I don't see how you gather any of that from what we know. Clearly the funding was available. The money only left when the team couldn't show progress. Quite simple. Not everything in F1 has to involve Bernie.

[xpensive]

its becoming increasingly obvious that funding was not the biggest issue at the team..

Nothing is obvious!

Oh, but this one is WB. No matter what wild renegade-info you can copy and paste from the web, those bums never had any more than Hurley's seed-money to spend. When that was gone, so were they

[Tim.Wright]

Anderson & Windsor promised funding was secured for 3yrs..

- $16m from drivers (per season)
- $10m from Locstein ($30m for 3yrs)
- plus whatever Hurley brought to the table..
- FOM annual dividends

its becoming increasingly obvious that funding was not the biggest issue at the team..
it is after sponsors signed on, that funding was pulled & became an issue. USF1 did not hold to their side of the deals.. how did that happen, and who's to blame..?

You might be able to run an F1 team for a year for $40-50m but I seriously doubt you could start one from scratch. The non recurring costs are the killers;
Autoclaves plus tooling
5 axis CNC machines
lathes, drills (in fact the whole machine shop)
clean rooms
plycutters
freezers
NDT equipment
CMM's and other metrology equipment
CAD stations
software licences
recruiting
data aquisition gear
tensile tesing machines
fatigue testing gear
engine dynomometers
transmission dynomometers
stores and logistics
transporters and other vehicles
office equipment etc

Purchase and commissioning all of thist would come in at well well over $100m and thats quite a conservative guess. I can totally belive that they ran out of money.

Tim