Haas - American team in F1

[Scorpaguy]

Good grief, what's the big deal? Haas either fails or succeeds (or barely survives and manages to sell to another sucker). Just because he's American doesn't make his triumph/failure any more significant. As history shows us, failure in F1 seems to treat all nationalities quite equally.

I would think we all would want him to succeed...has everyone seen some of the hacks forming the grid in recent years?

...and as for USF1, you "across the ponders" should be thanking us. That was funnier than a Chris Rock stand up routine

[PlatinumZealot]

+1.

People seem to forget that you had guys with no Formula 1 experience whatsoever that were successful in running a F1 team. Guys, like Tony Fernandes, Flavio Briatore, Christian Horner. I think Haas has what it takes. All he has to make sure of is to hire the right people.

By right people, there are some highly skilled free agents out there right now fresh for the picking. Martin Whitmarsh, Pat Fry, Luca Marmorini, Bob Bell, Nicolas Tombazis. Great guys who know how to build a team. Too bad he started off with Guenther Steiner however, that guys is like Collin Coles, anything they touch turns to dust.

[GitanesBlondes]

+1.

People seem to forget that you had guys with no Formula 1 experience whatsoever that were successful in running a F1 team. Guys, like Tony Fernandes, Flavio Briatore, Christian Horner. I think Haas has what it takes. All he has to make sure of is to hire the right people.

By right people, there are some highly skilled free agents out there right now fresh for the picking. Martin Whitmarsh, Pat Fry, Luca Marmorini, Bob Bell, Nicolas Tombazis. Great guys who know how to build a team. Too bad he started off with Guenther Steiner however, that guys is like Collin Coles, anything they touch turns to dust.

Tony Fernandes successful?

Caterham went bankrupt. That's not successful.

You're missing the whole point though, it's not about lack of F1 experience, it's about how the team is being setup. You have a better chance for some success if you take over an existing outfit as opposed to trying to start from scratch.

Regarding Flavio, he benefited big time from having John Barnard, and then Rory Byrne as TD at Benetton. Benetton does not have the success it had in the early to mid 90s without having had those TD's successively.

[GitanesBlondes]

Being steeped in racing means what as a predictor for success?

Nothing really.

Give me a break. I'll grant you that the F1 game is very different than NASCAR, and the challenges that lay ahead for Haas are large. However, he does have an advantage due to his racing history.

He has a network of contractors, and suppliers. He already has people in place to generate non prize-money revenues (sponsorships, licensing deals, merchandise). He has an infrastructure, in-house and contracted, for the purpose of building and testing race cars. Finally he has hundreds of contacts within the racing arena, from whom he can draw to fill staff positions of all sorts.

While his outfit must make large adaptations and do a lot of learning, he is not just another A-hole showing up to the track with a big bank account.

Bobby Rahal had plenty of experience when he was running Jaguar, how'd that work out?

You also are significantly overestimating the ability of F1 to attract sponsors. F1 is not a sponsor friendly venture anymore as the costs are simply too great, and the benefits are far too little for most companies to get involved. Sure he can just put Haas CNC on the engine covers all he wants, but that's not generating any money to cover the overhead of running the team as he would just be paying himself.

Having contacts and suppliers means absolutely nothing since you want people who actually have real world experience applicable to F1 if you are looking to succeed. Hiring a moron like Gunther Steiner is a sign that you're not really that interested in making a serious effort to field the best possible team.

Talking about what your approach is, and claiming you're not going to make the same mistakes as those who came before you is all great sound bites for the PR campaign, but it doesn't actually accomplish concrete things.

If Haas really wants to field the best possible team, he would have simply taken over Marussia completely and paid off their debts. Why? You don't have to go through some silly auction to cherry-pick a few things. You get the tried and true staff who knows what the whole thing is about. They had the 2015 chassis so it's not as if a chassis had to be designed from scratch unless it was imperative. You get a starting point instead of this idiocy of talking about having Dallara build a chassis.

Proven team versus starting from scratch?

Hmmmm....

I'll go with proven team since I've got the cash and that was precisely what was missing.

Since you're supposedly getting all this help from Ferrari, the entire transition is seamless by taking over Marussia.

2015 is going to be a benchmark year of sorts, and the goal is really on 2016 as the first truly competitive season.

You know what you do for 2015?

You focus on building a Monaco-spec car. The only goal is to build the best possible car for Monaco that can be a serious contender. Once you get that down, you start building for Monza. Two races can make your season completely, and as such you focus on two for 2015. If you do well with one, or even both, you can build off of that for 2016. Thinking you're going to come in for 2016 and be competitive from scratch with no real world track time is a joke. It'll take you at least 2 years to have some good results if you're good, 3 years is more likely. If you haven't done it in 3 years, there's a strong chance you never will, and you may as well pack up.

[Manoah2u]

Bobby Rahal had plenty of experience when he was running Jaguar, how'd that work out?

You also are significantly overestimating the ability of F1 to attract sponsors. F1 is not a sponsor friendly venture anymore as the costs are simply too great, and the benefits are far too little for most companies to get involved. Sure he can just put Haas CNC on the engine covers all he wants, but that's not generating any money to cover the overhead of running the team as he would just be paying himself.

Having contacts and suppliers means absolutely nothing since you want people who actually have real world experience applicable to F1 if you are looking to succeed. Hiring a moron like Gunther Steiner is a sign that you're not really that interested in making a serious effort to field the best possible team.

Talking about what your approach is, and claiming you're not going to make the same mistakes as those who came before you is all great sound bites for the PR campaign, but it doesn't actually accomplish concrete things.

If Haas really wants to field the best possible team, he would have simply taken over Marussia completely and paid off their debts. Why? You don't have to go through some silly auction to cherry-pick a few things. You get the tried and true staff who knows what the whole thing is about. They had the 2015 chassis so it's not as if a chassis had to be designed from scratch unless it was imperative. You get a starting point instead of this idiocy of talking about having Dallara build a chassis.

Proven team versus starting from scratch?

Hmmmm....

I'll go with proven team since I've got the cash and that was precisely what was missing.

Since you're supposedly getting all this help from Ferrari, the entire transition is seamless by taking over Marussia.

2015 is going to be a benchmark year of sorts, and the goal is really on 2016 as the first truly competitive season.

You know what you do for 2015?

You focus on building a Monaco-spec car. The only goal is to build the best possible car for Monaco that can be a serious contender. Once you get that down, you start building for Monza. Two races can make your season completely, and as such you focus on two for 2015. If you do well with one, or even both, you can build off of that for 2016. Thinking you're going to come in for 2016 and be competitive from scratch with no real world track time is a joke. It'll take you at least 2 years to have some good results if you're good, 3 years is more likely. If you haven't done it in 3 years, there's a strong chance you never will, and you may as well pack up.

=D> this

However, he does have an advantage due to his racing history.

He has a network of contractors, and suppliers. He already has people in place to generate non prize-money revenues (sponsorships, licensing deals, merchandise). He has an infrastructure, in-house and contracted, for the purpose of building and testing race cars. Finally he has hundreds of contacts within the racing arena, from whom he can draw to fill staff positions of all sorts.

While his outfit must make large adaptations and do a lot of learning, he is not just another A-hole showing up to the track with a big bank account.

Actually, he is worse.

First off, he rather hasn't got that wonderfull racing history without Tony Stewart. People are missing the important factor of Tony Stewart in this picture.

A network of contractors and suppliers was something Marussia and Caterham had, too. Matter of fact; the recent 'yardsale' of Marussia showed just how much they actually had to be in F1, and they were [aside a lucky day] a backmarker and went bankrupt. These people in place to generate non-prize money don't mean squad; so did Caterham and Marussia. Remember Caterham when it was Lotus/Teamlotus whatever they were? Dell, Intel, CNN, and much more. AirAsia was the parent company of tony fernandes so i'll give that the 'Haas' label. his business revenue is worth 5.19 BILLION USD, that's 5 times that of Haas. Yet, caterham went bankrupt and did not achieve a sole thing.

All his contacts, all his experience, is coming and living in the USA - that doesn't work. He wants europe, and he hires and has Americans in service to 'concour' europe's market. Good luck with that, that's not gonna work.

His infrastructure is nothing, he has a building built originally for Nascar Cup team 41, not for F1, but he expanded it so it can house F1. The building thus was never purpose-built. Meanwhile, it's based in America. It's a logistical and organisational nightmare. Having a 'depot' in Europe is not gonna work at all.

He's indeed not the next a-hole with a big bank account because quite frankly, Tony Fernandes' bank account was bigger, and so was Richard Branson's.

Speaking of the latter, Branson had high goals and big plans with his Virgin F1 team. He has an insane amount of money to throw at it. He jumped ship after one season, the wisest thing he could do. Guess why he did that?
Branson has more money, wealth, contacts and 'strings' to his hands to get 'the job done', and a whole lot of a better brain in his head, and he decided he's not having any of it after a single season.

What happened to Marussia? Gone. Why? money problems. Why is Caterham gone? Money problems.

Marussia originally had Virgin as the sponsor. Caterham had Airasia. MUCH more worth than Haas. both gone.
I don't even have to talk about HRT.

BUT, from all the locations Haas is getting his tub built, he's gonna let it be done by Dallara, the same provider that gave HRT that awful car that was hanging by a thread. And you can start about 'bad supplier' all you want and yes, it had steel brakes originally and yes, it improved a bit when they mounted acceptable carbon parts - but the fact remains it was dead last without any hope of crawling an inch forward.

All these teams were run from the UK [one went to spain or actually sat in spain, i'm not sure about HRT anymore], and it did not work at all. And all failed miserably. The main problem wasn't that their cars were that awfull bad; hell, they kept within the 107% rule big-time. The biggest problem was money flow. After 3 years of struggling, it's suddenly gone. Not the money, that was gone and kept going further away in those 3 years.

Atleast these teams were aware and prepared that they were in for a struggle. Now we have this american bigmouth that is calling these former to 'more or less established' teams that vaporised out on their problems like he knows anything about it and is not gonna make the same mistakes. No indeed, he's making bigger mistakes already and he's making the same mistakes USF1 did before.

And as for 'proof' Haas have themselves prepared more; i'll remind again of USF1, who actually had a TUB with nose ready and built in-house, an engine provider (Cosworth) and a big infrastructure. It all turned into thin air fastly, because all these things are like thin air.
And that's the same HAas has; nothing but thin air.

As for that Ferrari engine: Sauber had it in the back, they were all the way at the back. So was Marussia. Only Ferrari themselves were sort of being atleast 'mediocre'. So they may have a Ferrari engine and Ferrari parts; it'll bring them nothing but trouble. Haas would have done smart in getting a Mercedes deal which was still available before Lotus picked up a deal.

Caterham and Marussia and HRT before they went into F1 all were teams that had experience in european series, GP2 mainly, with GP2 used to be conciderd as the F1 junior feeder series. Their racing experience is with open-wheelers, not bricks on wheels. In europe, not USA. and they didn't manage to make it, sadly.

Next up, we're about to lose either Sauber or Lotus. Well established teams with huge amounts of experience and success. They might even not show up at the 2015 season start at all. How on earth does HAAS manage to make it if even they can't?

I'll tell you why - because HAAS won't nor is intending to. He'll use the bankrupcy of Caterham and Marussia and the exit of Lotus/Sauber from F1 in 2015 as his get-out-ticket and before having actually seen anything F1 related built in that Charlotte base, he'll have his Nascar Cup Team 41 well parked in there.

Leaving F1 with some sponsorship as he decides he'll sponsor F1 instead of becoming an outfit.

[TAG]

No much love for a team that's yet to even put a car on the grid and is already having their grave dug alongside the 2010 crop of teams that are no more. Succeed or fail, they're talking as if looking at the big picture and have a clear road map of what not to do. Why not at least allow them go bankrupt first? It's not as if they can do any worse than the existing template for failure.

[strad]

Good grief, what's the big deal?

The big deal is yet another chance for the haters to bash any American effort and the attempt kill it and throw dirt on it before it's even born.

[Richard]

And that's the same HAas has; nothing but thin air.

Haas is comparable to HRT, Lotus/Caterham or Virgin/Marussia at the same stage.

Even HRT with nomadic facilities and a lot less racing experience managed to to keep going for 2 years without paying their Dallara bills. I'm sure Haas has the gumption to do better than that considering his background.

Also it is funny that Marussia are held up as the best of that bunch. After all they started out with an undersized fuel tank, "who needs flexible wings when you can have zero drag with detachable wings" and "we're not going to bother with a wind tunnel". Even so they managed to be respectable.

Then looking at Caterham, they started out with quotes such as:

The longer-term vision is to create a centre of technical excellence at the Sepang circuit which we have already started planning together with Tony Fernandes and his associates. Naturally this takes time, so we have opted initially for a UK base at the RTN facility in Hingham from where we will run the F1 operations while we establish our Malaysian facilities. Ultimately, the team will be headquartered in Malaysia, but we will keep a small UK base which will give us a logistical advantage when we are racing within Europe.

We have been working with Fondtech to develop the aerodynamics, as well as with gearbox specialists Xtrac. We have an engine supply deal in place with Cosworth and we also have the support of engineering and composites teams in Malaysia who will play an integral role in developing the car.

Swap the countries and supplier names, it's identical to Haas isn't it?

So back to the fundamental issue, at this stage Haas isn't any worse off that the other new entrants who did make it to the track. It's all down to his determination to travel the tough road to Melbourne in 2015.

Ps - I do agree that anyone starting a team from scratch in F1 needs to consider their sanity, it's a fast track to losing a fortune. IMHO Haas would have been better buying Marussia or Caterham rather than setting up his own team.

pps - Branson's involvement was a classic. He may be very rich but he's notorious for setting up high profile Virgin brands without risking much of his own cash then runs when he can. Just like he bailed out of F1 before the end of his first season in Nov 2010.

[PlatinumZealot]

+1.

People seem to forget that you had guys with no Formula 1 experience whatsoever that were successful in running a F1 team. Guys, like Tony Fernandes, Flavio Briatore, Christian Horner. I think Haas has what it takes. All he has to make sure of is to hire the right people.

By right people, there are some highly skilled free agents out there right now fresh for the picking. Martin Whitmarsh, Pat Fry, Luca Marmorini, Bob Bell, Nicolas Tombazis. Great guys who know how to build a team. Too bad he started off with Guenther Steiner however, that guys is like Collin Coles, anything they touch turns to dust.

Tony Fernandes successful?

Caterham went bankrupt. That's not successful.

You're missing the whole point though, it's not about lack of F1 experience, it's about how the team is being setup. You have a better chance for some success if you take over an existing outfit as opposed to trying to start from scratch.

Regarding Flavio, he benefited big time from having John Barnard, and then Rory Byrne as TD at Benetton. Benetton does not have the success it had in the early to mid 90s without having had those TD's successively.

I knew you were gonna comment on that! hehe.. I think Tony was fairly successful in the context of surviving for five years.

[GitanesBlondes]

+1.

People seem to forget that you had guys with no Formula 1 experience whatsoever that were successful in running a F1 team. Guys, like Tony Fernandes, Flavio Briatore, Christian Horner. I think Haas has what it takes. All he has to make sure of is to hire the right people.

By right people, there are some highly skilled free agents out there right now fresh for the picking. Martin Whitmarsh, Pat Fry, Luca Marmorini, Bob Bell, Nicolas Tombazis. Great guys who know how to build a team. Too bad he started off with Guenther Steiner however, that guys is like Collin Coles, anything they touch turns to dust.

Tony Fernandes successful?

Caterham went bankrupt. That's not successful.

You're missing the whole point though, it's not about lack of F1 experience, it's about how the team is being setup. You have a better chance for some success if you take over an existing outfit as opposed to trying to start from scratch.

Regarding Flavio, he benefited big time from having John Barnard, and then Rory Byrne as TD at Benetton. Benetton does not have the success it had in the early to mid 90s without having had those TD's successively.

I knew you were gonna comment on that! hehe.. I think Tony was fairly successful in the context of surviving for five years.

Except if your goal is to just survive and tread water for a couple of years, you should consider an alternative line of motorsport that is far less costly.

[GitanesBlondes]

Good grief, what's the big deal?

The big deal is yet another chance for the haters to bash any American effort and the attempt kill it and throw dirt on it before it's even born.

I would be saying the same thing no matter who was behind the entire thing. It being an American effort isn't why I'm bashing this. I'm bashing it because everything to date shows how ill-thought out this entire endeavor really is.

[SectorOne]

The thing about HAAS that´s different from Caterham, Marussia, HRT etc is "dollar dollar bills ya´ll".

Now money is no guarantee for success but you are guaranteed no success without money.

[GitanesBlondes]

The thing about HAAS that´s different from Caterham, Marussia, HRT etc is "dollar dollar bills ya´ll".

Now money is no guarantee for success but you are guaranteed no success without money.

And Toyota had more money than Haas did.

Remind me of what they accomplished during their stint in F1?

[strad]

Maybe you can find him on Twitter or Facebook and explain how stupid he is and offer yourself as advisor.

[Manoah2u]

Maybe you can find him on Twitter or Facebook and explain how stupid he is and offer yourself as advisor.

I think you just don't get it (the critisism pointed out here repeatedly)

-even though Toyota imho is a bad example because imho, because toyota actually did a good job as a 'newcomer'.

I wonder however just how much Toyota slammed into their F1 foray, and if it were comparable to the budget Haas or other competitors are looking for. I assume Haas will invest not even a fraction of what Toyota did. To be honest, that can only result in achieving a fraction of their results especially since they aren't even doing a fraction of their effort.

Toyota did have more money and had much more organisation and preperation, imho they actually were competetive and interesting in F1. So to be honest, i'd say atleast Toyota 'achieved' something.

Anyway, Toyota announced their F1 plans in january 1999. In June 2000 they were granted their entry for the '02 season.
They should have entered in 2001, but delayed their entry. Toyota started their own works team and didn't buy an existing team either. Their motorsport home wasn't in the UK either but in Germany. There are thus some similarities here with Haas.
Toyota however tested throughout 2001 with a testbed car - a car, fully built by themselves thus having all in-house knowledge over a period of 1 1/2 years and then used solely as a 'driving laboratory' to used it for a 2002 updated version as an actual competitor.

Compared to Toyota, Haas' is facing 2 problems; 1 - no testing. That'll hurt him severely. 2 - no knowledge nor understanding of the entire car. They buy Ferrari parts which they didn't research nor construct themselves and slam them on a car which they let build by dallara and thus have know knowledge of either. A combination of parts and a body that were not purpose-built; rather a 'mix your own' smoothie.
The fact there is no testing except for the winter testing hurts the 2nd problem even more; they have zilch idea about how it all will respond in real life.

All they'll have are (limited) computer simulations and windtunnel time of their own - relatively unused for F1 purposes except some exceptions in the past - of material they did not create themselves and didn't do the work for nor have the understanding about - they'll have to learn along the way, but - that could backfire them ala Lola-Mastercard.

Toyota had a bigger budget and inseason testing and their own data on a fully purpose-built car.
Haas has a smaller budget, no inseason testing and have second to no data of a non-purpose-built car.

Meanwhile, there's still nothing substancial but cheap words and a big sign at a building which was intended to be built for something else, nor any actual prospect of anything else in the short future. That's where the big difference is; Toyota by now had a car built which they went ahead and tested for an entire year, whereas Haas still hasn't even has a braking pad in his warehouse.

They've only begun starting to 'work' on an european base whilst they actually should have their facilities up and running so they'll actually get to the lights. That is, after all what they said why they were postponing to 2016; to be prepared to the grid instead of half-baked. Meanwhile we're a year further and we're not even quarter-baked.

Baked air, that's what we've had though.