Infiniti Red Bull Racing 2015

[bhall II]

My apologies if this has already been shared. I haven't been paying close attention to the debate, but this highlights what I believe is the key issue as to why the Red Bull-Renault experiment failed.

Red Bull 'not our works team', says Renault

Renault Sport F1 managing director Cyril Abiteboul says a lack of integration with Red Bull Racing is partly to blame for current woes.

The rocky state of relations between Red Bull and its engine provider has been one of the headlines of the 2015 season, and the situation doesn't appear to be improving heading into the second half of the year.

Reliability issues with the new power unit have been foremost among the complaints the team has had, but Renault has hit back and said that one of the underlying reasons for strained relations and poor performance is that the squad isn't living up to its end of an arrangement to work as a de facto works team.

"It's one thing to state that Red Bull is our team and a works team of Renault, but it's another to make it happen," Abiteboul told ESPN.

"They expressed a desire, but for some reason - and maybe the reasons are not completely on their side - we have not managed to move from the uniform statements to acts."

Abiteboul explained that not being a single operation means that unlike teams like Mercedes and Ferrari, Renault and Red Bull lack an integrated budget with which they can plan ahead with and properly apportion between chassis, engine and driver development.

"When there is an arms race in engine technology and the return on money spent is higher on the engine than it is going to be on a front wing then you have to review the whole economic view," he added, calling it "a no brainer."

But Abiteboul said that he didn't want to play the blame game and admitted that Renault were also not where they wanted to be in terms of engine performance and reliability so far in 2015.

The frustrations voiced by Abiteboul point to why there has been so much speculation in Formula One that Renault is looking to re-enter team ownership in the coming months, having become frustrated with the limitations of the role of engine provider.

Reports earlier in the year linked Renault to a buy-out or rebadging of Red Bull's sister team Toro Rosso, but STR team principal Franz Tost admitted this week that talks between the companies had gone cold in recent weeks and that he felt Renault were looking to buy a stake elsewhere.

Current favourite for Renault's attentions is thought to be Lotus, the team that they owned until 2010.

However, Abiteboul insisted that splitting from Red Bull after their historic run of shared success would be a "huge wasted opportunity," although he admitted that it might nonetheless be necessary if Renault are to salvage their recently battered reputation and get their brand in the sport back to its former glories.

With the sport's biggest budget over the last few years, I think Red Bull should have dedicated more of its resources to power unit development. I also think it was incumbent upon Renault to stress the importance of doing so, because Red Bull, as a team whose success coincided with frozen-spec engines, has virtually no experience in a competitive environment that requires wholesale, top-to-bottom development. Instead, both sides seem to have treated the 2014 formula as a continuation of the contemporary status quo as opposed to the sea change everyone else recognized it to be.

Christian Horner: Renault F1 2014 engine won't be limited by budget

Red Bull boss Christian Horner believes Renault will deliver a competitive Formula 1 engine next year, despite not having the highest budget among suppliers.

The French car marker has helped Red Bull clinch four consecutive drivers' and constructors' titles, and will again power the team in 2014 when turbo engines will return to F1.

Renault famously introduced a turbo engine in F1 back in 1977, becoming the first team to win with a turbocharged car two years later.

"Renault has got a great track record and we have achieved some phenomenal things with them," Horner told AUTOSPORT.

"They perhaps don't have the budget of some of the others but they have been prudent in how they spend it.

"We are pretty confident that we will have a competitive power plant.

"There's an awful lot a hearsay that goes round at this time of year but as always, what is important is what happens when the flag drops in Melbourne."

Horner said Red Bull's relationship with Renault means the French manufacturer will do everything possible to adapt its engine to next year's car.

"The status we have as their works partner means that the maximum effort is going into optimisation of the engine and the Red Bull car," he said.

"It's going to be a big element of grand prix racing next year.

"Renault has worked very closely with us on the installation of the engine and we have concentrated where they can.

"They [have their] specialist area, our area is the chassis, so it has been a collective effort over the last couple of years to integrate the engine."

They were never on the same page, and it scuttled the whole project.

[FW17]

I have never heard an engine supplier asking for money from a team that is supposed to be their works team

Merc and Ferrari engine budgets don't come team but the board of the parent company that the Daimler and Ferrari

Abiteboul should ask Ron how much money he is sending Honda

Bernie Ecclestone said: “We don't want begging bowls.

[ME4ME]

And it's not like Renault had only Red Bull to supply in 2014: they had in total 4 paying teams.
They should have invested more themself right from the start.

Besides, if Red Bull had invested heavily in the PU (more then they've already done), who is to say that Renault wouldn't have gone on and buy a team of their own anyway.

Honda is investing heavily into this F1 project. Renault should have done the same. The blame is on Ghosn.

[djos]

And it's not like Renault had only Red Bull to supply in 2014: they had in total 4 paying teams.
They should have invested more themself right from the start.

Besides, if Red Bull had invested heavily in the PU (more then they've already done), who is to say that Renault wouldn't have gone on and buy a team of their own anyway.

Honda is investing heavily into this F1 project. Renault should have done the same. The blame is on Ghosn.

You certainly cant fault RBR for trying to help Renault, bringing Mario Illien in would not have been a cheap exercise! It's hardly surprising then that Renault's rejection of his work seems to have been the final straw and catalyst for divorce.

[FoxHound]

I have never heard an engine supplier asking for money from a team that is supposed to be their works team

Merc and Ferrari engine budgets don't come team but the board of the parent company that the Daimler and Ferrari

Abiteboul should ask Ron how much money he is sending Honda

Bernie Ecclestone said: “We don't want begging bowls.

That's not the point. If you read Ben's(Bhall) post you'd see that the issue was not just about integration but allocation of fiscal resources.
No competitor, be that Red Bull, Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault etc...can operate a maximum flat out 24/7 development strategy.
There are gains to be had in all 3 disciplines(4 if you include tyres) of the car...Aero, Chassis, Engine.
Only the advantage Mercedes and Ferrari had was they could see where the money needed to be spent, and when.

As a whole of the budget, those teams could divert efforts from one discipline to the other quicker and more effectively.

And as it's been pointed out, Red Bull knew Renault were down on budgets compared to Ferrari and Mercedes.

So not only was there less fluidity in the relationship(by choice from the looks of it), there was also less money to do the same work as the leading contenders. And the situation was allowed to continue by both parties.

Then we get idiots proclaiming incompetence...

[djos]

So not only was there less fluidity in the relationship(by choice from the looks of it), there was also less money to do the same work as the leading contenders. And the situation was allowed to continue by both parties.

Then we get idiots proclaiming incompetence...

So how much do you reckon Mario Illien's work would have cost RedBull? Was Renault ignoring that work competent?

[FoxHound]

So not only was there less fluidity in the relationship(by choice from the looks of it), there was also less money to do the same work as the leading contenders. And the situation was allowed to continue by both parties.

Then we get idiots proclaiming incompetence...

So how much do you reckon Mario Illien's work would have cost RedBull? Was Renault ignoring that work competent?

What's to say that Mario's work represented a step forward? You are assuming it is.

Renault will have seen the data, and acted accordingly.

[FW17]

That's not the point. If you read Ben's(Bhall) post you'd see that the issue was not just about integration but allocation of fiscal resources.
No competitor, be that Red Bull, Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault etc...can operate a maximum flat out 24/7 development strategy.
There are gains to be had in all 3 disciplines(4 if you include tyres) of the car...Aero, Chassis, Engine.
Only the advantage Mercedes and Ferrari had was they could see where the money needed to be spent, and when.

As a whole of the budget, those teams could divert efforts from one discipline to the other quicker and more effectively.

And as it's been pointed out, Red Bull knew Renault were down on budgets compared to Ferrari and Mercedes.

So not only was there less fluidity in the relationship(by choice from the looks of it), there was also less money to do the same work as the leading contenders. And the situation was allowed to continue by both parties.

Then we get idiots proclaiming incompetence...

Why should Renault stay in F1 if they do not want to spend on it?

Just to take the example of Mclaren again, if Mclaren feels Honda requires more money, he is not going to send some of his team budget, he is going to ask the Honda board to spend more.

There is a smear campaign here and in all Brit sites against Red Bull. Let us talk for a moment about Mclaren in 1994 when they called Peugeot incompetent. And Ron is a 100 times worse in his comments than Honer and Marko combined.

[FoxHound]

Why should Renault stay in F1 if they do not want to spend on it?

The budget of between 170 to 200million to produce engines is rather a large sum wouldn't you agree?
This looks especially exorbitant when, Cyril Abiteboul comments that "Red Bull win, it's Red Bull. They lose, and they blame us".
If we add this to Red Bull's budget, I can promise you it's by far more than any other team out there.

Just to take the example of Mclaren again, if Mclaren feels Honda requires more money, he is not going to send some of his team budget, he is going to ask the Honda board to spend more.

That's a silly comparison. McLaren ditched the best engine, as they felt it would stop them from winning....
And McLaren do not have Red Bull's financial resources.

There is a smear campaign here and in all Brit sites against Red Bull. Let us talk for a moment about Mclaren in 1994 when they called Peugeot incompetent. And Ron is a 100 times worse in his comments than Honer and Marko combined.

A smear campaign? Are you having a laugh? How else is the media to report the stuff that comes out of Mateschitz, Horner and Marko's mouth's?
Did the media make up the stories? C'mon, there's no smear campaign, there's a big game of politics going on and Red Bull are living up to the adage...all news is good news.

[turbof1]

I agree with Bhall. Note that he said resources. Many people confuse this for money, but resources encompass a lot more. Red Bull and Renault should probably have allocated manpower, data and material to form one specific team for both the chassis and PU. All decisions should have been in function of gaining the most out of the combination of chassis and PU.

That would have required an investment from Red Bull yes, but since they added to the development process, they could also partially recuperate those costs by reduction on PU contract and have a slice from the contracts of the customer teams.

What happened is obvious: red bull made their decisions about chassis/aero independently from the decisions Renault made about the PU. And foxhound, this works both ways. I highly doubt thay Renault would have even considered Mario's input. They most likely will have been offended by that offer from Red Bull.

[FoxHound]

I agree with Bhall. Note that he said resources. Many people confuse this for money,

Resources are nothing without money, they no longer retain resourcefulness if nobody pays the bills.

That would have required an investment from Red Bull yes, but since they added to the development process, they could also partially recuperate those costs by reduction on PU contract and have a slice from the contracts of the customer teams.

Dangerously close to them being a fully fledged PU maker... Careful Turbo, you may be labelled delusional.

What happened is obvious: red bull made their decisions about chassis/aero independently from the decisions Renault made about the PU. And foxhound, this works both ways. I highly doubt thay Renault would have even considered Mario's input. They most likely will have been offended by that offer from Red Bull.

Why would Renault not consider something that helps them? Maybe because in the long term, it does not help them at all.
Again there is an unfounded opinion the Illien's wunderwerk would be better than Renault's own.
Allied to this, Illien is a consultant at Red Bull, with no long term working knowledge of the Renault PU.
So how is this magical 60bhp going to come from the ICE alone? It's a fantasy, a Red Bull powered one.

Why would this risky strategy pay off, when Renault pandered to Red Bull's request to fast track upgrades this year that shoot both of them in the foot?!
Turbo, you yourself(I'm going by memory mate...shoot me if I'm wrong) said that it was Renault's fault for allowing themselves to be pushed into doing this. Now you would hold it against them when they stay firm to their path?

[FW17]

A smear campaign? Are you having a laugh? How else is the media to report the stuff that comes out of Mateschitz, Horner and Marko's mouth's?
Did the media make up the stories? C'mon, there's no smear campaign, there's a big game of politics going on and Red Bull are living up to the adage...all news is good news.

Who wrote that Renault were not appreciated between 2010 and 2013?

[turbof1]

Resources are nothing without money, they no longer retain resourcefulness if nobody pays the bills.

And simply putting money on a joint bank account is not going to lead itself to the appropiate resources. Without proper allocation you could just as well buy VW stocks at the moment. A big mistake many people and business make: they first start from the money they want to use and then look how they can fill that with the resources. Neither smart nor viable.

Why would Renault not consider something that helps them? Maybe because in the long term, it does not help them at all.

P'robably because the relationship has been sour ever since the start of 2014. Not once did we see the renault team and red bull team share the same table outside. Not once did we hear one positive thing from one another. Tell me, which identity, company or individual, would then happily accept help from the identity who continually criticises you?

It could have been the head engine engineer of Mercedes that Red Bull offered; Renault was not going to accept anything. Not when the partnership is that empty and even enemy-like.

I'm not blaming Renault or Red Bull solely for this. As Bhall mentioned, the relationship never allowed pride to be put aside for a better cooperation. It was always going to tumble down to this eventually. Any offer of help from either side would have been viewed as an insult and not as help. That's exactly what happened with Mario. Nothing else.

Dangerously close to them being a fully fledged PU maker... Careful Turbo, you may be labelled delusional.

Not even close by a long shot. Red Bull has the resources to built the chassis, Renault has the resources to built a PU. But to make that PU-chassis combination anywhere near competitive you need the both work together and sink in resources in a joint-venture that has trust and single-leadership at the base, with one clear goal. And very importantly: that has to start right from the beginning. Both Red Bull and Renault later on tried to move that direction, but at that point there was too much bad blood already between them and again any offer of help will be dismissed as ignorance for the know-how the other party has.

Red Bull would first need to be in the position of putting the resources Renault has into the project before being a "full fledge PU maker". Red Bull does not have anything in the slightest going with engines, not in F1 and not in any other sports.

[FoxHound]

Who wrote that Renault were not appreciated between 2010 and 2013?

Wait, appreciated when winning you mean?

[FoxHound]

And simply putting money on a joint bank account is not going to lead itself to the appropiate resources. Without proper allocation you could just as well buy VW stocks at the moment. A big mistake many people and business make: they first start from the money they want to use and then look how they can fill that with the resources. Neither smart nor viable

That would be an insult to the management of both Renault and Red Bull. Had they had one big fund, I'm pretty sure that they could manage the funds, and thereby resources, appropriately.

Red Bull had income of circa 200 million in 2013. The expenditure was roughly the same meaning pretty much balanced books.
Renault have an expenditure of around 200 million in 2014, with an income of around 80/90 million. Leaving a black hole of around 110 million.
http://www.pitpass.com/52954/Red-Bull-w ... ts-of-200m

It's very easy to see why Renault baulk at investing even more money when the return for them as "just a supplier" would be minimal.
There's a responsibility on both parties here, especially in view of the distribution of cash from participation.

'm not blaming Renault or Red Bull solely for this. As Bhall mentioned, the relationship never allowed pride to be put aside for a better cooperation. It was always going to tumble down to this eventually. Any offer of help from either side would have been viewed as an insult and not as help. That's exactly what happened with Mario. Nothing else.

I'd agree mostly. The irksome problem I have here is conduct. At which point can we look at Red Bull and say their conduct toward the supplier Renault changed? I'd say the moment it became clear Renault were not on terms with Mercedes.
This leads to a number of issues, primarily what we are seeing today. How can you integrate with the sort of rhetoric flying around?

What will happen if next year Renault overtake Ferrari as the second best PU? Ferrari did it this year.
What will then happen if Red Bull, using 2015 Ferrari engines fall even further behind?
More quit threats? Insults towards Ferrari...or F1 in general? Very likely.

Not even close by a long shot. Red Bull has the resources to built the chassis, Renault has the resources to built a PU.

Closer than you think Turbo....
http://uk.motorsport.com/f1/news/red-bu ... r-renault/

http://adamcooperf1.com/2014/06/25/red- ... -for-2016/

Having said that when I asked Horner on Sunday if it was possible for Red Bull to do its own engine, he said: “It’s highly improbable. First of all we need to see what the plans of Renault are. Obviously a team like Red Bull isn’t short of choices, but we want to make sure that we’re competitive for the long term. Obviously designing and manufacturing our own engine currently isn’t part of our plan.”

It could be argued that he didn’t deny that someone else could manufacture it on Red Bull’s behalf. Indeed when I asked Christian if it would be possible under the rules for Viry to build a new engine for Red Bull, badged as something else, he simply smiled and said he believed it was…