RIP Manor Racing (2010-2017)

andrew · Post by **andrew** » 27 Oct 2014, 10:47

CoopsII wrote:So Bianchi's two points may end up being for nothing. There's clearly more to the Caterham story than just the performance on-track but either way the fact that both back-marking teams are unable to make F1 pay despite being, in my opinion, reasonably competative stinks.

I think the only hope for Marussia now is that Sauber do not overtake them, that way the reward money could be useful. I doubt it though.

CoopsII · Post by **CoopsII** » 27 Oct 2014, 10:48

andrew wrote:
CoopsII wrote:So Bianchi's two points may end up being for nothing. There's clearly more to the Caterham story than just the performance on-track but either way the fact that both back-marking teams are unable to make F1 pay despite being, in my opinion, reasonably competative stinks.

I think the only hope for Marussia now is that Sauber do not overtake them, that way the reward money could be useful. I doubt it though.

Useful to the creditors possibly. It's unlikely to be invested into next years car. Bianchi is quite fortunate he has Ferrari backing while he languishes in Japan.

AndreaModa · Post by **AndreaModa** » 27 Oct 2014, 10:49

I suspect it will be void due to them missing these last races.

I'll bet old Max Mosley has had a quiet chuckle to himself watching this latest news unfold. If's and but's are all very well in any situation in life, but I have to wonder what things would have been like if the £40 million cap had been implemented.

CoopsII · Post by **CoopsII** » 27 Oct 2014, 10:50

AndreaModa wrote:I'll bet old Max Mosley has had a quiet chuckle to himself watching this latest news from the luxury of his non-nazi themed sex dungeon.

Fixed.

andrew · Post by **andrew** » 27 Oct 2014, 10:51

A question, with Caterham and Marussia not at COTA and with the possibility of Vettel no entering qualifying, is there any point in doing q1??

AustralianStig · Post by **AustralianStig** » 27 Oct 2014, 10:53

andrew wrote:A question, with Caterham and Marussia not at COTA and with the possibility of Vettel no entering qualifying, is there any point in doing q1??

Adam Cooper seems to think that the FIA will restructure Q1 and Q2 to eliminate 4 cars only, but the rules don't allow for only 18 cars taking part so no doubt there'll be an official statement on their decision soon.

CoopsII · Post by **CoopsII** » 27 Oct 2014, 10:55

God only knows what they'll cook up for this now.

Post by **Ataxia** » 27 Oct 2014, 11:25

The MARUSSIA F1™ TEAM have officially entered administration.

However, there are rumours aboard that two steel millionaires are set to buy the team. However, I did a quick sweep of Google and found nothing on them...so, uh, I'm a little sceptical.

That said, I have a sneaking suspicion that we'll still see both teams in FORMULA 1™ next season.

CoopsII · Post by **CoopsII** » 27 Oct 2014, 11:26

Ataxia wrote:The MARUSSIA F1™ TEAM have officially entered administration.

However, there are rumours aboard that two steel millionaires are set to buy the team. However, I did a quick sweep of Google and found nothing on them...so, uh, I'm a little sceptical.

That said, I have a sneaking suspicion that we'll still see both teams in FORMULA 1™ next season.

You don't need to keep doing the little TMs. We've been told it's nowt to do with that.

Post by **Ataxia** » 27 Oct 2014, 11:29

CoopsII wrote:
Ataxia wrote:The MARUSSIA F1™ TEAM have officially entered administration.

However, there are rumours aboard that two steel millionaires are set to buy the team. However, I did a quick sweep of Google and found nothing on them...so, uh, I'm a little sceptical.

That said, I have a sneaking suspicion that we'll still see both teams in FORMULA 1™ next season.

You don't need to keep doing the little TMs. We've been told it's nowt to do with that.

If there's one thing I've learned in life, it's to question everything. Better to err on the side of caution on this one...plus, it seems to be quite annoying, which is a bonus.

™.

eagleash · Post by **eagleash** » 27 Oct 2014, 11:31

andrew wrote:Now it has been confirmed, Marussia has entered administration according to Sky Sports F1 news. No information on redundancies, they will miss the U.S gp, no confirmation on Brazil yet.

Cars from Austin will go directly to Brazil, so if Marussia don't catch the "Bernie Air" flight to Texas, it would be very unlikely they would independently get the team to SP.

Zetec · Post by **Zetec** » 27 Oct 2014, 13:39

Marussia gets Ferrari money for letting Bianchi drive. => Bianchi crashes, therefore he doesn't drive. => Ferrari ceases the payments.

Anyone thinking the same way?

shinji · Post by **shinji** » 27 Oct 2014, 14:18

Zetec wrote:Marussia gets Ferrari money for letting Bianchi drive. => Bianchi crashes, therefore he doesn't drive. => Ferrari ceases the payments.

Anyone thinking the same way?

I think that'd be unconscionably heartless from Ferrari, would hope beyond hope that that's not what's happened.

Zetec · Post by **Zetec** » 27 Oct 2014, 14:50

shinji wrote:
Zetec wrote:Marussia gets Ferrari money for letting Bianchi drive. => Bianchi crashes, therefore he doesn't drive. => Ferrari ceases the payments.

Anyone thinking the same way?

I think that'd be unconscionably heartless from Ferrari, would hope beyond hope that that's not what's happened.

But at the end of the day Formula 1 is about money. We don't know what is written in the contract.
But I hope too that this is no what's happened...

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 27 Oct 2014, 17:21

Ataxia wrote:
CoopsII wrote:
Ataxia wrote:The MARUSSIA F1™ TEAM have officially entered administration.

However, there are rumours aboard that two steel millionaires are set to buy the team. However, I did a quick sweep of Google and found nothing on them...so, uh, I'm a little sceptical.

That said, I have a sneaking suspicion that we'll still see both teams in FORMULA 1™ next season.

You don't need to keep doing the little TMs. We've been told it's nowt to do with that.

If there's one thing I've learned in life, it's to question everything. Better to err on the side of caution on this one...plus, it seems to be quite annoying, which is a bonus.

™.

I just assumed that you were starting to parody Don Pentecost... Seems I was mistaken. :roll:

Post by **mario** » 27 Oct 2014, 17:52

Zetec wrote:
shinji wrote:
Zetec wrote:Marussia gets Ferrari money for letting Bianchi drive. => Bianchi crashes, therefore he doesn't drive. => Ferrari ceases the payments.

Anyone thinking the same way?

I think that'd be unconscionably heartless from Ferrari, would hope beyond hope that that's not what's happened.

But at the end of the day Formula 1 is about money. We don't know what is written in the contract.
But I hope too that this is no what's happened...

That is true, because it is possible that the terms of the contract with Bianchi contained other clauses - for example, Ferrari might have offered a discount on the price of their engines or offered certain technical support services at a reduced rate in return for Bianchi being given a seat rather than making direct payments to Marussia.

AustralianStig wrote:
andrew wrote:A question, with Caterham and Marussia not at COTA and with the possibility of Vettel no entering qualifying, is there any point in doing q1??

Adam Cooper seems to think that the FIA will restructure Q1 and Q2 to eliminate 4 cars only, but the rules don't allow for only 18 cars taking part so no doubt there'll be an official statement on their decision soon.

If the rumours suggesting that Ferrari might also start Alonso from the pit lane in order to change his engine and the ancillaries are true, then they will probably have to change the rules - otherwise, if only two drivers were to be knocked out of that session and two drivers (Alonso and Vettel) had already announced that they will not run, then the other drivers would only have to do an installation lap to guarantee a position in Q2. I can't imagine that such a farce would go down well with the paying public...

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 27 Oct 2014, 20:35

mario wrote:I can't imagine that such a farce would go down well with the paying public...

Particularly not in the land of the free - the good old US of A!

Dj_bereta · Post by **Dj_bereta** » 27 Oct 2014, 20:48

So, we could see another shameful US Grand Prix, like it was in 2005.

CoopsII · Post by **CoopsII** » 28 Oct 2014, 07:47

Dj_bereta wrote:So, we could see another shameful US Grand Prix, like it was in 2005.

Say what you like about that farce but it's the most memorable race at Indy we had :lol:

Ferrim · Post by **Ferrim** » 28 Oct 2014, 09:15

If only Schumacher and Barrichello had crashed. They were oh so close.

Bleu · Post by **Bleu** » 28 Oct 2014, 10:39

Ferrim wrote:If only Schumacher and Barrichello had crashed. They were oh so close.

I remember Mika Salo hoping for a retirement in top 3 because he was excited to see whether organizers have flag of India for the podium ceremony.

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 28 Oct 2014, 11:18

CoopsII wrote:
Dj_bereta wrote:So, we could see another shameful US Grand Prix, like it was in 2005.

Say what you like about that farce but it's the most memorable race at Indy we had

That is certainly the most talked about race at Indy. Pity.

James1978 · Post by **James1978** » 28 Oct 2014, 12:12

That and the stupid staged "dead heat" in 2002 as well.

CoopsII · Post by **CoopsII** » 28 Oct 2014, 12:38

James1978 wrote:That and the stupid staged "dead heat" in 2002 as well.

Man alive, I miss the days when that was the biggest problem F1 had...

MrMG · Post by **MrMG** » 28 Oct 2014, 19:22

Since Ferrari was paying for Bianchi's drive, surely the best course of action would be to buy the team and run it as their own Toro Rosso.

CoopsII · Post by **CoopsII** » 28 Oct 2014, 19:28

MadGaz85 wrote:Since Ferrari was paying for Bianchi's drive, surely the best course of action would be to buy the team and run it as their own Toro Rosso.

I like that idea, put it to them.

f1andrea · Post by **f1andrea** » 30 Oct 2014, 20:36

I don't like this silence: they haven't never announced their US GP missing. Any news about indians investors?

AustralianStig · Post by **AustralianStig** » 03 Nov 2014, 11:49

Do I dare to begin to hope?

http://www1.skysports.com/f1/report/124 ... -abu-dhabi

roblo97 · Post by **roblo97** » 03 Nov 2014, 13:20

AustralianStig wrote:Do I dare to begin to hope?

http://www1.skysports.com/f1/report/124 ... -abu-dhabi

I hope this happens.

Post by **Frogfoot9013** » 03 Nov 2014, 16:24

roblomas52 wrote:
AustralianStig wrote:Do I dare to begin to hope?

http://www1.skysports.com/f1/report/124 ... -abu-dhabi

I hope this happens.

I agree.

f1andrea · Post by **f1andrea** » 03 Nov 2014, 18:58

Frogfoot9013 wrote:
roblomas52 wrote:
AustralianStig wrote:Do I dare to begin to hope?

http://www1.skysports.com/f1/report/124 ... -abu-dhabi

I hope this happens.

I agree.

me too

Ducktanian · Post by **Ducktanian** » 03 Nov 2014, 19:05

Man, I hope that Marussia make it to Abu Dhabi, because then if the boycott takes place we could have more points for Marussia!

F1000X · Post by **F1000X** » 03 Nov 2014, 19:19

Dartanian wrote:Man, I hope that Marussia make it to Abu Dhabi, because then if the boycott takes place we could have more points for Marussia!

Realistically, they can't overtake anyone in the constructors championship besides Lotus, and that's a big ask. As long they can prevent Sauber from scoring points, I'm not sure what more an extra point or two would do for them. There may be rewards written into their contracts with sponsors, but we have no way of knowing if that's the case.

DanielPT · Post by **DanielPT** » 04 Nov 2014, 10:33

F1000X wrote:
Dartanian wrote:Man, I hope that Marussia make it to Abu Dhabi, because then if the boycott takes place we could have more points for Marussia!

Realistically, they can't overtake anyone in the constructors championship besides Lotus, and that's a big ask. As long they can prevent Sauber from scoring points, I'm not sure what more an extra point or two would do for them. There may be rewards written into their contracts with sponsors, but we have no way of knowing if that's the case.

They don't need to prevent Sauber from scoring points. That is what Perez is there for. They just need to race.

Zetec · Post by **Zetec** » 04 Nov 2014, 12:54

F1000X wrote:Realistically, they can't overtake anyone in the constructors championship besides Lotus, and that's a big ask. As long they can prevent Sauber from scoring points, I'm not sure what more an extra point or two would do for them. There may be rewards written into their contracts with sponsors, but we have no way of knowing if that's the case.

An extra point or two would be a boost of motivation, just for the good feeling of the boys working back at the factory (even if the points are not scored by being faster than other cars).
But even if Lotus, Sauber and Fcrce India don't show up in AbuDhabi, there is still Mercedes, Ferrari, McLaren, Williams, RedBull and Torro Rosso racing. So I count 12 cars faster than Marussia. So you need 3 retirements for a point...

Post by **mario** » 04 Nov 2014, 15:52

Zetec wrote:
F1000X wrote:Realistically, they can't overtake anyone in the constructors championship besides Lotus, and that's a big ask. As long they can prevent Sauber from scoring points, I'm not sure what more an extra point or two would do for them. There may be rewards written into their contracts with sponsors, but we have no way of knowing if that's the case.

An extra point or two would be a boost of motivation, just for the good feeling of the boys working back at the factory (even if the points are not scored by being faster than other cars).
But even if Lotus, Sauber and Fcrce India don't show up in AbuDhabi, there is still Mercedes, Ferrari, McLaren, Williams, RedBull and Torro Rosso racing. So I count 12 cars faster than Marussia. So you need 3 retirements for a point...

Realistically, as far as Marussia are concerned, if Sauber do not score points and pass them in the WCC, then they probably do not want to score any more points unless it is enough for them to get ahead of Lotus.

Up until that point, any additional points they could score would cost them additional money, since the licence fee the FIA levies currently charges teams by the point, whilst not yielding additional revenue from FOM as their overall WCC position would remain the same. Only if they passed Lotus in the WCC would it then be worthwhile scoring more points, since that would then move them up the WCC rankings (assuming Sauber remain pointless in the closing races).

Since Lotus have two 8th place finishes to their name, Marussia would therefore need to pick up one 7th place in Abu Dhabi to do the job (one 8th would not be enough - they'd tie on points, but Lotus would remain ahead on countback).

GwilymJJames · Post by **GwilymJJames** » 05 Nov 2014, 18:26

FIA entry list marks this team as subject to confirmation, also reveals that they have reverted to being a British team called Manor.

Post by **Bobby Doorknobs** » 05 Nov 2014, 18:33

GwilymJJames wrote:FIA entry list marks this team as subject to confirmation, also reveals that they have reverted to being a British team called Manor.

Still subject to confirmation though, while Caterham are confirmed. And what's with MNR?

Post by **mario** » 05 Nov 2014, 19:19

Simtek wrote:
GwilymJJames wrote:FIA entry list marks this team as subject to confirmation, also reveals that they have reverted to being a British team called Manor.

Still subject to confirmation though, while Caterham are confirmed. And what's with MNR?

I guess that the reason why Caterham are confirmed is the technicality that the company that owns the entry rights to the team is not the outfit that is in administration - 1MALAYSIA RACING TEAM is the entity that Fernandes set up that holds the entry rights, whilst the actual production of the car was carried out by a separate outfit and a third different company was then responsible for the day to day race preparation for the team (which is why the administrator complained about the structure of the holding companies being unnecessarily convoluted).

As 1Malaysia Racing Team is still technically in operation, they therefore have not yet voided their entry rights - by contrast, because Marussia had only one entity that held both the entry rights and carried out the day to day operations, that would appear to be the reason why Marussia's entry is technically subject to confirmation.

As for using MNR for the chassis name, well, I guess that they cannot use Marussia given that the owner is shutting the business down and probably retains the ownership of the marque, so the only name they can use is some variant of their new name, hence the contraction of 'Manor' to MNR.

AndreaModa · Post by **AndreaModa** » 05 Nov 2014, 20:01

But why not Manor? Urgh that's the best-worst piece of news I've seen all day. Great to see the team on the entry list but my God what a poor choice of constructor name! Who the hell thought of that? MNR doesn't stand for anything - surely everyone will just call them Manor anyway. Daft decision.