Oooooof, not this story again ..... How many time we gonna rehash this ?
it is what it is... They made thier bed ...now they have to sleep in it.
Because they still would be playing the blame game. All the good changes happened after Honda left, because McLaren learned they weren't anywhere close to the top teams. You're also comparing Red Bull with McLaren, while they operate on different budgets. Let's not forget that Honda costed McLaren a lot of money as well because of sponsors running away and less price money. Their racing team also isn't underperforming, they ended 4th in the constructor championship and that's the place where they should be budget wise. McLaren isn't the crème de la crème of F1 anymore, but it seems some fans still compare their resources with Ferrari, Mercedes and Red Bull. Even with Honda they weren't comparable.Jolle wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 18:47Mclaren is a group. The extra income of $100, free engines, drivers and marketing is a lot. During 2018 they had to sell historic cars to compensate the giant loss at the racing team. There might be somehow be a good side to it... but I don't see it. RedBull winning and podiums for Toro Rosso might more make the decision of the McLaren management to break with Honda even more painful. I suspect it was a choice to keep Alonso and the possibility to attract better sponsorship, the lack in leadership in 2017 and not "getting" that their 2017 chassis was underperforming a push in the wrong direction. At the moment they are quite large car manufacturer who is in financial stress with a racing team that is underperforming. An extra investment into the racing team is not logical and wil not be on the priority list of the owners.SmallSoldier wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 18:33Not necessarily, the financial issues plaguing Mclaren today aren’t related to the Racing division per se... Would it have been better from a Cash Flow perspective? Definitely, since they would have benefited of the investment from Honda... Nevertheless, it may not have covered the problems conveying the team today.Bill wrote:If they would stayed the course with Honda a lot their financial issues would have been addressed.they went from being a works team which in principle could compete with the likes Mercedes and Ferrari to a midfield team on verge of bankruptcy.they wanted instant gratification they should have gone through pain just like Honda until eventually everything works it is just how development in engineering works. When USA was in a space race with Soviet Union it was a disaster from the beginning with rockets blowing all over at launch before they eventually set foot on the Moon.
On the other hand, the issues from the relationship with Honda could have easily trickle down to the automotive division, which would have been a bigger problem... The decision to move away from Honda when it was made, was the right one... The fact that they had issues with the 2018 car, not related to the PU, is a different situation in itself.
As a matter of fact, the issues in 2018 and the divorce from Honda (and the pain that came from it) may end been very beneficial, since it forced the team to look at themselves with a more critical attitude, forced them to rebuild and change the way they were tackling their racing operations... In the long term, it could prove to be the best thing that could have happened today.
The financial issues today are due to a Pandemic that is having an effect on everyone, not so long ago we were discussing whether Mercedes was going to stay in F1, similar with Renault and others.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
“The blame game” is a management issue. And with management like that you’re not going to win any championships anyway, it’s destructive.RonDennis wrote: ↑26 Jun 2020, 00:01Because they still would be playing the blame game. All the good changes happened after Honda left, because McLaren learned they weren't anywhere close to the top teams. You're also comparing Red Bull with McLaren, while they operate on different budgets. Let's not forget that Honda costed McLaren a lot of money as well because of sponsors running away and less price money. Their racing team also isn't underperforming, they ended 4th in the constructor championship and that's the place where they should be budget wise. McLaren isn't the crème de la crème of F1 anymore, but it seems some fans still compare their resources with Ferrari, Mercedes and Red Bull. Even with Honda they weren't comparable.Jolle wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 18:47Mclaren is a group. The extra income of $100, free engines, drivers and marketing is a lot. During 2018 they had to sell historic cars to compensate the giant loss at the racing team. There might be somehow be a good side to it... but I don't see it. RedBull winning and podiums for Toro Rosso might more make the decision of the McLaren management to break with Honda even more painful. I suspect it was a choice to keep Alonso and the possibility to attract better sponsorship, the lack in leadership in 2017 and not "getting" that their 2017 chassis was underperforming a push in the wrong direction. At the moment they are quite large car manufacturer who is in financial stress with a racing team that is underperforming. An extra investment into the racing team is not logical and wil not be on the priority list of the owners.SmallSoldier wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 18:33
Not necessarily, the financial issues plaguing Mclaren today aren’t related to the Racing division per se... Would it have been better from a Cash Flow perspective? Definitely, since they would have benefited of the investment from Honda... Nevertheless, it may not have covered the problems conveying the team today.
On the other hand, the issues from the relationship with Honda could have easily trickle down to the automotive division, which would have been a bigger problem... The decision to move away from Honda when it was made, was the right one... The fact that they had issues with the 2018 car, not related to the PU, is a different situation in itself.
As a matter of fact, the issues in 2018 and the divorce from Honda (and the pain that came from it) may end been very beneficial, since it forced the team to look at themselves with a more critical attitude, forced them to rebuild and change the way they were tackling their racing operations... In the long term, it could prove to be the best thing that could have happened today.
The financial issues today are due to a Pandemic that is having an effect on everyone, not so long ago we were discussing whether Mercedes was going to stay in F1, similar with Renault and others.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
what you have to know is that the budget differences is all Bernie's fault. When the concorde agrement was signed in 2011(cerrect me if i'm wrong) i think he gave everything in terms of funding to Ferrari, Merc and Red Bull (because the were threating to quit). He made it posible for the big teams to grow out of control and made the sport unsustainable. McLaren and Williams got some solidation with their long standing bonuses. And now less than 10 years later two of the most important teams in f1 history are on the brink of death and nothing is in motion to stop thais...shame for the sport because im probably not the only one who will stop watching the sport if mclaren and williams will dissapearRonDennis wrote: ↑26 Jun 2020, 00:01Because they still would be playing the blame game. All the good changes happened after Honda left, because McLaren learned they weren't anywhere close to the top teams. You're also comparing Red Bull with McLaren, while they operate on different budgets. Let's not forget that Honda costed McLaren a lot of money as well because of sponsors running away and less price money. Their racing team also isn't underperforming, they ended 4th in the constructor championship and that's the place where they should be budget wise. McLaren isn't the crème de la crème of F1 anymore, but it seems some fans still compare their resources with Ferrari, Mercedes and Red Bull. Even with Honda they weren't comparable.Jolle wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 18:47Mclaren is a group. The extra income of $100, free engines, drivers and marketing is a lot. During 2018 they had to sell historic cars to compensate the giant loss at the racing team. There might be somehow be a good side to it... but I don't see it. RedBull winning and podiums for Toro Rosso might more make the decision of the McLaren management to break with Honda even more painful. I suspect it was a choice to keep Alonso and the possibility to attract better sponsorship, the lack in leadership in 2017 and not "getting" that their 2017 chassis was underperforming a push in the wrong direction. At the moment they are quite large car manufacturer who is in financial stress with a racing team that is underperforming. An extra investment into the racing team is not logical and wil not be on the priority list of the owners.SmallSoldier wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 18:33
Not necessarily, the financial issues plaguing Mclaren today aren’t related to the Racing division per se... Would it have been better from a Cash Flow perspective? Definitely, since they would have benefited of the investment from Honda... Nevertheless, it may not have covered the problems conveying the team today.
On the other hand, the issues from the relationship with Honda could have easily trickle down to the automotive division, which would have been a bigger problem... The decision to move away from Honda when it was made, was the right one... The fact that they had issues with the 2018 car, not related to the PU, is a different situation in itself.
As a matter of fact, the issues in 2018 and the divorce from Honda (and the pain that came from it) may end been very beneficial, since it forced the team to look at themselves with a more critical attitude, forced them to rebuild and change the way they were tackling their racing operations... In the long term, it could prove to be the best thing that could have happened today.
The financial issues today are due to a Pandemic that is having an effect on everyone, not so long ago we were discussing whether Mercedes was going to stay in F1, similar with Renault and others.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Of course it wasn't in the contract. No-one expected a global pandemic to delay the start of the season for half the year.diffuser wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 18:19Nobody blocked anyone. I've said this before. If that stuff would have been in the PU contract, They would have gotten it. The fact that they didn't get it means it wasn't in the contract or they didn't want to spend the money on it.adrianjordan wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 13:32Anyone else concerned that Renault are going to repeat what they (are alleged to) have done to other departing partners and give McLaren sub-par parts?
Seems they've already blocked them from pre-season preparation by not providing a PU for a filming day on top of not helping them to be able to run a 2018 car the other week.
Really not showing Renault in the best light. I used to have a soft spot for the team from Enstone when Kimi and then Robert K drove for them.
nobody's giving anyone an competative edge for free.
I'm sure if Mclaren would have forked over the million Pound (or whatever the price is) for the PU. Renault would have given them one.
We see news of McLaren having cash flow problems but you automatically think it's renault not willing to give PU, instead of mcLaren not willing to spend.
Yet you find no problem assigning blame to Renault for not giving a 1 million pound PU to McLaren out of the goodness of their heart.adrianjordan wrote: ↑26 Jun 2020, 22:49Of course it wasn't in the contract. No-one expected a global pandemic to delay the start of the season for half the year.diffuser wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 18:19Nobody blocked anyone. I've said this before. If that stuff would have been in the PU contract, They would have gotten it. The fact that they didn't get it means it wasn't in the contract or they didn't want to spend the money on it.adrianjordan wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 13:32Anyone else concerned that Renault are going to repeat what they (are alleged to) have done to other departing partners and give McLaren sub-par parts?
Seems they've already blocked them from pre-season preparation by not providing a PU for a filming day on top of not helping them to be able to run a 2018 car the other week.
Really not showing Renault in the best light. I used to have a soft spot for the team from Enstone when Kimi and then Robert K drove for them.
nobody's giving anyone an competative edge for free.
I'm sure if Mclaren would have forked over the million Pound (or whatever the price is) for the PU. Renault would have given them one.
We see news of McLaren having cash flow problems but you automatically think it's renault not willing to give PU, instead of mcLaren not willing to spend.
No. They would have had to provide them for the races, so no. It's just yet another symptom of how Renault operate. Remember when Red Bull and Torro Rosso were leaving for Honda and TR suddenly found they were being given unreliable parts or having to scrape together old parts. Then there's the lack of grace over the handling of Daniel leaving to come to McLaren.diffuser wrote: ↑27 Jun 2020, 07:12Yet you find no problem assigning blame to Renault for not giving a 1 million pound PU to McLaren out of the goodness of their heart.adrianjordan wrote: ↑26 Jun 2020, 22:49Of course it wasn't in the contract. No-one expected a global pandemic to delay the start of the season for half the year.diffuser wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 18:19
Nobody blocked anyone. I've said this before. If that stuff would have been in the PU contract, They would have gotten it. The fact that they didn't get it means it wasn't in the contract or they didn't want to spend the money on it.
nobody's giving anyone an competative edge for free.
I'm sure if Mclaren would have forked over the million Pound (or whatever the price is) for the PU. Renault would have given them one.
We see news of McLaren having cash flow problems but you automatically think it's renault not willing to give PU, instead of mcLaren not willing to spend.