Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
At mid season, the situation was that Alonso had already built a commanding lead in the driver's title, while on team points, Mclaren was a close second. Since the driver's title is more obvious in the press and to the general fans, it made sense to at least focus and capture one title. The driver's title seemd attainable, while the constructor's was a lot less assured. If Montoya had scored more points as he should have in the last half of the season, McLaren could have easily taken the manufacturer's title.
So Renault adopted a less aggressive strategy to get Alonso to the title. Fisi just kept plugging away, Montoya went to play tennis or find backmarkers to crash into, and Kimi either won or DNF'd. As things played out, Renault were in the hunt for the manufacturer's title, and were fortunate to capture it. But they did, and the bosses at Renault were pleased.
But it's no secret the man who makes the decision on Renault's racing participation is warm to racing only as long as it is worth it in sales of their commercial vehicles. So during this next year, the accountants at Renault will be watching their sales numbers, and it is my opinion that if the accounting doesn't show that it's worth it, they may leave F1 and invest that money into pure car sales advertising, or something else.
And just winning a title can be carried for many years to add prestige to a company. In other forms of motor racing, especially LeMans, many car manufacturers have won, established prestige and got their names on the map. Jaguar, just as an example, did that. So did Ford in the 60's. They spent a huge amount of money for that era, dominated for a few years, and disappeared from LeMans. It's not impossible to realize Renault could follow the same path.
As manchild posted, maybe Renault could just pack up and sell their team to someone else, and it could be Nissan. If they were interested in F1, it would be a sweet deal, since they would be purchasing a top team and equipment.
I still believe in Fisi, if he could master his confidence it is possible he could do much better. And who knows, in '06 renault might adopt a different strategy and go flat out, win or DNF like Kimi does. If it pays off, Renault could dominate like Ferrari has done in years past. But personally, I don't think that is what we will see happen.
As far as Alonso taking his gift car to McLaren and allowing them to examine it, there are a few things that stand in the way. The car most probably does not have the latest improvements, it probably has all the oldest bits attached. Also, Alonso is still bound by confidentiality, and for him to just hand over that car to Mclaren is most likely a huge violation of that. As well, even if Mclaren do get their mitts on that car, by then it will be rather passe in F1 terms. By the time they get around to weeding out any secrets, it will too late, or the info obsolete. Externally, that car would appear similar to the one he drove to the title. But under very close inspection, it would be proven to be incapable of quick times.
I think that Alonso made a decent decision, to change teams. I don't like any driver doing this before his present contract expires, though. I find it hard to believe any driver can be 100% comitted to his team when he knows (as well as the rest of the world) that at season's end, he will be going to a competitor after that. Massa got shut out by Williams when it was announced he was going to Ferrari, he still raced, but didn't participate in testing, and I'm sure, they tried as much as possible to keep confidential info away from him. Same with Heidfeld. He could have returned after his injury, but instead, sat out the rest of the season. Drivers who loyalties are questionable will always be treated with suspicion.
If they had no intention of leaving F1, they would have said so whether asked or not. That means they are dropping out or they have not yet decided.
Y would you state your future intentions if you werent asked. You dont see Ferrari (or any other team for that metter) releasing statements saying "Even though you didn't ask us we feel it is nessecary to inform you we will be partaking in next years championship"
errr...who said you wasn't?!
Silence is golden when you don't know a good answer.
DaveKillens wrote:
And just winning a title can be carried for many years to add prestige to a company. In other forms of motor racing, especially LeMans, many car manufacturers have won, established prestige and got their names on the map. Jaguar, just as an example, did that. So did Ford in the 60's.
You have an excellent point, Renault's championship will pay dividends for years. Ford just built a modern replication of their LeMans winner. They've been bragging about beating Ferrari for forty years.
jezzwa wrote:i would never buy a car based on the makers racing success, how much F1 technology would go into your every day city car?.
I don’t know how much technology from F1 can be found in passenger car but at least now they can sell cars saying that they made complete car for F1 that has beaten Ferrari (FIAT), Mercedes, BMW, Toyota and Honda which is just what ordinary car buyer needs to hear.
jezzwa wrote:Renault will go back to making engines again, so they still have their name in F1 but they spend less money.
Never again. When Renault re-entered F1 they clearly stated that they are not interested at all to re-enter as engine manufacturer again because they've already won all that can be won on such level. Renault has policy of going from series to series without re-entering same series on same level if they've already achieved major success in that series. That is why they are now free as a bird because there is no major series left that they haven't won when it matters 4 wheels racing.
Last edited by manchild on 02 Jan 2006, 21:00, edited 1 time in total.
The names of companies that raced and established a reputation is long and impressive. Rolls-Royce, Bentley, Mercedes, Jaguar, Ford, Porsche, Lotus, BMW, Ferrari, and many more. Not that there are any guarantees that the road car has the quality of the racing machines, but winning implies that the company know what they are doing, and know how to assemble quality machinery.
And over in NASCAR land, they have a favorite saying "win on Sunday, sell on Monday". Many fans like like being part of the aura of a winner, and there are scores of replica racers on the street. I'm sure we have all seen a blue Subaru with "555" on the side.....
That being said, there is no guarantee that a manufacturer sells to the public the quality they have on the race track. Ford is a very good example. In the '60's LeMans spending spree, they built cars that beat all comers, and to this day, cars with names like the GT 40 and MK III are spoken with reverence. But in the '70's Ford sold to the unsuspecting public in America a piece of trash called the Pinto, a car that killed a few people, despite the fact that executives and engineers at Ford were aware of it's shortcomings.
Maybe you or I would not rush out and buy a car based purely on a race win, but there are many out there who do that.
jezzwa wrote:i would never buy a car based on the makers racing success, how much F1 technology would go into your every day city car?
Good point, and I believe that racing technology and it's lessons take a while to trickle into production vehicles.
It probably benefits the manufacturers more than the consumers, though. I once read that Honda liked to have their bright, young engineering protegees spend time on racing programs, so that they could learn in that environment before moving on to design production vehicles. They have to work on hard deadlines, in a difficult, fluid environemnt. Success is measured quickly, and failure and shorcomings magnified. And those engineers take that hard experience into production design. That is when we as consumers really receive the trickle-down. Of course it's many years later, and what comes out of it may be an improved ashtray, or whatever.
I remember when Renault dominated European market in early ‘80s and so it does nowadays. Back than there was a sticker with photo of Renault F1 car at the rear window of each car that left factory. It worked than and I think it will work in 2006 and beyond.
Also it is not just starting since end of 2005 because the titles are won. It started when Alonso lapped Schuey and won in Hungary in 2003, than there was Trulli’s victory in Monaco in 2004 that also probably boosted sales. In 2005 Renault broke their sales records and that can’t be looked aside from F1 success. Millions of people are watching F1 and it must be a decision maker for at least small percentage of them to go for Clio rather than Punto or Yaris when they see track performance of manufactures in his price range.
F1 fans are out of this story because they stick to their teams no matter what but ordinary people without interest in motorsport and without much technical knowledge will see a race or hear results in news and Renault will ring in their ears especially when they consider reliability and remeber what they've seen on TV - Mercedes blows up, BMW blows up, Honda blows up, Ferrari drags around and Toyota is fast only on fumes… That is marketing and that is why it is risky for any manufacturer to enter F1 and fail under direct market opposition.
So, Ghosn is wrong because "win on Sunday sell on Monday" worked for Renault even though it was not part of his policy.
manchild wrote:I remember when Renault dominated European market in early ‘80s and so it does nowadays. Back than there was a sticker with photo of Renault F1 car at the rear window of each car that left factory. It worked than and I think it will work in 2006 and beyond.
Also it is not just starting since end of 2005 because the titles are won. It started when Alonso lapped Schuey and won in Hungary in 2003, than there was Trulli’s victory in Monaco in 2004 that also probably boosted sales. In 2005 Renault broke their sales records and that can’t be looked aside from F1 success. Millions of people are watching F1 and it must be a decision maker for at least small percentage of them to go for Clio rather than Punto or Yaris when they see track performance of manufactures in his price range.
F1 fans are out of this story because they stick to their teams no matter what but ordinary people without interest in motorsport and without much technical knowledge will see a race or hear results in news and Renault will ring in their ears especially when they consider reliability and remeber what they've seen on TV - Mercedes blows up, BMW blows up, Honda blows up, Ferrari drags around and Toyota is fast only on fumes… That is marketing and that is why it is risky for any manufacturer to enter F1 and fail under direct market opposition.
So, Ghosn is wrong because "win on Sunday sell on Monday" worked for Renault even though it was not part of his policy.
Those are reports for last couple of months of 2005. Annual report isn't available yet and 6 month report for January to June 2005 shows record sales which will mean that 2006 will be better than 2004 while 2004 was better than 2003... 3/4 report (Jan to Sep) shows rise too
KEY FIGURES
• Group worldwide sales amounted to 1.36 million vehicles, up 3.8%. Sales of passenger cars were up 3.1%, while sales of light commercial vehicles (LCVs) rose 8.4%.
• Sales performance:
- Western Europe: Renault’s sales dipped 0.7% in a virtually stable automobile market that gained just
0.4%. Renault was still the leading brand for passenger cars, with 10.2% (10.4% in first-half 2004)
and for LCVs, with 15% (15.1% in first-half 2004).
- Rest of the world: sales rose by a strong 17.5%, buoyed largely by gains at Dacia and Renault Samsung.
• Group revenues amounted to €21,324 million, up 3.8% on a consistent basis.
• Group operating margin was €943 million, or 4.4% of revenues, compared with €1,106 million and
5.4% in first-half 2004.
• The contribution from Nissan Motor was €1,361 million, including a €450 million exceptional gain,
compared with €894 million in first-half 2004.
• Net income was €2,211 million, giving earnings per share of €8.52 (versus €1,453 million and
€5.53 in first-half 2004).
• Debt was reduced by €780 million, taking the net financial indebtedness of the Automobile Division
to €787 million at June 30, 2005, compared with €1,567 million at December 31, 2004.
