I was right about Branson...

Never write this guy off. Sure he's looking to get some PR mileage but I don't think he is going into this to be a loser either.

 

It seems with the financial troubles in the past few months, most people have jumped on board with cost cutting initiatives.
This is not what F1 is about. F1 is about applying a formula and pushing it's physical limits.
When cost is involved, it becomes a limiting factor so the outcome is, to some degree distorted.

...on another note, often times adding some sort of limit will spawn new thought processes or ideas.

And maybe it's just me, but even with all the BS over the last few months, this season looks to be one of the best in a long time. There are going to be 4 WDC, with 11 titles between them. IMHO RedBull could very well end up being the next...So from that aspect all the BS does seem to be paying off in creating a competitive atmosphere.

 

Yeah, i like the car and i like the team, and i also might appreciate the fact that they are trying to do things different.

But, that attitude it's just terrible, "we are new and we are going to show the ones in place how it's done"...please.
That can work in some businesses, but not here.

You can admire the guy for what he achieved, but right now, and talking about F1, he just sounds like an arrogant idiot.

 

Its time to get off of your soap box again SRT Mike. Sir Richard Branson is a person who does things, and not just sit and complain about others. He has been sucessful in life, business & F1. He knows how to make $$ and enrich other peoples lives. Brawn Gp was lucky to have him step in last year with his deep pockets. I'm sure that he will only bring a positive twist to the GP circus, unlike what we have seen in the past with Bernie & Company.

 

Unconfirmed reports are that the Virgin sponsorship provided to Brawn last year was anything but generous.
Sir Richard has achieved a lot but I don't think that F1 is an arena suited to his way of doing business. We shall see.

 

+1

And it's not like they needed the money at all with Honda (and maybe also MB) covering the entire season.

 

He was generous with his attention toward his drivers girlfriend after getting a wee schnockered. Classy!

 

A case of wait and see IMO Mike, Branson is one hell of a shrewd business man.

You maybe quite right, however you could argue he saying all the right things, in this present economic climate, singing the FIA tune.

 

I'm sorry Jim, but that comment did nothing other than devalue what you went on to say IMHO..... I don't agree with either of you 100%, but you both make some good points and are certainly entitled to your respective soap boxes......

You went on:

I think you're stretching his involvement in BGP's success last season, but it did seem to get him into the sport, even without spending too much $, and he has successfully started a new team - Good for him.

As I've also said somewhere before, he's nothing if not a salesman - I expect to see some other name(s) appear on the car during the season - And they won't be names from his empire either......

Cheers,
Ian

 

It seems to me NASA may have had a similar view. I'm not advocating that pushing the state of the art is cheap... but I do believe, with the right talent, more can be accomplished with less $.

I remember reading a story years ago about racing hull design for the America's Cup. One firm spent millions doing a CAD design, study and analysis on a hull form only to find that it sailed faster in reverse than forward. The winning team used much more conventional (and cheaper) methods. Perhaps that's what Branson is trying to espouse.

 

Assuming (and yes, I know what's said about doing that) that each of Ferrari and Mercedes runs two cars each and that Cosworth have three teams (Red Bull, Virgin, and pick your favorite) running their motors, where would one find other non-manufacturer teams prepared to spend the over $300mm per year to be back markers while they develop the capability to be significant enough points/podium finishers to gain enough income to make the economics work? In the "Old Days" before costs ran out of control, one could make a breakeven or better biz case from shared development, customer engines, realistic driver salaries, and sponsorship available in more robust economic ties to take a run at thie sport, but as we sit today, I think Mr. Branson is only saying what others are thinking, and I believe that he is, sadly, correct. What fun would F1 be with only 10 cars on the grid??? It cannot continue in the current operating style and survive much longer without getting even more boring than it's been in the past several years IMHO.

 

The spending curve is subject to the same law of diminishing returns as everything else but it still trends upwards.
There are exceptions to every rule but I'll still go with the university trained heart surgeon over Ned from the shed

Steve, you entrepreneurial types stick together don't you. Virgin Cane. Gotta like the sound of that

 

This struck a chord with me as I relate to it, as a musician/studio producing engineer back in the day.

I/we had written and produced some great songs back at my house that were really getting us noticed by the big guys, so on the strength of this I invested heavy in equipment state of the art samplers £1000 keyboards ect, problem was it was over kill. It actually damaged the creative side nothing was a problem creating what sound we needed.

The point is having everything spoilt it, restricted with less made me find ways of being creative, I suppose its a bit like chalk and cheese comparing this with F1, however.

Money can solve and help buy solve most of the problems in F1, but as the big guys have shown Honda and Toyota, it needs more than that, clever creative engineering talent a must.

I'am sure there are a good number of these guys looking for jobs at present.

 

Hehehe I like zat..

 

Yes I can go with that, your good you get offered top dollar and get tempted away, but Branson has a history of keeping his staff loyal, or he did back in day.

 

I don't get that from his statements but I agree with some of your analysis on money and talent. My take on his statement is simply- you have some teams that are willing to spend huge amounts for modest gains... but only one will be victirous. Did those other teams that weren't victorious not enjoy the fight? Did they enjoy it more or less if the spent more or less than the victors? Does spending the most necessarily buy you a championship?

I think he's astute enough to understand that as new player, it will take some time to get up to speed. And, simply throwing huge amounts of money at it doesn't guarantee anything. I think he wants to be competitive and he wants his staff to "believe" they can achieve that without braking the bank. Makes sense to me and it doesn't diminsh anyones capacity or intent to outspend him.

I will predict that within 3 years, he will perform better than teams that have spent more .

 

Sir Richard Branson is a person who does things, and not just sit and complain about others. He has been sucessful in life, business & F1. He knows how to make $$ and enrich other peoples lives. Brawn Gp was lucky to have him step in last year with his deep pockets. I'm sure that he will only bring a positive twist to the GP circus, unlike what we have seen in the past with Bernie & Company.

Put my money where my mouth is??? What in Gods creation are you talking about? Time to get your hate under control there buddy.

 

I believe that Mike was suggesting a small wager. No need to take offense. This is suppose to be fun.

 

Clearly HBS material. No doubt about it.