Bridgestone to quit F1 after 2010

[foreversideways]

Originally Posted by neiltb

how much do kwik fit charge for F1 tyres?

Yes and you cant get quicker than a Kwikfit fitter !!

[jab]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

GP3 Series will run on Pirellis when it starts next year.

I'd like to see someone a bit different take over the supply. Or perhaps it could even be someone more obvious like Avon or Dunlop?

Avon, yes, maybe - the only F1 tyre manufacturer without a win. Dunlop are part of Goodyear, though, and they're in financial trouble

[JHamilton]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

Years ago, not F1 I know but the championship I used to run got a reasonable sponsorship deal from Falken Tyres (Japanese) and so reasonable we actualy gave guys a bit of grid money and had a prize fund then out the blue they pulled the plug on us, OK fair enough maybe they found a higher profile series but no! They turned their attentions to sponsoring ruddy golf!

Falken = Sumitomo = Dunlop = Golf... not justifying their actions, but it makes sense.

[Al Weyman]

Well I suppose if they want to push tyres for Golf Buggies it is.

[429CJ]

Maybe Continental, reviving Englebert brand...

[crmalcolm]

The thing to remember with Falken (and many other tyre manufacturers I guess) is that they are part of a rubber company that manufactures more than just tyres for cars.

My thought on the Falken situation is that at Sumitomo level they get worldwide exposure from tennis and golf balls (and associated equipment) without the outlay to design performance tyres for motorsport.

[Sodemo]

I dont remember what happened to Goodyear after 1998, would someone mind enlightening me on their plight?

[jab]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I dont remember what happened to Goodyear after 1998, would someone mind enlightening me on their plight?

They got to the same stage that Bridgestone have got to, really - they were in F1 so long, they weren't getting the publicity anymore, because everyone just assumed they were there and forgets about them. Even after Bridgestone pull out at the end of next year GY will still have double BS's number of wins It was a given that they were there. Plus they were in financial trouble (and have been ever since)

They actually announced their withdrawal like Bridgestone - a year in advance

[fredd1]

Bridgestone announced factory closures down under several weeks back, job lay-offs, etc.
Only saw comment in financial pages at the time, didn't seem to raise any interest in any other area, like, say, what about motor sport.

[kartracer41]

I really don't understand why a tire supplier should have to "pay" dearly for their involvement in a sport. Yes, their product could be offered at a discounted rate, and the company would spend money on advertisement, but all parties involved (besides "sponsors") in the sport should see some direct compensation for their efforts. I am guessing the problem here is how much of F1's revenue that is leaving the sport. Just like a team pays Brembo dearly for the best of the best in technology in braking, they should be paying for tires. On the same note, the FOM should be paying the teams so that they can sustain their spending in the sport (that FOM shouldn't really be involved in).

[Gravel Trap]

My understanding is that F1 is a single tyre supplier formula, in the interests of cost savings. Michelin declined to tender for the contract and withdrew from F1 leaving Bridgestone as sole supplier.

Tyre suppliers have a contractural obligation to give 12 months notice of withdrawal.

[bjohnsonsmith]

I put this on the "Tyres for 2010" thread, maybe the threads should merge?

Bridgestone/Firestone already supply the Indy Car series and the feeder Firestone Indy Lights series. I don't know what the Indy Car series tyre costs per team are but for the Indy Lights series it's 3 sets per race at $1,306 per set, $50,900 a year and nearly $4 million in prize money was handed out in the 2009. So somewhere along the line Bridgestone have worked out that the Indy Car and Indy Lights series are more cost affective than F1. As for marketing, the Americas must seem the better option.

[Naruto]

whoever it is, do you think that they will make tires as good as bridgestone did?

[Dead-Eye]

Never going to happen, but I'd hope they find noone willing to supply all the teams/race against themselves and are forced to drop the single supplier rule...

[fredd1]

Originally Posted by Naruto

whoever it is, do you think that they will make tires as good as bridgestone did?

Well for some reason I never felt Bridgestone had it as completely together as Goodyear did.
Maybe I'm just a Goodyear fan....

[fredd1]

Going a bit further....for some reason I never felt the playing field (read circuit) was quite level as far as horses for courses was concerned...

[neilhrd]

I really think the Koreans might be interested. Hankook have been dipping a toe in the water in the UK for a few years now. I remember all sorts of jokes when they first backed the Porsche 924 cup in the mid ninties but they have done a solid job. Kumho similarly have learned the ropes with the BMW series in Britain. It is a big step up for them but I don't think it is impossible.

From a business and marketing point of view it might make sense. Toyota have stated their intention to challenge Hyundai in their home market and what better way to retaliate that to take over from Japan's number 1 tyre manufacturer on the biggest stage of all. Furthermore F1 increasingly relies on Asian markets and sponsors so it makes more sense to develop capacity there than to return to Michelin or Goodyear.

The FIA need to try to use the years notice they have been given to broker a deal which would provide funds for a new manufacturer to develop the manufacturing and logistical capacity to service F1 and then perhaps some licensing arrangement for core technologies or secondment of key people from Bridgestone until a newcomer has learned the ropes and can do it independently.

One other issue that arises will be the testing ban in F1. A new tyre supplier invariably increases the amount of testing teams need to do especially if the supplier is new to F1. Some way to deal with this has to be thrashed out by FOTA to stop costs going stratospheric again whilst at the same time providing a level playing field and ensuring tyre safety.

Jokes aside don't discount the Chinese either. China has numerous tyre manufacturers. They are smarting from American anti dumping tarriffs and allegations in the American media about junk products. One of them might be tempted to use F1 as a way to make a nationalistic political point. The Chinese government is committed to backing auto industry acquisitions abroad e.g Hummer and a bid by Geely to buy Volvo. They are desperate to short cut the acquisition of high tech industries to move China up the value added chain and will use state control of the financial markets to facilitate this.

I doubt if the Chinese governemnt has the vision to see the opportunity of having the F1 tyre supplier by themselves. But if it was pointed out to them with the right back up package of money and technical support I think they could be tempted.

[Tim the Grey]

Hmmm. How much does one have to bung Bernie to be the "Official Tyre Supplier"?
I reckon I could rebadge some old Avons...

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

Hmmm. How much does one have to bung Bernie to be the "Official Tyre Supplier"?
I reckon I could rebadge some old Avons...

That sparks a memory...
Didn't Avon step in to supply tyres a very long time ago when Goodyear were unable to for some reason (industrial action?)?
And at that time didn't Bernie own the company who distributed them?
I'm sure that someone more knowledgeable and with a better memory than me will be along soon to put me out of my misery!

[Marbot]

I remember that 'Stoddy's' Minardi team were stuck with Avons one winter when he had neither a contract with Bridgestone nor Michelin.

[Teretonga]

Reading through Bridgestones announcement I began to woinder how much the election of Todt as FIA president might have to do with the withdrawal of various sponsors and companies from F1.

If the opportunity for a new era was with Ari, and instead more of the same from Mr Todt, does the withdrawal of Bridgestone and other companies retrenchment reflect not just the current recession, but also a lack of confidence in the present management and direction of the sport....
In the 80's and 90's Japan had a love affair with F1, Senna being notably idolised.
That seems to be no longer the case between the Japanese public and F1.
While the recession has hit the manufacturers hard is the withdrawal also a sign that the F1 star is waning.
If the election of someone who represents the 'old guard' rather than the 'new wave', how much is that reflected in the decisions of companies which would ultimately be made on the basis of economics and marketing.

[codename_47]

The fact I find most interesting is that in 2011 we'll finally get the oldschool F1 of no refuelling and no need for mandatory soft tyre/hard tyre switch, which was written into the rules to please Bridgestone so at least they'd get a bit of publicity out of the difference in compounds etc.

So maybe some drivers will risk the whole race on one set of tyres and some will dare to switch.

Also I'm worried this'll just be a marketing excercise and then we'll get an announcement that Firestone will be taking up the contract to increase awareness of that brand...

[climb]

well if nobody files for the supply contract; F1 should pay to have tires, and this could be attractive for any supplier

[foreversideways]

Toyota gone now as well.

[kartracer41]

Originally Posted by climb

well if nobody files for the supply contract; F1 should pay to have tires, and this could be attractive for any supplier

Maybe I am naive, but it should be this way regardless.