Andretti F1 - 2025

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

to be fair though, the construction of any large facility will always be prone to delays, the whims of planning authorities, tax authorities, utility boards, the local nimby faction, bird watching societies (just a joke birds are amazing!), and then of course issues dealing with contractors.

none of which is hardly unique to the realities of building in America. i suspect anywhere one would see as an ideal place to set up an F1 facility would also happen to be in a place equally if not more mired by a similar level of bureaucracy, incompetence, or lawsuits right?

not sure i see this as a knock against them...certainly not a knock against the place tbh.

I'm thinking this too.
If I picked any construction job of a similar scale, I'd probably find just as much court work to go alongside.

There's nothing in this to suggest any issues for Andretti having a US-based F1 construction facility for use.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

to be fair though, the construction of any large facility will always be prone to delays, the whims of planning authorities, tax authorities, utility boards, the local nimby faction, bird watching societies (just a joke birds are amazing!), and then of course issues dealing with contractors.

none of which is hardly unique to the realities of building in America. i suspect anywhere one would see as an ideal place to set up an F1 facility would also happen to be in a place equally if not more mired by a similar level of bureaucracy, incompetence, or lawsuits right?

not sure i see this as a knock against them...certainly not a knock against the place tbh.

I agree that any large construction project will have various drama as you mention. I do think this is probably larger drama than normal. The prior article talks about how the management team hired by Andretti effectively said they were cancelling the contract with Dillon who is a design-build firm. And claimed they had unpaid bills related to the work they have performed.

When looking at the posts from today/yesterday I was curious if there were any updates and if construction was stopped or not. The original article had a quote about the project will move forward (or something similar). But I found this article which is interesting...

https://www.iniplaw.org/dillon-const...truction-team/

So as I mention above, Dillion is a design-build firm (my wife used to work for one like them). They combine the architecture (design) and construction (build) all in one package. So as Dillion says they have not received payment for prior work, they have sent cease and desist on construction (which has not stopped apparently), but the problem is that whoever is running the show now is apparently building a building designed by Dillion, but has not paid for the design. They are using the Dillion blueprints. So the additional lawsuit is around inappropriate use of Dillion IP (building/site design that Andretti doesn't yet own).

So in short, sounds like construction is still ongoing, but this is a decently sized mess and could delay occupancy by Andretti if it hasn't already. As this drama has been ongoing for months, I wonder if Andretti has any backup plans for the short term. But I do agree that Peebee2 has a fair point as all is not well on the Andretti infrastructure side. I do think if this became an FIA/FOM roadblock, it would be resolved quickly by Andretti (its a money dispute).

Richard

[chillibowl]

fair fair but hard to take a position on this based on a brief article just commenting on the nature of what the plaintiff alleges to have happened.

cant resist adding this

as F1 fans, if we were just to accept claims made by those doing the suing then surely Massa deserves more of our support!

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

to be fair though, the construction of any large facility will always be prone to delays, the whims of planning authorities, tax authorities, utility boards, the local nimby faction, bird watching societies (just a joke birds are amazing!), and then of course issues dealing with contractors.

none of which is hardly unique to the realities of building in America. i suspect anywhere one would see as an ideal place to set up an F1 facility would also happen to be in a place equally if not more mired by a similar level of bureaucracy, incompetence, or lawsuits right?

not sure i see this as a knock against them...certainly not a knock against the place tbh.

Very fair comment, it was just that it was claimed they’d already moved in which clearly they haven’t.

[Tourer]

To be expected that we'd get some team reactions this weekend from Qatar:

Horner raises a few points, in particular whether buying an existing team is preferable to starting up from scratch, that GM should build its own engines - teams waiting on proposal from FOM re Andretti.

Vowles makes it clear that Williams is strongly opposed to Andretti coming in but welcomes GM and would be happy to partner up with GM - the Piranha Club still in play!

Drivers generally like the idea of another couple of driver positions but aware that team owners have a different view by & large.

Wonder if we'll know by the end of this year or if it'll drag on into next year?

[Richard C]

The knives are very much out!

The irony from Horner is thick because you can make a strong argument that the Ford is probably mostly a badging effort for the RBPT effort. However I am sure both Ford and RBR will talk up Ford's contributions as it is a marketing exercise like everything in F1. Also, lets just ignore all of the teams like Williams, etc. that are using customer engines. That coming into F1 as a team should not require you to bring a new power unit manufacture!

I think that to have GM coming in particular into F1 is a massively positive thing. We're seeing Ford coming back in '26, Ford versus GM would be fantastic.

I think they need to do their own engine, and I think that when you look at how Audi has come into the sport, they've acquired an existing team and an existing franchise, should it be different for the others?

Vowles is just going for it. Basically, we don't want you as a team, but we would love to steal your sponsorship!

I welcome GM open armed… and I hope to forge a relationship with them should things not work out. They are an incredible entity that I think will make the sport better.

Originally Posted by Tourer

Wonder if we'll know by the end of this year or if it'll drag on into next year?

I tend to think they (FOM and teams) will drag this out as long as they can. It basically makes it hard for Andretti to make it in for 2025 and strengthens their position if they force Andretti to negotiate a 2026 entry.

Richard

[chavez]

Did Vowles or Horner mention the race fans?

No, course they didn't.

Unlike the teams, the race fan is guaranteed to make a financial loss, but would benefit from an additional team in terms of interest and entertainment.

Sometimes the likes of Horner forgets why the sport exists and which group guarantees that existence by their often unwelcome presence.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by chavez

Did Vowles or Horner mention the race fans?

No, course they didn't.

Unlike the teams, the race fan is guaranteed to make a financial loss, but would benefit from an additional team in terms of interest and entertainment.

Sometimes the likes of Horner forgets why the sport exists and which group guarantees that existence by their often unwelcome presence.

Don't overlook the fact that as far as most, if not all, teams' principles believe that F1 is a business; they are not in the least concerned about "fans" because fans do not contribute financially in any significant measure. The teams rely on commercial sponsors and FOM for their income, although I do appreciate that firms such as Red Bull do, in theory, contribute to many "sports" to boost the sales of their products.

However, I do believe that most sponsorship money comes from businesses that are corporate in that it is aimed at other corporate entities. That is why so many F1 race meetings take place in countries that, in reality, have very little "fan" interest; it's all aimed at the money people in those countries.

And fans and/or spectators have been the losers for a long time with FOM, whether under Mr E or Liberty, have been constantly ramping up the race licence fees which, in turn, forces the local promoters to vastly increase admission prices!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Don't overlook the fact that as far as most, if not all, teams' principles believe that F1 is a business; they are not in the least concerned about "fans" because fans do not contribute financially in any significant measure. The teams rely on commercial sponsors and FOM for their income, although I do appreciate that firms such as Red Bull do, in theory, contribute to many "sports" to boost the sales of their products.

However, I do believe that most sponsorship money comes from businesses that are corporate in that it is aimed at other corporate entities. That is why so many F1 race meetings take place in countries that, in reality, have very little "fan" interest; it's all aimed at the money people in those countries.

And fans and/or spectators have been the losers for a long time with FOM, whether under Mr E or Liberty, have been constantly ramping up the race licence fees which, in turn, forces the local promoters to vastly increase admission prices!

I think the fans do contribute financially, though indirectly. One of the big issues IndyCar faced after series reunification in 2008, was dwindling track attendance and poor TV audiences. The latter was partly due to races being broadcast behind a pay wall. The overall result was a lack of sponsors and reduced TV advertising revenue. Advertisers/sponsors need a viewing audience and they don't want to see lots of empty seats on TV screens.

Things have vastly improved since 2008. Most races are now FTA and NBC, who have the broadcasting contract, have reported increased viewing figures for 2023, up on the previous year.

For the sake of argument what would happen F1 if there was a serious decline in track attendance and TV viewers?

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I think the fans do contribute financially, though indirectly. One of the big issues IndyCar faced after series reunification in 2008, was dwindling track attendance and poor TV audiences. The latter was partly due to races being broadcast behind a pay wall. The overall result was a lack of sponsors and reduced TV advertising revenue. Advertisers/sponsors need a viewing audience and they don't want to see lots of empty seats on TV screens.

Things have vastly improved since 2008. Most races are now FTA and NBC, who have the broadcasting contract, have reported increased viewing figures for 2023, up on the previous year.

For the sake of argument what would happen F1 if there was a serious decline in track attendance and TV viewers?

I don't know about current TV audiences, however once TV went behind a paywall, both here in the UK and a number of European countries, the viewing figures dropped dramatically. Whether they have picked up, I know not.

And yes indirectly, the the public do contribute when it comes to companies like Red Bull. But how many sponsors in F1 are actively involved in supplying their products to the general public? I would hazard a guess that it's not that many.

And as for spectators numbers, I would imagine that they are still high in most if not all the European races, Australia and Japan. I wonder whether the numbers will be diluted in the USA, it having 3 races now; that's not a comment on whether they should have them, it's merely a thought that has crossed my mind. As for other races, a lot of them happen in countries that have no great racing pedigree and the Baku race has a huge lack of accommodation which restricts foreign spectators.

[Adam43]

The sport doesn’t exist because of the fans. It exists because of the competitors wanting to do it. Two people with a car, let’s race. That is the desire the reason. The doing it in front of others is then the bit that puts these people in the position they are.

Lots of people watch it, there are fans, that is why directly, or indirectly, it is big and employees lots of people and some of these people have made a lot of money. Although some, of course, do lose a lot - “how to make millions in Motorsport…”. Those that lose are coming from the stock that made the sport exist.

Being extremely popular does make it big bucks. Whether that is because people want to be involved to get eyes on their product, or just to be associated with it. Even the companies that are there just to be associated and aren’t selling directly to the great unwashed are there because it is big. That is opportunity, profile and the reason.

[S griffin]

Very true. You shouldn’t try and cater for everyone. Nothing is going to remain popular forever. We’ve enjoyed quite a few popularity booms in F1, but too often we’ve lost sight of what F1 is supposed to be about. It’s a sport, not show business, but unfortunately that was forgotten and we’ve ended up with gimmicks like DRS

Anyway I digress

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Very true. You shouldn’t try and cater for everyone. Nothing is going to remain popular forever. We’ve enjoyed quite a few popularity booms in F1, but too often we’ve lost sight of what F1 is supposed to be about. It’s a sport, not show business, but unfortunately that was forgotten and we’ve ended up with gimmicks like DRS

Anyway I digress

DRS was initially a means to solve a problem, drivers not be able to overtake, not a gimmick but it has become one. However, what has been a gimmick from the outset are the sprint races. Today's sprint shoot out is a good example of what you are talking about regarding show business.


That's enough digression.

[bathurst77]

I also get annoyed when they say "but only if its a good team, we dont want another team running off the pace". That means nothing. Look at Williams, Hass Aston etc.... some years they run mid field (and how many WDC WCC have williams won) then they either find or lose their mojo a while and the order changes.

Very few teams start out near the front (Braun were an established team renamed) It might take 3 years or so to find their way.. a few years of embarrassment then suddenly winning everything

Look at 888 history in Australian Supercars. They were the butt of jokes for years.
So yeh a new team thats well off the pace is a possibility.... or one of the current teams could make a howling dog car one year and be way off the pace.
Thats motorsport

[bjohnsonsmith]

FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem wants more teams, citing F1's rules which allow for up to 12 teams.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/67051341

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem wants more teams, citing F1's rules which allow for up to 12 teams.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/67051341

If I had to choose between MBS and F1, I would be standing with MBS.

[Tourer]

FIA Pres has had more to say - not much new in it although the suggestion in the article is that we are unlikely to know where FOM sits on this until next year some time.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Tourer

FIA Pres has had more to say - not much new in it although the suggestion in the article is that we are unlikely to know where FOM sits on this until next year some time.

My other perspective on what is said in that article is that MBS is going the path that I was suggesting Andretti go. Last month in the "Prospective new teams.." thread I mentioned that Andretti should act like it's a done deal and then react with outrage if/when it goes south. But Mike Harte correctly pointed out that given Andretti tried a similar tactic early on and it rubbed people the wrong way, it would be the wrong move for them (and I can agree with that point).

But now it seems MBS is doing this for Andretti. He is publicly saying he thinks it will go through and that negotiations with FOM will be successful. That there is no need for legal challenges because it will be worked out. This sets the ground to lay any failure directly at FOM's (and maybe the other team's) feet. This also helps build foundation for any type of anti-trust legal attacks.

Richard

[Tourer]

Andretti does not have a current engine deal according to Alpine.

If it gets an entry, no doubt that could be sorted out but it may impact on when the team joins, allowing for production of the power units and all that. Wonder if Andretti would stick with Alpine or go somewhere else?

Also wonder about Andretti being approved by the FIA but not having an engine contract - is that slackness by the FIA or did it take a practical approach?

[veeten]

And whom does Andretti have a long standing relationship with?
The motor company in Japan is a major hint, and it begins with the letter H.

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by veeten

And whom does Andretti have a long standing relationship with?
The motor company in Japan is a major hint, and it begins with the letter H.

Japanese Truck maker Hino to F1 bombshell. You heard it here on 10/10ths first!

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Andretti does not have a current engine deal according to Alpine.

If it gets an entry, no doubt that could be sorted out but it may impact on when the team joins, allowing for production of the power units and all that. Wonder if Andretti would stick with Alpine or go somewhere else?

Also wonder about Andretti being approved by the FIA but not having an engine contract - is that slackness by the FIA or did it take a practical approach?

I'm not sure Alpine is allowed to refuse a deal. They currently do not supply customer engines to anyone, whilst Mercedes supplies 3 customers, Ferrari supplies 2 customers, and Honda supplies 1 customer (technically, with the RBPT stuff). Alpine would be forced to supply engines if the entry was approved, so their opinion on what constituetes a deal doesn't mean anything. We should ask Piastri about Alpine contracts lol

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by veeten

And whom does Andretti have a long standing relationship with?
The motor company in Japan is a major hint, and it begins with the letter H.

There could be something in that. Honda Performance Development, HPD, who have been behind engine design and production for IndyCar whose engines Andretti uses, have merged with Honda Racing Corporation, to form Honda Racing Corporation USA, who will collaborate with Honda Racing Corporation Japan. Andretti could be the perfect vehicle, no pun intended, to contribute to Honda's F1 program, as mentioned in this announcement from Honda.


https://honda.racing/post/honda-perf...s-organization

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Also wonder about Andretti being approved by the FIA but not having an engine contract - is that slackness by the FIA or did it take a practical approach?

I think there are two perspectives on this...

1. Teams are not required to solve the problem of having a power unit or not. The regulations say that if you are a F1 power unit manufacture, in specific situation you may have to provide a power unit to a team that doesn't have one. I don't think this has actually happened yet, but this is not a new rule.

So based upon how the rules are structure this would be Honda or Renault/Alpine.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/a...-fia/10533383/

2. Part of the argument for Andretti is that they are bringing GM with them. But it was understood that given the timeframe this was likely to be a badging effort in the short term. So for example, what if Andretti gets an entry and then GM backs out after Andretti is in? What if GM backs out before Andretti gets in? Should either situation impact Andretti's chances?

Richard

[Tourer]

More from the FIA re engines for Andretti. Interesting that Alpine believes that it's not so simple due to Concorde Agreement.

Originally Posted by veeten

And whom does Andretti have a long standing relationship with?
The motor company in Japan is a major hint, and it begins with the letter H.

Had the same thought the moment that I saw the original Alpine story - no question that Honda has a better engine & a more likely supplier for Andretti, might even have a deal done that Alpine doesn't know about?

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I'm not sure Alpine is allowed to refuse a deal. They currently do not supply customer engines to anyone, whilst Mercedes supplies 3 customers, Ferrari supplies 2 customers, and Honda supplies 1 customer (technically, with the RBPT stuff). Alpine would be forced to supply engines if the entry was approved, so their opinion on what constituetes a deal doesn't mean anything. We should ask Piastri about Alpine contracts lol

On the face of it, you're right, although the question of how much time Alpine or anyone else needs for production of engines for a new customer could be critical for when a new entry actually starts competing. In the article I've linked above, Bruno Famin from Alpine is suggesting not so simple due to the Concorde Agreement - so maybe the FIA regs and Concorde Agreement don't talk to each other so well on this subject?

Originally Posted by Richard C

I think there are two perspectives on this...

2. Part of the argument for Andretti is that they are bringing GM with them. But it was understood that given the timeframe this was likely to be a badging effort in the short term. So for example, what if Andretti gets an entry and then GM backs out after Andretti is in? What if GM backs out before Andretti gets in? Should either situation impact Andretti's chances?

Richard

Covered your first point above Richard but the 2nd one is kinda where I was heading with my first post on the engine question. My understanding is that applicant teams wanting to enter the series had to jump though a series of hoops to prove that they were capable etc etc and one of those hoops was having an engine. Seems moot given the FIA regs on engine supply though. The GM branding / possible engine is one of the key selling points that Andretti has put on the table for entry and for "adding value to F1" so I'd suggest that is likely to be one of the areas that FOM is looking at most closely, to confirm details and commitment.