[Multi 21] Red Bull-Honda

[E.B]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I think Yamamoto's statement is following this advice:

[Oldtony]

Honda, while somewhat reticent and inward looking, have always tended to be honest about the position that they see themselves as filling in whatever sphere of motorsport they are engaged in. Yamamato's statement follows that pattern. Competing has always been at the heart of their operations.


They are now teamed with Red Bull, the world's most successful EXTREME SPORTS organisation who happen to have a (not so) soft drink sideline to help finance their operations across a whole range of activities.


That is a very interesting combiation. It could very easily be the only possible way to take on the major auto manufacturers.

[midgetman]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Interesting. Red Bull have not officially signed a contact with Honda. According to Masashi Yamamoto (General Manager, Honda Motor Sport Division), Red Bull and Honda have only verbally agreed to the supply of engines, but no contract has been signed as yet.


Could we see another Sauber/Honda type situation?

Why was this announced before the "T"s are crossed and "I"s dotted? Who on earth makes such a hullabaloo about something that could still stumble? It's not good business.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[S griffin]

Anyone see that C4 interview where Christian Horner struggled to think of a reason to miss Renault? Perhaps four consecutive driver and constructor titles?

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Anyone see that C4 interview where Christian Horner struggled to think of a reason to miss Renault? Perhaps four consecutive driver and constructor titles?

But by that logic McLaren should be missing Honda cause they won together in the past too. Under the current regs Red Bull haven't come close with Renault power so why would championships prior to the current engine specs matter any less than Honda winning with McLaren way back when?

[ASCII Man]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

But by that logic McLaren should be missing Honda cause they won together in the past too. Under the current regs Red Bull haven't come close with Renault power so why would championships prior to the current engine specs matter any less than Honda winning with McLaren way back when?

Thats like comparing apples and oranges, as the honda/mclaren connection was over 20 years inbetween stints, where the vast majority of the people involved back then were not involved in the most recent stint.

With Red Bull and Renault on the other hand, it hasn't been that long ago, and the vast majority of people working on it are the very same now.
It's like winning with a partner, then turning around immediately after and spit in their face.

Extremely unprofessional of Horner, but that simply doesn't surprise me anymore, not in the least. The faster F1 sees the back of Horner and his toxic ilk, the better.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

Thats like comparing apples and oranges, as the honda/mclaren connection was over 20 years inbetween stints, where the vast majority of the people involved back then were not involved in the most recent stint.

With Red Bull and Renault on the other hand, it hasn't been that long ago, and the vast majority of people working on it are the very same now.
It's like winning with a partner, then turning around immediately after and spit in their face.

Extremely unprofessional of Horner, but that simply doesn't surprise me anymore, not in the least. The faster F1 sees the back of Horner and his toxic ilk, the better.

It wouldn't matter if it was 5 years or 20, the entire structure of the engine program was changed both in physical architecture and most of management. Add in the change from being THE team to the guys getting engines and why should Red Bull care. They purchase a product and frankly that product has had as much time to develop as Ferrari and MB and by all reports Honda had caught Renault from behind. Why should they gush about Renault had done, they haven't done anything for years now. And did the interviewer really expect a how great things were response, it's a loaded question from someone looking to ***** about Red Bull like somehow that's a new idea.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Anyone see that C4 interview where Christian Horner struggled to think of a reason to miss Renault? Perhaps four consecutive driver and constructor titles?

But that's just history now. You're relationship with an engine supplier is only as good as the engine performs - now. This isn't a game where the old pals act counts for anything....

[ASCII Man]

It's just one more of those disgusting aspects of F1 that it can really do without.

[Casper]

I haven't seen the interview and won't unless it gets onto YT but I will say that interviewers ask a question to get the answer they want and he got an answer or lack of which was the whole point. Do you think Horner should have lied or coloured the truth so Renault would not be offended? What good would that do?

If I paid a company that much money and they did not deliver the product they promised over many years I think what Horner has said would be mild compared to my reaction after all the broken promises which are still occurring to this day. I might be wrong here and someone can correct me but has Renault ever apologised for its under achievement that they willingly took the money for?

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Casper

I haven't seen the interview and won't unless it gets onto YT but I will say that interviewers ask a question to get the answer they want and he got an answer or lack of which was the whole point. Do you think Horner should have lied or coloured the truth so Renault would not be offended? What good would that do?

If I paid a company that much money and they did not deliver the product they promised over many years I think what Horner has said would be mild compared to my reaction after all the broken promises which are still occurring to this day. I might be wrong here and someone can correct me but has Renault ever apologised for its under achievement that they willingly took the money for?

You can also add that Renault were instrumental in putting the current PU rules in place, neatly shooting RBR in the foot.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

It's just one more of those disgusting aspects of F1 that it can really do without.

I don't see that at all. F1 isn't a place for sentimentality - never has been. Nor is sport in general. Players (drivers) and teams compete to win, not to win friends. If your (engine) supplier isn't able to give you the goods to compete at the top (when you're a player/driver/team used to doing that), then the outcome is probably inevitable.

[S griffin]

But Horner could at least thank Renault for all those titles

[Aysedasi]

I'm sure he did at the time.....

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I'm sure he did at the time.....

This article suggests that Renault felt that he didn't... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/34404641

[Moneyseeker]

Interesting to see that Aston Martin have pretty much ruled out entering F1 as an engine manufacturer under the proposed 2021 regs, so you would imagine it will be Honda for the long term or maybe a VAG brand bearing in mind Red Bulls longstanding relationship with them as a sponsor of VAG motorsport ?

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Moneyseeker

Interesting to see that Aston Martin have pretty much ruled out entering F1 as an engine manufacturer under the proposed 2021 regs, so you would imagine it will be Honda for the long term or maybe a VAG brand bearing in mind Red Bulls longstanding relationship with them as a sponsor of VAG motorsport ?

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

VAG in F1?

[GT6]

Still unsure why AM will sponsor a car with a Honda engine when there actual cars race in completely different types of racing, they are not exactly making huge sums and surely that money would be better spent trying to get there own cars perform better in the series they actually race in.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by GT6

Still unsure why AM will sponsor a car with a Honda engine when there actual cars race in completely different types of racing, they are not exactly making huge sums and surely that money would be better spent trying to get there own cars perform better in the series they actually race in.

What mystifies me even more is why Aston Martin are involved at all, bearing in mind, or so I believe, that their engines have been produced by Mercedes AMG since about 2012.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

What mystifies me even more is why Aston Martin are involved at all, bearing in mind, or so I believe, that their engines have been produced by Mercedes AMG since about 2012.

Daimler AG owns 5% of Aston Martin. Maybe they think their association with RBR is good marketing, after all RBR won Monaco this year.

[M91]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

What mystifies me even more is why Aston Martin are involved at all, bearing in mind, or so I believe, that their engines have been produced by Mercedes AMG since about 2012.

Main reason is the partnership with Red Bull Advanced Technologies for their high performance road cars(the Valkyrie and planned mid engine supercar).

Also, AMG only supply the TTV8. The V12 is still a bespoke unit manufactured at the Aston Martin Engine Plant, located at the Ford facility in Cologne.

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by M91

Main reason is the partnership with Red Bull Advanced Technologies for their high performance road cars(the Valkyrie and planned mid engine supercar).

Agreed, it is much more a partnership deal than sponsorship. Probably almost no money changing hands.
The Aston name was also a means for Red Bull to get some automotive street cred among those who like to call them a fizzy drink company.
As I said in an earlier post, Red Bull is, at heart, an extreme sports company with a very profitable drinks operation in it's financial structure.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

Agreed, it is much more a partnership deal than sponsorship. Probably almost no money changing hands.
The Aston name was also a means for Red Bull to get some automotive street cred among those who like to call them a fizzy drink company.
As I said in an earlier post, Red Bull is, at heart, an extreme sports company with a very profitable drinks operation in it's financial structure.

Would it not be more accurate to say Red Bull is a very profitable drinks company, that has diversified into sport, of which some are extreme sports?

[crmalcolm]

Looking at the company history, the drink came first (1 Apr 87), followed by marketing (late Apr 87).
The first connection to sport was made in 88.

So it would be wrong to consider it an extreme sports company first, drinks as a component. They are a company who's main product is an energy drink, that uses extreme sport connections in its branding.

[peebee2]

The drink existed in Thailand long before Didi found out about it. The Red Bull we know is purely a marketing company that happens to sell an energy drink.