Williams in the dog house - again

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by AC » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:29:41



Quote:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2009/08/costs_and_politics_to_de
> cide_t.html

> FOTA had a vote on dumping KERS.  Williams - alone - want it retained
> for next season.  Why?  Because their sponsors like it.

> I reckon FW is losing it.

How is SFW losing it by wanting to please his sponsors and protect income?

Does it not occur to you that this is a bargaining chip?

AC

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by emuLOA » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:00:34


Quote:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2009/08/costs_and_politics_to_de
> cide_t.html

> FOTA had a vote on dumping KERS. ?Williams - alone - want it retained
> for next season. ?Why? ?Because their sponsors like it.

> I reckon FW is losing it.

not really... this is a good threat to pull on the FOTA group... on
top of that, it is a smart move in some ways... its allowed by the
rules, and it would seem that no one else is going to use it... it has
proven it can be advantagious... seems like a sound choice to me.

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by CatharticF » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:28:22



Quote:

>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2009/08/costs_and_politics_to_de
>> cide_t.html

>> FOTA had a vote on dumping KERS. Williams - alone - want it retained
>> for next season. Why? Because their sponsors like it.

>> I reckon FW is losing it.

> not really... this is a good threat to pull on the FOTA group... on
> top of that, it is a smart move in some ways... its allowed by the
> rules, and it would seem that no one else is going to use it... it has
> proven it can be advantagious... seems like a sound choice to me.

Yes but you're playing the Williams song, you could just as easily view it
as disreputable. McLaren and Ferrari have the most to lose on this one and
agreed to bin it, so we have two very clear examples of teams losing their
advantage while one looks to take advantage of simply not being party to
the agreement.

"Oh - you've all agreed not to use a turbo? Well we just might then.."

As I've said already - were Ferrari or McLaren the ones doing this their
opponents would be slinging the mud. I think on balance I believe Williams
would be advised that it's in their best interests financially and
politically to not spend any more dollars and rock the boat.

But go ahead. Pull the trigger Frank - Ferrari and McLaren are too quick on
the draw and you're going to look foolish.

--
CatharticF1

"What you thought was freedom is just greed."

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by Bigbir » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:34:52

Quote:





> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2009/08/costs_and_politics_to_
> de >> cide_t.html

> >> FOTA had a vote on dumping KERS.  Williams - alone - want it
> retained >> for next season.  Why?  Because their sponsors like it.

> >> I reckon FW is losing it.

> > not really... this is a good threat to pull on the FOTA group... on
> > top of that, it is a smart move in some ways... its allowed by the
> > rules, and it would seem that no one else is going to use it... it
> > has proven it can be advantagious... seems like a sound choice to
> > me.

> Yes but you're playing the Williams song, you could just as easily
> view it as disreputable. McLaren and Ferrari have the most to lose on
> this one and agreed to bin it, so we have two very clear examples of
> teams losing their advantage while one looks to take advantage of
> simply not being party to the agreement.

> "Oh - you've all agreed not to use a turbo? Well we just might then.."

> As I've said already - were Ferrari or McLaren the ones doing this
> their opponents would be slinging the mud. I think on balance I
> believe Williams would be advised that it's in their best interests
> financially and politically to not spend any more dollars and rock
> the boat.

> But go ahead. Pull the trigger Frank - Ferrari and McLaren are too
> quick on the draw and you're going to look foolish.

There is an important principal here. FOTA are not the F1 commission.
It is not their place to decide the rules for the whole grid. How many
teams does it take to get an agreement like this in FOTA?; how many
teams on the grid next year?

I also think it highlights a flaw in the FOTA procedures. It is one
thing to go by majority decisions when every team is a member but
McLaren and whoever else it was that wanted to keep KERS have shot
themselves in the foot by making an agreement to which it appears 5 or
more teams that could be on the grid next season are not a party.

Simply blaming Williams is naive.

Let's see what the commission have to say.

--

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by AC » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 18:30:26


Quote:
> AC wrote...



>> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2009/08/costs_and_politics_to_de
>> > cide_t.html

>> > FOTA had a vote on dumping KERS.  Williams - alone - want it retained
>> > for next season.  Why?  Because their sponsors like it.

>> > I reckon FW is losing it.

>> How is SFW losing it by wanting to please his sponsors and protect
>> income?

> Remember the cigarette sponsors?  It was going to be the end of F1
> without them.

Remember the credit crunch?

Quote:

>> Does it not occur to you that this is a bargaining chip?

> With only 10 teams running, he had some power.  Now there are more
> private teams and he needs a new engine - he's become a neusance.

LOL, I wonder what that makes Ferrari? I assume all those names used to
describe the new teams when the Max row was going on have suddenly
disappeared. Oh dear........

AC

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by pete » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:07:04


Quote:
>Ferrari invested in KERS and is still using it.  If they're happy to
>dump it, FW should shut the *** up.

Ferrari are happy to dump KERS because they believe that McLarens system
is way better...same applies to all the other Non-Mac FOTA teams.
The question is why are McLaren prepared to give up their big dollar
spent advantage?  Its not like they can get their money back.
If Williams want to keep it then good for them, its their
prerogative...all the FOTA teams (except McLaren) want to dump KERS for
their own benefit, why should Williams be expected to act in any other
fashion?
--
"This is slave 'Max' a dirty *** slut!"
 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by AC » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:37:01


Quote:
AC wrote...



> > AC wrote...



> >> > http://SportToday.org/
> >> > cide_t.html

> >> > FOTA had a vote on dumping KERS.  Williams - alone - want it retained
> >> > for next season.  Why?  Because their sponsors like it.

> >> > I reckon FW is losing it.

> >> How is SFW losing it by wanting to please his sponsors and protect
> >> income?

> > Remember the cigarette sponsors?  It was going to be the end of F1
> > without them.

> Remember the credit crunch?
>The crunch that led to a spending limit on teams?  An attempt to put a
>stop to wasting huge amounts of money on tiny gains.  McLaren have spent
> 45m pissing around with KERS - that's more than FW total budget and
>Williams have yet to run their version of KERS.

Which has nothing to do with sponsorship being harder to find now than when
the bacci cash was banned.

But you know that.

Quote:
> >> Does it not occur to you that this is a bargaining chip?

> > With only 10 teams running, he had some power.  Now there are more
> > private teams and he needs a new engine - he's become a neusance.

> LOL, I wonder what that makes Ferrari? I assume all those names used to
> describe the new teams when the Max row was going on have suddenly
> disappeared. Oh dear........

>Ferrari invested in KERS and is still using it.  If they're happy to
>dump it, FW should shut the *** up.

Why, because Ferrari say so? Nah, I dont think so.

BTW, did you actually read the article you posted? You seem to be forgetting
most of it, particularly McLarens comments. Even more amusing is you
ignoring a very important problem for Williams noted in the article.

Lay in to Williams with your abusive language all you like, its just making
you look more an more stupid.

But I knew that.

Interesting that you are ignoring the other replies to you. I wonder why you
feel you cant deal with those?

AC

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by mower ma » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:03:57

Quote:


>> Ferrari invested in KERS and is still using it.  If they're happy to
>> dump it, FW should shut the *** up.

> Ferrari are happy to dump KERS because they believe that McLarens system
> is way better...same applies to all the other Non-Mac FOTA teams.
> The question is why are McLaren prepared to give up their big dollar
> spent advantage?  Its not like they can get their money back.
> If Williams want to keep it then good for them, its their
> prerogative...all the FOTA teams (except McLaren) want to dump KERS for
> their own benefit, why should Williams be expected to act in any other
> fashion?

I reckon Williams flywheel KERS might be way better than McLaren's or
Ferrari's battery system -  should it ever hit the track. Naturally
Frank would want to keep it for 2010.

--

Chris

I am not young enough to know everything.
Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900)

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by Paul Harma » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:27:42

Quote:

> There is an important principal here. FOTA are not the F1 commission.
> It is not their place to decide the rules for the whole grid. How many
> teams does it take to get an agreement like this in FOTA?; how many
> teams on the grid next year?

> I also think it highlights a flaw in the FOTA procedures. It is one
> thing to go by majority decisions when every team is a member but
> McLaren and whoever else it was that wanted to keep KERS have shot
> themselves in the foot by making an agreement to which it appears 5 or
> more teams that could be on the grid next season are not a party.

Did Williams leave FOTA or were they kicked out - wasn't it over
re-signing with the FIA when Williams felt they had no choise, commercially?

If FOTA kicked them out over something so silly, I wouldn't blame
Williams in the slightest for not having any loyalty to a Gentlemen's
Agreement they were never part of.

McLaren and Ferrari are showing what an advantage KERS is, if you have a
car near the sharp end. I wouldn't get rid of mine, either.

        Paul

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by AC » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:45:54


Quote:
> mower man wrote...



>> >> Ferrari invested in KERS and is still using it.  If they're happy to
>> >> dump it, FW should shut the *** up.

>> > Ferrari are happy to dump KERS because they believe that McLarens
>> > system
>> > is way better...same applies to all the other Non-Mac FOTA teams.
>> > The question is why are McLaren prepared to give up their big dollar
>> > spent advantage?  Its not like they can get their money back.
>> > If Williams want to keep it then good for them, its their
>> > prerogative...all the FOTA teams (except McLaren) want to dump KERS for
>> > their own benefit, why should Williams be expected to act in any other
>> > fashion?

>> I reckon Williams flywheel KERS might be way better than McLaren's or
>> Ferrari's battery system -  should it ever hit the track. Naturally
>> Frank would want to keep it for 2010.

> They've been ***ing around with it for well over a year now.  Time to
> put or shut up.

Yes, put up in 2010.

AC

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by David Melvill » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:28:17

Quote:

> Simply blaming Williams is naive.

naive is easy though, no?

--
Cheers,
        Dave

If you want to email me, you must
take out John Howard first.

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by David Melvill » Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:30:14

Quote:

> Bigbird wrote...






>> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2009/08/

costs_and_politics_to_

Quote:
>> > de >> cide_t.html

>> > >> FOTA had a vote on dumping KERS.  Williams - alone - want it
>> > retained >> for next season.  Why?  Because their sponsors like it.

>> > >> I reckon FW is losing it.

>> > > not really... this is a good threat to pull on the FOTA group... on
>> > > top of that, it is a smart move in some ways... its allowed by the
>> > > rules, and it would seem that no one else is going to use it... it
>> > > has proven it can be advantagious... seems like a sound choice to
>> > > me.

>> > Yes but you're playing the Williams song, you could just as easily
>> > view it as disreputable. McLaren and Ferrari have the most to lose on
>> > this one and agreed to bin it, so we have two very clear examples of
>> > teams losing their advantage while one looks to take advantage of
>> > simply not being party to the agreement.

>> > "Oh - you've all agreed not to use a turbo? Well we just might
>> > then.."

>> > As I've said already - were Ferrari or McLaren the ones doing this
>> > their opponents would be slinging the mud. I think on balance I
>> > believe Williams would be advised that it's in their best interests
>> > financially and politically to not spend any more dollars and rock
>> > the boat.

>> > But go ahead. Pull the trigger Frank - Ferrari and McLaren are too
>> > quick on the draw and you're going to look foolish.

>> There is an important principal here. FOTA are not the F1 commission.
>> It is not their place to decide the rules for the whole grid. How many
>> teams does it take to get an agreement like this in FOTA?; how many
>> teams on the grid next year?

>> I also think it highlights a flaw in the FOTA procedures. It is one
>> thing to go by majority decisions when every team is a member but
>> McLaren and whoever else it was that wanted to keep KERS have shot
>> themselves in the foot by making an agreement to which it appears 5 or
>> more teams that could be on the grid next season are not a party.

>> Simply blaming Williams is naive.

>> Let's see what the commission have to say.

> All next years teams attended a meeting at Valencia.  Who knows what was
> discussed.

Mr. or Dr.?

--
Cheers,
        Dave

If you want to email me, you must
take out John Howard first.

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by Chad » Wed, 26 Aug 2009 02:25:06

Quote:



>>> Ferrari invested in KERS and is still using it.  If they're happy to
>>> dump it, FW should shut the *** up.

>> Ferrari are happy to dump KERS because they believe that McLarens
>> system is way better...same applies to all the other Non-Mac FOTA
>> teams. The question is why are McLaren prepared to give up their big
>> dollar
>> spent advantage?  Its not like they can get their money back.
>> If Williams want to keep it then good for them, its their
>> prerogative...all the FOTA teams (except McLaren) want to dump KERS
>> for their own benefit, why should Williams be expected to act in any
>> other fashion?

> I reckon Williams flywheel KERS might be way better than McLaren's or
> Ferrari's battery system -  should it ever hit the track. Naturally
> Frank would want to keep it for 2010.

There is a very interesting follow up post by the author of that article.

Check out the line that says Williams will _not_ be using the flywheel
system in their F1 car!!


After I wrote this article, Williams chief executive Adam Parr was keen to
expand on the team's stance on Kers. His points make interesting reading.

"We have always been behind Kers and our view is it would be quite wrong for
F1 to ban it.
"There are three different broader issues, in no particular order.
"The first is the environment. F1 is a fantastic sport but there is always
the criticism that we are burning fossil fuels for fun. That issue is not
going away. The concept behind Kers was to unleash F1 thinking on energy
efficiency and power trains. It was a very smart move because F1 is a
fantastic place to develop new technology fast. Now, the whole world is
taking the motor car in that direction, and we are going to say, well, it
didn't really work and that has implications for our partners, the
attractiveness of our sport, etc.
"The second is that F1 is about technology. One of the arguments I've heard,
which I find ridiculous, is the fans don't understand it, or can't
understand why some people have it and some haven't. Well, some people have
been clever in developing a system and putting it into a car and good for
them. It's not us. I'm jealous. If we ban it, it sends a message of
Ludditism that is completely inconsistent with everything we stand for.
"The third thing is I think the more Kers impacts on the race itself, the
more it will add and I think it will add more next year because it will make
a bigger impact.
"Everyone has spent their money on Kers. The sport has spent getting on for
150m on it. We've got systems that work. Williams could fit Kers next year
for probably 1.5m. That's not even the cost of a gearbox programme. I just
can't see any reason to go back on something we have put so much into."

Parr says Williams would not be using their flywheel system if Kers was
allowed in F1 next year, so would not benefit commercially from such a
decision, even if they are selling the flywheel technology for application
outside F1.

He believes there are a number of systems in existence in F1 that various
teams could buy - such as McLaren's or BMW's. And although he admits that
would mean expense, his belief is that F1 teams have to spent their budget
on something, and that Kers is a better way to spend it then some of the
other areas teams would invest in if it was banned.

"The improvements to an existing system would be relatively modest compared
to what we spend on aero, for example, and I feel this is an area that
matters."

--
Chad

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by mower ma » Wed, 26 Aug 2009 03:05:31

Quote:




>>>> Ferrari invested in KERS and is still using it.  If they're happy to
>>>> dump it, FW should shut the *** up.

>>> Ferrari are happy to dump KERS because they believe that McLarens
>>> system is way better...same applies to all the other Non-Mac FOTA
>>> teams. The question is why are McLaren prepared to give up their big
>>> dollar
>>> spent advantage?  Its not like they can get their money back.
>>> If Williams want to keep it then good for them, its their
>>> prerogative...all the FOTA teams (except McLaren) want to dump KERS
>>> for their own benefit, why should Williams be expected to act in any
>>> other fashion?
>> I reckon Williams flywheel KERS might be way better than McLaren's or
>> Ferrari's battery system -  should it ever hit the track. Naturally
>> Frank would want to keep it for 2010.

> There is a very interesting follow up post by the author of that article.

> Check out the line that says Williams will _not_ be using the flywheel
> system in their F1 car!!


> After I wrote this article, Williams chief executive Adam Parr was keen to
> expand on the team's stance on Kers. His points make interesting reading.

> "We have always been behind Kers and our view is it would be quite wrong for
> F1 to ban it.
> "There are three different broader issues, in no particular order.
> "The first is the environment. F1 is a fantastic sport but there is always
> the criticism that we are burning fossil fuels for fun. That issue is not
> going away. The concept behind Kers was to unleash F1 thinking on energy
> efficiency and power trains. It was a very smart move because F1 is a
> fantastic place to develop new technology fast. Now, the whole world is
> taking the motor car in that direction, and we are going to say, well, it
> didn't really work and that has implications for our partners, the
> attractiveness of our sport, etc.
> "The second is that F1 is about technology. One of the arguments I've heard,
> which I find ridiculous, is the fans don't understand it, or can't
> understand why some people have it and some haven't. Well, some people have
> been clever in developing a system and putting it into a car and good for
> them. It's not us. I'm jealous. If we ban it, it sends a message of
> Ludditism that is completely inconsistent with everything we stand for.
> "The third thing is I think the more Kers impacts on the race itself, the
> more it will add and I think it will add more next year because it will make
> a bigger impact.
> "Everyone has spent their money on Kers. The sport has spent getting on for
> ???150m on it. We've got systems that work. Williams could fit Kers next year
> for probably ???1.5m. That's not even the cost of a gearbox programme. I just
> can't see any reason to go back on something we have put so much into."

> Parr says Williams would not be using their flywheel system if Kers was
> allowed in F1 next year, so would not benefit commercially from such a
> decision, even if they are selling the flywheel technology for application
> outside F1.

I'm reading between the lines - does he mean it's a failure as an F1 system?

Quote:
> He believes there are a number of systems in existence in F1 that various
> teams could buy - such as McLaren's or BMW's. And although he admits that
> would mean expense, his belief is that F1 teams have to spent their budget
> on something, and that Kers is a better way to spend it then some of the
> other areas teams would invest in if it was banned.

> "The improvements to an existing system would be relatively modest compared
> to what we spend on aero, for example, and I feel this is an area that
> matters."

--

Chris

I am not young enough to know everything.
Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900)

 
 
 

Williams in the dog house - again

Post by Bigbir » Wed, 26 Aug 2009 05:04:53

Quote:


> > Parr says Williams would not be using their flywheel system if Kers
> > was  allowed in F1 next year, so would not benefit commercially
> > from such a  decision, even if they are selling the flywheel
> > technology for application  outside F1.

> I'm reading between the lines - does he mean it's a failure as an F1
> system?

Maybe they can't get it to shutdown in 2 seconds.

--
Bigbird
#