Hugely Dissapointed With McLaren

[Pup]

The MTC is still hugely leveraged by the banks, Im going on 2009 figures stating they owe in the region of £150 million on that alone.

I don't know where you read this, but McLaren have said on several occasions that the MTC has been paid off in entirety. They also have repeatedly described their company as "debt-free" in press releases. They made a point of emphasizing this at the McAuto launch.

And they didnt "pay" their fine in so much as they just didnt recieve any FIA money for a year(£100 million).Mercedes picked up half the slack for that year too, good benefactors they be

Money spent or money not received - same thing. I think the way it actually worked was that the remaining fine, after the FOM money was subtracted, was split evenly among the shareholders according to their percentage ownership. Though it could have just been split 50/50 between McLaren and Merc, I don't remember.

They also paid Mercedes 200 million for its stake in McLaren. However even though a "substantial" amount was paid off a couple of months ago, Haug still says most of this is still outstanding.

According to Merc's '09 annual report, there is only $26M remaining to be paid, and isn't due until the end of 2011.

In conjunction with the 40 or so new dealerships and MP4-12C development and tooling costs, McLaren need it to work or face tough times ahead.

Yes, but this money doesn't come from the team, it comes from private outside investment. It's even possible that the infrastructure is being financed entirely with equity. Even if we assume that there is debt involved, since McAuto is separate, this debt should have no effect on the team's ability to raise capital itself, should it need to (I don't know why they should), nor can this debt ever come back to haunt the team itself.

We also know that McLaren received £80 million per annum from Mercedes because Daimler release this in their end of year reports. HPE(merc engines) in brixworth sets them back a further £48 million(2009 and KERS excluded).

Again, I'd be interested to know where you got these figures. In their annual reports, Merc lumps McLaren in with the rest of their joint ventures and doesn't break that figure down. However, since they showed only €54M in expenses for all their joint ventures combined last year, we can safely assume that the amount is less than that. Don't forget - and this is a very important point that most people overlook - that Mercedes was also taking 40% of McLaren's profits, which will now go to the team, since the team itself is taking over their share.

Merc did list an €86M one time expense related to McLaren last year, but that was part of the settling of accounts for the split.

Just offhand, I would caution you if you are getting your numbers from Chris Sylt, as he is an idiot.

The cost cap couldnt have come at a better time for Mclaren

Definitely. I don't think they could have done this 5 years ago. Though it's more a factor of income than expense. If the manufacturers still saw enough value in the sport to spend what they were spending 5 years ago, it would be unlikely to impossible for someone like McLaren to fund that sort of share themselves.

[Giblet]

InternetF1 fan:

The balance problems were NOT KERS related. I don't know how many times you need to hear that for it to sink in. IT was aero and weight distribution, which is a ballast issue. NOT KERS.

Your whole basis in this tiny reality is flawed, as you are making general untrue assumptions.

Renault and BMW didn't have very good cars, and tried KERS and found it to have no advantage for them, other than draining resources and bank accounts.

The Ferrari was not a good car. It was dropped in development mid way through the year.

It's very simple, KERS was not a problem for Mclaren to figure out, understand? It was aero!!!!

[internetf1fan]

Of course it was to do with KERS. You mention weight distribution, and ballast issue. But oh wait, where does KERS tie into this? That's right. KERS meant less ballast to move around which mean weight distribution issues. McLaren managed to get around it and if they kept KERS they would be in a stronger position than they are at the moment.

[Giblet]

Of course it was to do with KERS. You mention weight distribution, and ballast issue. But oh wait, where does KERS tie into this? That's right. KERS meant less ballast to move around which mean weight distribution issues. McLaren managed to get around it and if they kept KERS they would be in a stronger position than they are at the moment.

You are still ignoring the aero problem, ant that was the main issue. Kers played a part, like I said, but a small one.

Stop ignoring what we are all telling you. Stop ignoring the aero issue, which was the main problem with the car. The weight distro was a secondary problem. Kers was a supplemental help to the car.

You have obviously wrongly made up your mind, contrary to what everyone and every article about the car's development tells you, and since you seem to be comfortable being close minded and wrong, even though there are many actually F1 experts here telling you otherwise, there is no longer any point discussing this with you in this pointless thread.

I am not one of them, but I do listen to them.

You remember the green paint? The constant aero updates and body changes? They had nothing to do with KERS.

Your missing the point and barking up the wrong tree, still.

You think kers was a major factor, and it is fact minor. You want them to go aginst FOTA to slap a minor imrpovement on their car?

Ridiculous. Enjoy your thread.

[internetf1fan]

You keep on going on about FOTA. What is so important about them? What have they done for F1 so far?

I can tell you what they haven't done. They didn't stop BMW and Toyota, key members of FOTA and F1 leaving the sport. What happened to for the good of the sport there?

They blocked Max's plan to cut budgets. What happened to good of the sport there?

I keep asking you and you avoid this question. Why should McLaren be in FOTA? What has McLaren gain from joining FOTA after the compromises in car design they have to make?

You can spin it all you want, but FOTA doesn't do anything. Yes I would like McLaren to go against FOTA and slap on a minor improvement to the car. By leaving FOTA they wouldn't lose anything and with that minor improvement, they might be at least able to seal the second place in the WCC. I believe there is a huge prize gap between coming 2nd and 3d in the championship.

[timbo]

You keep on going on about FOTA. What is so important about them? What have they done for F1 so far?

I fail to see Giblet mentioning FOTA once in his final couple of posts.

I keep asking you and you avoid this question. Why should McLaren be in FOTA? What has McLaren gain from joining FOTA after the compromises in car design they have to make?

I'd repeat again. Macca would be outvoted in EVERY majority voting. If you can't beat'em join'em.

[Giblet]

internetf1fan, I'm not spinning crap. FOTA themselves decided to not run KERS this year. You think they should have. Your disagreement with them doesn't change the fact that they did do something without the aid of the FIA.

I don't agree with most of what FOTA did under the 'leadership' of Luca, but this has absolutely nothing to do with they could do in the future. You say FOTA has done nothing, but we keep telling you over and over that they agreed to ditch KERS, and since you asked, that is what happened to the good of the sport there.

I keep saying the same thing over and over, and you keep asking me to say it.

The car compromises you speak of are MINIMAL. KERS was not a big giant help like you erroneously think. KERS give you a one time gain of '.3' seconds. That .3 could be gained by tighter packaging and better aero, as RBR proved with no DDD and no KERS.

I really think you need to look at KERS a bit more closely, so you can understand it is not unicorn blood and fairy farts, which as we know, are good for 1 sec a lap each.

[DaveKillens]

I fail to see how KERS could be considered a magic bullet by McLaren. Yes, they had a working and effective system in place during 2009. But they weren't alone, Ferrari had a system effective enough to be a contributing factor in Kimi's win at Spa. So, even assuming that the belief in KERS holds water, McLaren would not be able to beat Ferrari with it, and to be perfectly honest, if they can't beat Ferrari, then it ain't worth a centime.

Do you understand what I'm saying, that even if McLaren broke ranks with FOTA, Ferrari could have easily followed suit, and their KERS system would have negated the Mclaren move.

And claims have been made that McLaren need to be more ruthless. But at the start of the season, McLaren went to a lot of trouble to keep it's F-duct secret as long as possible, from the competition, from fellow FOTA members. I do consider that act as being selfish and ruthless, good for them, it's all part of racing.

The decision to penalize Schumacher has nothing to do with FOTA. Their scope of coverage and responsibilities lies completely apart from driver punsihments, that belongs to the driver's team, namely Mercedes.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Definitely. I don't think they could have done this 5 years ago. Though it's more a factor of income than expense. If the manufacturers still saw enough value in the sport to spend what they were spending 5 years ago, it would be unlikely to impossible for someone like McLaren to fund that sort of share themselves.

Fair comments pup,

I will try source those figures for you as best I can. And yes, Chris Sylt and alot of PitPass articles are pure fantasy and BS

[WhiteBlue]

Regardless of what you think of Sylt

1. his basic figures are usually right, he usually messes them up with dumb interpretation

2. in the Merc/McLaren case Merc themselves have pointed out how much money they used to sink into the team and how much they are going to save

It cannot be denied that McLaren will have to do with less money until perhaps their automotive business can replace it. On the other side the FiA cost cutting successes will enable them to save a ton.

If the McLaren group goes belly up as a result McLaren automotive going bust it will have negative repercussions on McLaren F1 as well regardless of any fire walls. They better make it a success and pray that no competent competitor puts a car with a better price/performance/fuel use figure up. I'm not convinced that a 160.000 € car with inferior spec would sell better just by having a McLaren badge. If Porsche just build a better car the F1 image will not help.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Regardless of what you think of Sylt

1. his basic figures are usually right, he usually messes them up with dumb interpretation

2. in the Merc/McLaren case Merc themselves have pointed out how much money they used to sink into the team and how much they are going to save

It cannot be denied that McLaren will have to do with less money until perhaps their automotive business can replace it. On the other side the FiA cost cutting successes will enable them to save a ton.

If the McLaren group goes belly up as a result McLaren automotive going bust it will have negative repercussions on McLaren F1 as well regardless of any fire walls. They better make it a success and pray that no competent competitor puts a car with a better price/performance/fuel use figure up. I'm not convinced that a 160.000 € car with inferior spec would sell better just by having a McLaren badge. If Porsche just build a better car the F1 image will not help.

White blue I agree with you most the time, but Porsche cannot hope to have the same cachet as a McLaren.
The sub30k boxster Cayenne and Panamera saw to porsche as an exclusive sports car firm. Now they are just glorifed panzers. GT3 RS excepted.

[internetf1fan]

I fail to see how KERS could be considered a magic bullet by McLaren. Yes, they had a working and effective system in place during 2009. But they weren't alone, Ferrari had a system effective enough to be a contributing factor in Kimi's win at Spa. So, even assuming that the belief in KERS holds water, McLaren would not be able to beat Ferrari with it, and to be perfectly honest, if they can't beat Ferrari, then it ain't worth a centime.

Do you understand what I'm saying, that even if McLaren broke ranks with FOTA, Ferrari could have easily followed suit, and their KERS system would have negated the Mclaren move.

And claims have been made that McLaren need to be more ruthless. But at the start of the season, McLaren went to a lot of trouble to keep it's F-duct secret as long as possible, from the competition, from fellow FOTA members. I do consider that act as being selfish and ruthless, good for them, it's all part of racing.

The decision to penalize Schumacher has nothing to do with FOTA. Their scope of coverage and responsibilities lies completely apart from driver punsihments, that belongs to the driver's team, namely Mercedes.

McLaren's use of KERS was clearly better than Ferrari's. McLaren had two wins vs Ferrari's one and ended up higher in the WCC as well.

What does that even have to do with anything anyway? The fact is if they had KERS they would probably have just Ferrari to worry about. Right now they have to worry about Merc, RBR AND Ferrari.

McLaren would be better of racing just Ferrari than with more teams stealing valuable points from McLaren.

Suppose you were right, Ferrari did put in KERS and beat McLaren, but at least McLaren would have a 2nd place in WCC which huge financial rewards compared to the 3rd place.

People here have been arguing about Merc pulling out and McLaren not having enough money. This is exactly why McLaren needs to be ruthless and make sure they get the maximum number of points and maxiumum WCC prize possible with their resources.

Right now they are in danger being stuck in 3rd and losing a lot of WCC money.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

McLaren's use of KERS was clearly better than Ferrari's. McLaren had two wins vs Ferrari's one and ended up higher in the WCC as well.

What does that even have to do with anything anyway? The fact is if they had KERS they would probably have just Ferrari to worry about. Right now they have to worry about Merc, RBR AND Ferrari.

McLaren would be better of racing just Ferrari than with more teams stealing valuable points from McLaren.

Suppose you were right, Ferrari did put in KERS and beat McLaren, but at least McLaren would have a 2nd place in WCC which huge financial rewards compared to the 3rd place.

People here have been arguing about Merc pulling out and McLaren not having enough money. This is exactly why McLaren needs to be ruthless and make sure they get the maximum number of points and maxiumum WCC prize possible with their resources.

Right now they are in danger being stuck in 3rd and losing a lot of WCC money.

I have to say the air of intoxicating McLaren fanaticism fills this post.
KERS is a non starter for 2010, so forget it.
McLaren using Mercedes resources and getting an advantage has little to do with Mclaren themselves.
Its Mercedes who commisioned Zytek to do the KERS unit, so even if KERS was allowed Mercedes wouldnt be very eager to see the McLaren using it!
2011 KERS will return, but talk is of standardised units, this means its the same for everyone.
As someone else rightly said KERS is no magic bullet.

Mclaren need alot more than KERS...MUCH MORE.

[timbo]

McLaren's use of KERS was clearly better than Ferrari's. McLaren had two wins vs Ferrari's one and ended up higher in the WCC as well.

Oh, yeah. The fact that Ferrari lost one of its drivers and never found proper replacement doesn't have anything to do with standings.

[internetf1fan]

McLaren's use of KERS was clearly better than Ferrari's. McLaren had two wins vs Ferrari's one and ended up higher in the WCC as well.

What does that even have to do with anything anyway? The fact is if they had KERS they would probably have just Ferrari to worry about. Right now they have to worry about Merc, RBR AND Ferrari.

McLaren would be better of racing just Ferrari than with more teams stealing valuable points from McLaren.

Suppose you were right, Ferrari did put in KERS and beat McLaren, but at least McLaren would have a 2nd place in WCC which huge financial rewards compared to the 3rd place.

People here have been arguing about Merc pulling out and McLaren not having enough money. This is exactly why McLaren needs to be ruthless and make sure they get the maximum number of points and maxiumum WCC prize possible with their resources.

Right now they are in danger being stuck in 3rd and losing a lot of WCC money.

I have to say the air of intoxicating McLaren fanaticism fills this post.
KERS is a non starter for 2010, so forget it.
McLaren using Mercedes resources and getting an advantage has little to do with Mclaren themselves.
Its Mercedes who commisioned Zytek to do the KERS unit, so even if KERS was allowed Mercedes wouldnt be very eager to see the McLaren using it!
2011 KERS will return, but talk is of standardised units, this means its the same for everyone.
As someone else rightly said KERS is no magic bullet.

Mclaren need alot more than KERS...MUCH MORE.

Of course KERS advantage had everything to do with McLaren. Why did other teams get rid of their KERs? Because they unlike McLaren couldn't figure out the solution to the weight distro/ballast problem with KERS brought with it.

Merc wouldn't be able to do anything if McLaren wanted to run KERS. If they were so anti-McLaren they would have pulled the engine supply already.

Sure McLaren needs a lot more than KERS. But don't deny that KERS wouldn't be helpful. It could have provided the vital 2 or 3 tenths to catch up RBR in qualy, pass them during starts etc or at least secure a strong 2nd place in WCC just ahead of Ferrari.

Are you saying all that extra money that 2nd place in WCC gets compared to 3rd is not worth leaving FOTA and running KERS?